ArticleEcancermedicalscience2026
Clinical outcomes of adding vincristine to procarbazine-lomustine in patients with gliomas: insights from current evidence.
Article in Ecancermedicalscience, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Temozolomide (TMZ) is the standard chemotherapy for gliomas due to good tolerability. Clinical studies suggest a combination of procarbazine, lomustine (CCNU) and vincristine (PCV) provides superior survival and progression delay, but toxicities limit use. Given the ongoing debate over the role of vincristine in glioma chemotherapy amid the dominance of TMZ, simplified procarbazine and CCNU (PC) regimens warrant renewed evaluation. Methods: Three databases were searched up to August 2025 to identify studies that directly compared PC and PCV in patients with low-grade and high-grade gliomas. Outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and treatment-related toxicities. Hazard ratios (HRS) and relative risks (RRS) were then pooled using a random-effects model. Results: In a total population of 301 patients with low- and high-grade gliomas, PC significantly reduced the risk of disease progression compared with PCV (HR = 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.53-0.98; Conclusion: With the limited evidence available to date, we found that PC achieved significantly longer PFS and OS than PCV, while maintaining a better safety profile. We recommend further well-designed and adequately powered randomised clinical trials directly comparing TMZ, PC and PCV to determine which patient populations and glioma subtypes - according to the current World Health Organisation 2021 classification - derive the greatest survival benefit and tolerability from each regimen. Key points: Procarbazine-lomustine combination (PC) shows superior progression-free survival and overall survival versus procarbazine, lomustine and vincristine (PCV) in gliomas.Omitting vincristine may improve efficacy and reduce neurotoxicity.Findings suggest PC could be a safer alternative, pending confirmation by randomised controlled trials. Importance of the study: This meta-analysis is the first to directly evaluate whether vincristine is necessary within the procarbazine, lomustine and vincristine (PCV) regimen for gliomas. By synthesising data from three retrospective cohorts, it demonstrates that the procarbazine-lomustine combination (PC) achieved significantly longer progression-free and overall survival compared with PCV, while markedly reducing neurotoxicity and treatment discontinuation. These findings challenge the traditional view that vincristine is an indispensable component of chemotherapy for diffuse gliomas. Given that temozolomide has become the preferred agent in contemporary practice, clarifying the relative contributions of PC, PCV and TMZ remains essential for optimising therapeutic strategies. Although limited by the small number and retrospective design of included studies, this analysis suggests that PC may represent a more effective and tolerable alternative, underscoring the need for prospective randomised trials in the modern molecular era of glioma classification.
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.