ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2025
Reirradiation for recurrent glioblastoma: the significance of the residual tumor volume.
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Precision reirradiation in recurrent CNS tumors integrating biology techniques and multimodal care.Discover oncology · 2026Review
- Evaluation of triphenyl phosphate's pathogenic potential and molecular mechanisms in glioblastoma: an integrated network toxicology investigation employing multiple machine learning approaches.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Radiomics in glioblastoma recurrence: advances in prediction, localization, and differentiation from treatment-related effects.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Review
- MGMT promoter methylation modulates the effect of residual tumor on survival after re-resection of recurrent glioblastoma.Acta neuropathologica communications · 2026Article
- Advances in Artificial Intelligence for Glioblastoma Radiotherapy Planning and Treatment.Cancers · 2025Review
- Cs-131 Collagen Tile Brachytherapy for Recurrent Glioblastoma: Treatment Outcomes and Toxicity.Practical radiation oncologyArticle
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
purposeRecurrent glioblastoma has a poor prognosis, and its optimal management remains unclear. Reirradiation (re-RT) is a promising treatment option, but long-term outcomes and optimal patient selection criteria are not well established.
methodsThis study analyzed 71 patients with recurrent CNS WHO grade 4, IDHwt glioblastoma (GBM) who underwent re-RT at the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg between January 2009 and June 2019. Imaging follow-ups were conducted every 3 months. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined using RANO criteria. Outcomes, feasibility, and toxicity of re-RT were evaluated. Contrast-enhancing tumor volume was measured using a deep learning auto-segmentation pipeline with expert validation and jointly evaluated with clinical and molecular-pathologic factors.
resultsMost patients were prescribed conventionally fractionated re-RT (84.5%) with 45 Gy in 1.8 Gy fractions, combined with temozolomide (TMZ, 49.3%) or lomustine (CCNU, 12.7%). Re-RT was completed as planned in 94.4% of patients. After a median follow-up of 73.8 months, 88.7% of patients had died. The median overall survival was 9.6 months, and the median progression-free survival was 5.3 months. Multivariate analysis identified residual contrast-enhancing tumor volume at re-RT (HR 1.040 per cm
conclusionConventional fractionated re-RT is a feasible and effective treatment for recurrent high-grade glioma. The significant prognostic impact of residual tumor volume highlights the importance of combining maximum-safe resection with re-RT for improved outcomes.
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.