Literature DB >> 12816726

The influence of central review on outcome associations in childhood malignant gliomas: results from the CCG-945 experience.

Ian F Pollack1, James M Boyett, Allan J Yates, Peter C Burger, Floyd H Gilles, Richard L Davis, Jonathan L Finlay.   

Abstract

To examine the influence of the pathology review mechanism on the results of analyses of therapeutic efficacy and biological prognostic correlates for pediatric high-grade gliomas, we evaluated the effects of using single-expert review or consensus review, as alternatives to institutional classification, in determining outcome results of a large randomized trial. The study group was the randomized cohort of Children's Cancer Group study 945, which compared efficacy of 2 chemotherapy regimens adjuvant to surgery and radiation. Trial eligibility required institutional histopathologic diagnosis of high-grade glioma. Sections of study tumors also were centrally reviewed, initially by a study review neuropathologist and subsequently by 5 neuropathologists, including the review pathologist. Reviews were independent, and reviewers were masked to clinical factors and outcomes, and consensus diagnoses of the panel were then established. Among 172 eligible patients, 42 tumors were classified as discordant on single-expert review and 51 on consensus review. Progression-free survival probabilities calculated for patients with tumors classified as high-grade gliomas by either single-expert or consensus review were inferior to those for the overall, institutionally diagnosed cohort. However, conclusions of the study regarding relative efficacy of treatment and clinical and molecular outcome correlates were unaffected by diagnosis method. Resection extent, proliferation index, and p53 expression were associated strongly with outcome, regardless of diagnosis method. However, comparisons between arms in which inclusion was determined by different review criteria for each arm caused spurious conclusions about efficacy differences between treatments. We conclude that the pathology review mechanism had little effect on within-trial comparisons of therapeutic effects or prognostic correlates in this randomized study, but strongly influenced survival distributions that were calculated for each treatment arm. These results support the implementation of expedited central review in therapeutic studies involving childhood malignant gliomas as a way to prospectively identify and exclude cases with discordant diagnoses and indicate the need for additional measures, such as molecular assessments, to increase the reproducibility of neuropathologic classification for these tumors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12816726      PMCID: PMC1920685          DOI: 10.1215/S1152851703000097

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuro Oncol        ISSN: 1522-8517            Impact factor:   12.300


  48 in total

1.  Temozolomide for pediatric high-grade gliomas.

Authors:  Roger J Packer
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 5.081

2.  Mismatch repair deficiency is an uncommon mechanism of alkylator resistance in pediatric malignant gliomas: a report from the Children's Oncology Group.

Authors:  Ian F Pollack; Ronald L Hamilton; Robert W Sobol; Marina N Nikiforova; Yuri E Nikiforov; Maureen A Lyons-Weiler; William A LaFramboise; Peter C Burger; Daniel J Brat; Marc K Rosenblum; Floyd H Gilles; Allan J Yates; Tianni Zhou; Kenneth J Cohen; Jonathan L Finlay; Regina I Jakacki
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 3.167

3.  IDH1 mutations are common in malignant gliomas arising in adolescents: a report from the Children's Oncology Group.

Authors:  Ian F Pollack; Ronald L Hamilton; Robert W Sobol; Marina N Nikiforova; Maureen A Lyons-Weiler; William A LaFramboise; Peter C Burger; Daniel J Brat; Marc K Rosenblum; Emiko J Holmes; Tianni Zhou; Regina I Jakacki
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2010-08-20       Impact factor: 1.475

Review 4.  Paediatric and adult malignant glioma: close relatives or distant cousins?

Authors:  Chris Jones; Lara Perryman; Darren Hargrave
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 66.675

5.  The influence of central review on outcome in malignant gliomas of the spinal cord: the CCG-945 experience.

Authors:  Eric Bouffet; Jeffrey C Allen; James M Boyett; Allen Yates; Floyd Gilles; Peter C Burger; Richard L Davis; Laurence E Becker; Ian F Pollack; Jonathan L Finlay
Journal:  J Neurosurg Pediatr       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 2.375

Review 6.  Molecular analysis of pediatric brain tumors.

Authors:  Jaclyn A Biegel; Ian F Pollack
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 7.  Brain tumors in children.

Authors:  Andrew W Walter; Joanne M Hilden
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 5.075

8.  Reported outcomes of children with newly diagnosed high-grade gliomas treated with nimotuzumab and irinotecan.

Authors:  Nongnuch Sirachainan; Atthaporn Boongird; Thiti Swangsilpa; Wipawi Klaisuban; Apasri Lusawat; Suradej Hongeng
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 1.475

Review 9.  Chemotherapy for malignant brain tumors of childhood.

Authors:  Nicholas G Gottardo; Amar Gajjar
Journal:  J Child Neurol       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 1.987

10.  A phase II single-arm study of irinotecan in combination with temozolomide (TEMIRI) in children with newly diagnosed high grade glioma: a joint ITCC and SIOPE-brain tumour study.

Authors:  Darren Hargrave; Birgit Geoerger; Didier Frappaz; Torsten Pietsch; Lyle Gesner; Laura Cisar; Aurora Breazna; Andrew Dorman; Ofelia Cruz-Martinez; Jose Luis Fuster; Xavier Rialland; Céline Icher; Pierre Leblond; David Ashley; Giorgio Perilongo; Martin Elliott; Martin English; Niels Clausen; Jacques Grill
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2013-03-04       Impact factor: 4.130

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.