ArticleAmerican journal of cancer research2026
mTOR inhibitor everolimus versus conventional chemotherapy in pediatric low-grade gliomas.
Article in American journal of cancer research, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Standard chemotherapy in pediatric low-grade gliomas (pLGG) has limited efficacy and substantial toxicity, while clinical data on everolimus are lacking. This study compared the efficacy of everolimus and traditional chemotherapy in patients with pLGG, and evaluated the treatment response, survival, and the frequency and severity of adverse events. This single-center retrospective cohort study analyzed 279 patients with pathologically confirmed World Health Organization (WHO) grade 1-2 pLGG (Jan 2014-Jan 2021): 126 received everolimus and 153 received standard carboplatin-vincristine (CV) chemotherapy. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and clinical benefit rate (CBR). In the optic pathway glioma subgroup, visual function changes were assessed using the pediatric eye questionnaire (PedEyeQ) scale along with objective ophthalmic indicators including best-corrected visual acuity, visual field assessment, and optic nerve atrophy grading. Safety was evaluated by recording adverse events according to the CTCAE v5.0 criteria, with exposure-adjusted rates calculated per 100 patient-years to account for differential treatment duration, and long-term pediatric safety was assessed through 5-year follow-up of growth, bone metabolism, and endocrine function. The follow-up period was 5 years. The median PFS was 49.00 months (95% CI: 37.00-55.00) in the everolimus group and 41.00 months (95% CI: 28.00-55.00) in the CV group, with no significant difference (Log-rank χ
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.