The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin in Recurrent Malignant Glioma: Analysis of a Case Series
Abstract
Background: Recurrent malignant glioma has a dismal prognosis, and therapeutic options are scarce. After previous potentially encouraging reports on liposomal pegylated doxorubicin (PEG-DOX) in this setting, PEG-DOX was applied to patients with recurrent malignant glioma in an institutional series. Methods: In a retrospective analysis, 49 patients with recurrent high-grade glioma (WHO III, n = 18; WHO IV, n = 31) were treated with PEG-DOX (days 1 and 14/28, 20 mg/m 2, n = 26) alone or in combination with temozolomide (days 1–5/28, 200 mg/m 2, n = 23). The response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival were evaluated. Results: The rate of progression-free patients at 6 months after initiation of therapy was 27% (WHO III, 33%; WHO IV, 23%). The median overall survival (mOS) after initiation of PEG-DOX (monotherapy and combination therapy) was 8 months (WHO III, 16 months; WHO IV, 7 months). The mOS after initiation of PEG-DOX monotherapy was 8 months, and after initiation of combination therapy, 10 months. Both regimens were well tolerated, with the main side effect being hematologic toxicity (grade 1–2, 8%; grade 3–4, 18%). Conclusion: These data demonstrate the safety and moderate efficacy of PEG-DOX ± temozolomide therapy in recurrent malignant glioma. The potential of this nonalkylating chemotherapy should be further explored.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The effects of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Doxil or Caelyx) in glioblastoma are unconvincing.
“The effects of a pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Doxil or Caelyx) have recently been investigated in glioblastoma, but the results obtained are unconvincing (Glas et al., 2007;Beier et al., 2009;Ananda et al., 2011).”
From The association of statins plus LDL receptor‐targeted liposome‐encapsulated doxorubicin increases in vitro drug delivery across blood–brain barrier cells (2012) · cites this paper as Glas et al., 2007
Phase I/II trials with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin have shown that the drug has very few side effects and is well tolerated, but does not offer a significant advantage in overall survival or progression-free survival compared to standard protocols.
“Phase I/II trials with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin have shown that the drug has very few side effects and is well tolerated, but does not offer a significant advantage in terms of overall survival or progression-free survival in comparison to the standard protocols based on radio-chemotherapy (Glas et al., 2007;Beier et al., 2009;Ananda et al., 2011).”
From The association of statins plus LDL receptor‐targeted liposome‐encapsulated doxorubicin increases in vitro drug delivery across blood–brain barrier cells (2012) · cites this paper as Glas et al., 2007
Citations
Cites
Yung, W. K. A., Albright, R. E., Olson, J., Fredericks, R., Fink, K., Prados, M. D., Brada, M., Spence, A., Hohl, R. J., Shapiro, W., et al. (2000) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1054/bjoc.2000.1316 · Cited by 929
Multicenter phase II trial of temozolomide in patients with glioblastoma multiforme at first relapse
Brada, M., Hoang-Xuan, K., Rampling, R., Dietrich, P.-Y., Dirix, L. Y., Macdonald, D., Heimans, J. J., Zonnenberg, B. A., Bravo-Marques, J. M., Henriksson, R., et al. (2001) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1023/a:1008382516636 · Cited by 372
Temozolomide in the treatment of recurrent malignant glioma
Chang, S. M., Theodosopoulos, P., Lamborn, K., Malec, M., Rabbitt, J., Page, M., & Prados, M. D. (2004) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.11949 · Cited by 90
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- 10.1002%2Fcncr.11845 · DOI
- 10.1002%2F1097-0142%2819850901%2956%3A5%3C1106%3A%3AAID-CNCR2820560525%3E3.0.CO%3B2-2 · DOI
- 10.1016%2FS0140-6736%2802%2908091-1 · DOI
- 10.1056%2FNEJMoa043330 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002%2F1097-0142%2820011001%2992%3A7%3C1936%3A%3AAID-CNCR1712%3E3.0.CO%3B2-H · DOI
- 10.1002%2Fcncr.20073 · DOI
- 10.1215%2FS1152851703000188 · DOI
- 10.1093%2Fannonc%2Fmdh097 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ferraris, C., Cavalli, R., Panciani, P. P., & Battaglia, L. (2020) · International Journal of Nanomedicine · doi:10.2147/ijn.s231479 · Cited by 131
Pinzón‐Daza, M., Garzón, R., Couraud, P., Romero, I., Weksler, B., Ghigo, D., Bosia, A., & Riganti, C. (2012) · British Journal of Pharmacology · doi:10.1111/j.1476-5381.2012.02103.x · Cited by 84
Metadata
- Authors
- Glas, M., Koch, H., Hirschmann, B., Jauch, T., Steinbrecher, A., Herrlinger, U., Bogdahn, U., & Hau, P.
- Venue
- Oncology
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2007
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 5-6
- Pages
- 302-307
- ISSN
- 0030-2414
- 1423-0232
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 3
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
