ReviewNeurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics2026
Accelerating discovery: Transformative clinical trial models in neuro-oncology.
Review in Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics, 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
Progress in neuro-oncology drug development has been slower than the pace of biological discovery, and trial design is increasingly recognized as a central contributor to this gap. Traditional trial paradigms, largely developed for systemic malignancies, face distinct challenges when applied to central nervous system (CNS) tumors - among them intratumoral heterogeneity, rapid clinical progression, limited tissue access, and the evolving molecular classification of gliomas. These biological and logistical realities have strained the assumptions underlying conventional phase II and III designs, and there is growing consensus that new approaches are needed. This review examines a framework of emerging trial models that better align clinical testing with the realities of CNS tumors. Master protocol designs enable simultaneous evaluation of multiple therapies within shared, molecularly informed infrastructures, supporting precision medicine approaches and improving efficiency. Bayesian adaptive frameworks allow trials to learn during conduct, reallocating patients toward promising therapies and incorporating emerging biological data in real time. Beyond efficacy assessment, trials can serve as active discovery platforms embedding longitudinal tissue sampling, window-of-opportunity designs, and multi-omic profiling to interrogate CNS drug penetrance, pharmacodynamic target engagement, and treatment-induced tumor evolution directly in human disease. Decentralized trial models and artificial intelligence offer additional tools to broaden access, improve enrollment, and reduce operational burden. Reimagining clinical trials as dynamic, biologically integrated, learning-based systems rather than static tests of individual agents is essential to accelerate therapeutic progress in neuro-oncology.
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.