ArticleNeurosurgical review2026
Neurosurgical leadership in neuro-oncology clinical trials: A nationwide study.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Despite therapeutic advances, central nervous system (CNS) tumors such as glioblastoma and brain metastases remain highly lethal. Neurosurgeons have historically driven innovation in neuro-oncology but may be underrepresented as principal investigators (PIs) in clinical research. We analyzed all 525 U.S.-based neuro-oncology trials listed on ClinicalTrials.gov as of October 2024 to evaluate trends in neurosurgeon-led research, stratified by phase, funding source, and institutional characteristics. Oncologists led 34.8% of trials, whereas neurosurgeons led 21.5%. When normalized to the number of board-certified specialists, neurosurgeons demonstrated greater per-capita leadership than oncologists. Neurosurgeon-led studies were primarily early-phase (36.7% phase I; 5.1% phase III/IV), underscoring their role in translational and first-in-human investigations. At the state level, neurosurgical leadership correlated strongly with the number of neurosurgical residency programs (R² = 0.4835, p < 0.001) and aggregated departmental NIH funding (R² = 0.6146, p < 0.001), with states possessing greater training infrastructure and research resources demonstrating higher rates of neurosurgeon-led clinical trials. Nevertheless, 55.3% of neurosurgeon PIs lacked direct NIH support, highlighting persistent funding barriers. Notably, women were nearly twice as likely as men (1.8×) to serve as PIs, suggesting emerging gender diversity in neurosurgical research leadership. Neurosurgeons maintain a significant presence in neuro-oncology clinical trials, particularly in early translational work. However, their limited representation in NIH-sponsored and late-phase studies reflects enduring structural and funding challenges. Strengthening research mentorship, expanding grant access, and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration may enhance neurosurgical leadership and accelerate therapeutic innovation in neuro-oncology.
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.