ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2026
The impact of distance in treating glioblastoma: a retrospective single-center study.
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. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeGlioblastoma (GBM) is an aggressive primary brain tumor with poor overall survival. Patients living in rural areas have worse outcomes than those in metropolitan regions, but the effect of distance from subspecialty care on survival and clinical trial participation remains unclear. We evaluated the association between distance to a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center (CCC) and overall survival (OS) and clinical trial enrollment in patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase wild-type GBM.
methodsWe retrospectively identified patients with newly diagnosed isocitrate dehydrogenase wild-type GBM (2021 World Health Organization classification) who received treatment at our CCC (2018-2022). Distance from the CCC was analyzed as both categorical and continuous variables. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression models were performed, adjusting for established prognostic factors.
resultsThe 167 patients had similar baseline characteristics across distance groups. In univariable analyses, no significant difference in OS was observed between patients living near the CCC and those at intermediate or far distances. In multivariable analysis, patients in the intermediate-distance group demonstrated significantly worse OS compared with the near group (hazard ratio 1.61, 95% confidence interval 1.03, 2.50, p = 0.035). Increasing distance was associated with significantly lower clinical trial enrollment (near 43%, intermediate 35%, and far 18%; p = 0.0001).
conclusionsDistance from a CCC was associated with disparities in survival and access to clinical trials among patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase wild-type GBM. Given that clinical trials represent a standard-of-care option for GBM, strategies to improve access to subspecialty care and trial participation are needed to reduce outcome disparities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42105122What 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.