ArticleNeuro-oncology advances
Lomustine with or without procarbazine in recurrent glioblastoma-A propensity score matching analysis.
Article in Neuro-oncology advances. 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
27 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite recent advances, survival in patients with glioblastoma remains poor. Outside clinical trials, lomustine is commonly considered standard of care in recurrent disease. However, comparative data between lomustine and other chemotherapy regimens are limited. Methods: We performed a retrospective multicenter cohort study including patients from seven certified neuro-oncology centers in Germany to compare lomustine monotherapy with combination therapy using lomustine and procarbazine in first recurrence of glioblastoma. Propensity score matching was applied to obtain comparable groups based on sex, age, extent of resection at primary diagnosis, Karnofsky performance status at the start of recurrence therapy, and MGMT promoter methylation status. Post-recurrence survival (PRS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimation and multivariable Cox regression analysis. Results: Seventy-seven patients were matched in each treatment group. PRS was comparable, with a median of 11.6 months for lomustine monotherapy and 10.0 months for lomustine plus procarbazine (log-rank test, Conclusions: Our data indicates that potential additive toxicity by intensified combination chemotherapy should be avoided due to lack of efficacy compared to lomustine monotherapy.
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.