ReviewJournal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR2026
Decoding glioblastoma evolution and heterogeneity through mechanistic modeling: implications for clinical translation.
Review in Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Glioblastoma (GBM) is one of the most aggressive and lethal primary brain tumors in adults, characterized by dynamic clonal evolution and extensive genomic, cellular, spatial, and microenvironmental heterogeneity. Multi-omics studies have revealed that GBM follows complex evolutionary trajectories involving genetic, epigenetic, transcriptional, and immune-microenvironmental remodeling as tumors grow, adapt to the brain microenvironment, and acquire therapeutic resistance. Increasing evidence suggests that GBM may originate from aberrant neural stem or progenitor cells, including those residing in the subventricular zone, and that glioblastoma stem cells (GSCs) contribute to tumor propagation, heterogeneity, and recurrence. A key conceptual challenge is to reconcile hierarchical cancer stem cell models, in which GSCs are viewed as relatively stable tumor-propagating subpopulations, with dynamic state plasticity models, in which stem-like properties can be reversibly acquired or lost during transitions among proneural-like, mesenchymal-like, invasive, and therapy-tolerant states. Recent advances in single-cell profiling, spatial transcriptomics, lineage tracing, organoid culture, 3D bioprinting, genetically engineered models, and artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted computational modeling have substantially improved the ability to study these processes. However, no currently available model fully recapitulates human GBM heterogeneity, recurrence, treatment history, and tumor-microenvironment interactions. Therefore, model selection should be guided by clearly defined mechanistic questions rather than by reliance on any single platform. This review summarizes current advances in in vitro, ex vivo, in vivo, and computational models for studying GBM evolution and heterogeneity, and discusses how integrated model pipelines may improve preclinical drug testing, treatment-response prediction, and precision 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.