ReviewNeuro-oncology practice2025
Who will benefit from vorasidenib? Review of data from the literature and open questions.
Review in Neuro-oncology practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contemporary practice patterns in IDH-mutant glioma management: a multidisciplinary multi-institutional survey.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Article
- Management of Adult Patients With Isocitrate Dehydrogenase-Mutant Gliomas in Australia: An Expert Position Statement From the Cooperative Trials Group for Neuro-Oncology.Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Updates in the management of intradialytic hypotension: Emerging strategies and innovations.World journal of nephrology · 2025Review
- Vorasidenib for IDH-mutant grade 2 gliomas: clinical advances and future directions.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The clinical efficacy of isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) inhibitors in the treatment of patients with grade 2 IDH-mutant (mIDH) gliomas is a significant therapeutic advancement in neuro-oncology. It expands treatment options beyond traditional radiation therapy and cytotoxic chemotherapy, which may lead to significant long-term neurotoxic effects while extending patient survival. The INDIGO study demonstrated that vorasidenib, a pan-mIDH inhibitor, improved progression-free survival for patients with grade 2 mIDH gliomas following surgical resection or biopsy compared to placebo and was well tolerated. However, these encouraging results leave a wake of unanswered questions: Will higher-grade mIDH glioma patients benefit? When is the appropriate timing to start and stop treatment? Where does this new treatment option fit in with other treatment modalities? In this study, we review the limited data available to start addressing these questions, provide a framework of how to discuss these gaps with current patients, and highlight what is needed from the neuro-oncology community for more definitive answers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.