SynthesisActa neurochirurgica2026
Determinants of survival after re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Acta neurochirurgica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Laser Interstitial Thermal Therapy for High-Grade Gliomas: Current Evidence, Clinical Applications and Emerging Role of Artificial Intelligence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Peripheral hematological landscapes as biomarkers for detecting postoperative progression in glioblastoma multiforme: a multivariable risk scoring approach.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeGlioblastoma (GBM) inevitably recurs despite maximal safe resection and standard chemoradiotherapy. The factors influencing survival after first recurrence and re-resection remain controversial. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the prognostic factors influencing survival following re-resection of glioblastoma?
methodsA systematic search of major databases was conducted for original studies reporting on survival outcomes. Data on hazard ratios (HR) for overall survival and key prognostic factors were extracted, followed by meta-analyses of univariate and multivariate Cox models. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed.
resultsA total of 30 studies were included. Gross total resection and methylated MGMT promoter status were significantly associated with improved survival, with pooled HRs of 0.52 (95% CI: 0.36-0.76, p < 0.001) and 0.58 (95% CI: 0.45-0.75, p < 0.001), respectively. In contrast, age was modestly associated with worse survival (HR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01-1.03, p < 0.001). Preoperative Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) < 70 was associated with worse survival (HR: 2.25, 95% CI: 1.59-3.19, p < 0.001). Adjuvant chemotherapy (HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.33-1.45, p = 0.33) and time to re-resection (HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.41-1.16, p = 0.16) failed to show consistent survival benefits.
conclusionOur findings suggest gross total resection of contrast-enhancing tumour and MGMT promoter methylation are strongly associated with improved survival following first recurrence of glioblastoma. Conversely, age, preoperative KPS, adjuvant chemotherapy, and timing of re-resection showed inconsistent or non-significant associations, emphasizing the need for prospective studies to refine prognostic assessments and guide individualized treatment strategies in recurrent glioblastoma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.