ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2026
Prospective evaluation of GFAP point-of-care testing for rapid diagnosis of glioblastoma.
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of routine use of the GFAP and UCH-L1 TBI blood test for management of mild TBI on patient care in a European emergency department.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeGlioblastoma is the most common and the most aggressive malignant primary brain tumor. The diagnosis is made by histopathological analysis following stereotactic biopsy or tumor resection. However, rapid diagnostic clarity is often required before histology becomes available. Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) has been studied as a blood biomarker for glioblastoma using conventional immunoassays. The aim of this study was to test the diagnostic value of a GFAP point-of-care device to differentiate glioblastoma from other brain tumors.
methodsPatients admitted to our hospital with a newly diagnosed intracranial lesion suspicious for a brain tumor were enrolled prospectively. Blood samples were collected prior to diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Plasma GFAP measurements were performed using the TBI plasma test on the i-STAT Alinity® (Abbott) device. The gold standard was the final histopathological diagnosis.
resultsWe prospectively enrolled 101 patients (mean age 63 ± 17 years, 44.6% female). GFAP plasma levels were significantly higher in patients with glioblastoma (n = 37; median 610 pg/mL [interquartile range 263.5–1877.5]) compared to other tumors (n = 64; 81.5 pg/mL [40.3–197.3]; p < 0.001). A cut-off point of 191 pg/mL revealed a sensitivity of 84% and a specificity of 75% for diagnosing glioblastoma. A GFAP plasma concentration of > 1000 pg/ml was indicative of glioblastoma with a specificity of 95% and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 82%. Excluding lymphomas further increased the specificity to 96% and PPV to 93%.
conclusionGFAP measurements using a point-of-care device indicate glioblastoma with high diagnostic accuracy. GFAP testing has the potential to streamline the work-up of brain tumors.
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.