ArticleFrontiers in neurology
Efficacy of tumor treating fields in high-grade glioma: a real-world retrospective analysis of 28 patients.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) in 28 patients with high-grade gliomas in a real-world setting. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 19 newly diagnosed and 9 recurrent high-grade glioma patients treated at Shenzhen People's Hospital from March 2019 to February 2022. All patients underwent TTFields therapy for at least one month. Tumor stability or progression was assessed using the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Adverse events were recorded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0 and TTFields-related dermatologic adverse event (dAE) grading scale. Treatment adherence was assessed through the device usage data from the NonoTTF-200A system. Results: As of August 2024, the median duration of TTFields use was 9.4 months, with a median adherence rate of 88.05% (range: 54.3-92%). Among newly diagnosed patients, the median PFS and OS were 18.1 and 22.0 months, respectively. In the recurrent cohort, median PFS and OS were 9.1 and 18.2 months. The most common adverse events were grade 1-2 dermatologic reactions, including folliculitis, rash, and ulcers, with no grade 3-4 TTFields-related toxicities observed. Conclusion: These real-world, retrospective findings suggest that TTFields therapy is feasible, well tolerated, and associated with high treatment adherence in patients with high-grade gliomas. Observed survival outcomes were descriptively consistent with previously reported clinical and real-world data; however, given the small sample size and observational design, these findings should be interpreted cautiously. Prospective studies with larger cohorts are warranted to further evaluate the role of TTFields in glioma management.
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.