↓ Skip to main content

Oxford University Press

Bevacizumab, temozolomide, and radiotherapy for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: comprehensive safety results during and after first-line therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Neuro-Oncology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
Title
Bevacizumab, temozolomide, and radiotherapy for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: comprehensive safety results during and after first-line therapy
Published in
Neuro-Oncology, January 2016
DOI 10.1093/neuonc/nov300
Pubmed ID
Authors

Frank Saran, Olivier L. Chinot, Roger Henriksson, Warren Mason, Wolfgang Wick, Timothy Cloughesy, Sunita Dhar, Emanuela Pozzi, Josep Garcia, Ryo Nishikawa

Abstract

The proposed use of bevacizumab with radiotherapy/temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma raised potential safety concerns. Bevacizumab has been linked with stroke, bleeding events, and wound-healing complications in other tumor types; these events are of particular concern for glioblastoma (highly vascular tumors that are usually resected). Published data on the interaction of bevacizumab with radiotherapy/temozolomide are also limited. We report safety data from a phase III randomized trial (Avastin in Glioblastoma), focusing on these considerations. Eligible patients received: radiotherapy and temozolomide plus bevacizumab/placebo, 6 cycles; a 4-week treatment break; temozolomide plus bevacizumab/placebo, 6 cycles; and bevacizumab/placebo until progression. Data on adverse events (AEs) were collected throughout. Bevacizumab-treated patients (n = 461) had a longer median safety follow-up time (12.3 vs 8.5 mo), and a higher proportion completed 6 cycles of maintenance temozolomide (64.6% vs 36.9%) versus placebo (n = 450). The incidences of relevant AEs (bevacizumab vs placebo, respectively) were: arterial thromboembolic events (5.9% vs 1.6%); cerebral hemorrhage (3.3% vs 2.0%); wound-healing complications (6.9% vs 4.7%); thrombocytopenia (34.1% vs 27.3%); radiotherapy-associated skin injury (8.2% vs 9.3%); alopecia (39.0% vs 36.0%); gastrointestinal perforation (including gastrointestinal abscesses and fistulae, 1.7% vs 0.4%); and radiotherapy-associated injury (0.4% vs 0.0%). Overall, 15.8% and 23.8% of bevacizumab- and placebo-treated patients had surgery (including biopsy) after progression. Within 30 days of postprogression surgery, AE incidence was 10.9% (bevacizumab) and 23.4% (placebo). The safety profile was consistent with that expected from radiotherapy/temozolomide plus bevacizumab. The increased AE incidence with bevacizumab did not impact patients' ability to receive standard-of-care treatment or to undergo further surgery.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 15%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Student > Master 10 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Other 8 7%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 32 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 43%
Neuroscience 7 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 34 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 November 2020.
All research outputs
#6,052,245
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Neuro-Oncology
#818
of 3,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,333
of 396,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuro-Oncology
#18
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,248 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 396,334 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.