SynthesisInternational journal of molecular sciences2025
Gut Microbiota and Central Nervous System Tumors: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Microbiome-CNS Interactions.
Synthesis in International journal of molecular sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The gut-brain axis in pharmacology: microbiome-driven modulation of CNS drugs and neuropsychiatric outcomes.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The gut-brain axis has emerged as a critical pathway influencing central nervous system (CNS) tumor biology through complex microbiome-mediated mechanisms. Understanding these interactions is essential for developing novel therapeutic strategies and biomarkers for CNS tumors. To systematically review and meta-analyze current evidence on gut microbiota interactions with CNS tumors, examining mechanisms, clinical correlations, therapeutic implications, and biomarker potential. We conducted a comprehensive systematic review following PRISMA guidelines, searching PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published from 2010-2025. A random-effects meta-analysis of reported statistical outcomes was performed to quantify microbiome alterations using standardized mean differences (Cohen's d) and diagnostic accuracy measures. Analyses were based on published summary statistics rather than reprocessed raw sequencing data, acknowledging cross-study heterogeneity. From 161 identified records, 12 studies met inclusion criteria (6 clinical studies,
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.