PURPOSE: To determine recurrence patterns of glioblastoma treated with temozolomide-based chemoradiation. METHODS: Pretreatment and serial posttreatment magnetic resonance imaging scans of 54 patients were retrospectively evaluated. Central recurrence (i.e., local progression) and the development of new (i.e., interval appearance of discrete enhancing lesion) in-field, marginal, and distant recurrences were assessed, with the pattern of recurrence of individual lesions defined relative to the 95% isodose line (D(95)). Distant recurrences were defined as lesions completely outside D(95), marginal recurrences crossed D(95), and in-field recurrences were completely inside D(95). RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 17 months, 39 of 54 (72%) patients developed recurrent glioblastoma. Among these 39 patients, central recurrence occurred in 80% (at a median of 7 months from diagnosis); new in-field recurrence developed in 33% (at a median of 14 months); marginal recurrences developed in 15% (at a median of 18 months); and distant recurrences developed in 20% (at a median of 11 months). The actuarial rates of central, new in-field, marginal, distant, and any new recurrences at 1-year were 46%, 15%, 3%, 14%, and 25% respectively, whereas at 2 years, the rates were 68%, 60%, 32%, 28%, and 66%, reflecting an increasing probability of new lesions developing at later time points. Ten patients developed subependymal recurrences, of whom 7 developed multiple subependymal lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas central recurrence of glioblastoma treated with radiation and temozolomide predominates and persists over time, new in-field, marginal, and distant recurrences commonly develop, particularly at later time points in patients with longer survival.
PURPOSE: To determine recurrence patterns of glioblastoma treated with temozolomide-based chemoradiation. METHODS: Pretreatment and serial posttreatment magnetic resonance imaging scans of 54 patients were retrospectively evaluated. Central recurrence (i.e., local progression) and the development of new (i.e., interval appearance of discrete enhancing lesion) in-field, marginal, and distant recurrences were assessed, with the pattern of recurrence of individual lesions defined relative to the 95% isodose line (D(95)). Distant recurrences were defined as lesions completely outside D(95), marginal recurrences crossed D(95), and in-field recurrences were completely inside D(95). RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 17 months, 39 of 54 (72%) patients developed recurrent glioblastoma. Among these 39 patients, central recurrence occurred in 80% (at a median of 7 months from diagnosis); new in-field recurrence developed in 33% (at a median of 14 months); marginal recurrences developed in 15% (at a median of 18 months); and distant recurrences developed in 20% (at a median of 11 months). The actuarial rates of central, new in-field, marginal, distant, and any new recurrences at 1-year were 46%, 15%, 3%, 14%, and 25% respectively, whereas at 2 years, the rates were 68%, 60%, 32%, 28%, and 66%, reflecting an increasing probability of new lesions developing at later time points. Ten patients developed subependymal recurrences, of whom 7 developed multiple subependymal lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas central recurrence of glioblastoma treated with radiation and temozolomide predominates and persists over time, new in-field, marginal, and distant recurrences commonly develop, particularly at later time points in patients with longer survival.
Authors: Andrew Elson; Eric Paulson; Joseph Bovi; Malika Siker; Chris Schultz; Peter S Laviolette Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2015-04-17 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: R-E Yoo; S H Choi; T M Kim; S-H Lee; C-K Park; S-H Park; I H Kim; T J Yun; J-H Kim; C H Sohn Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-08-20 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Reena P Thomas; Seema Nagpal; Michael Iv; Scott G Soltys; Sophie Bertrand; Judith S Pelpola; Robyn Ball; Jaden Yang; Vandana Sundaram; Jonathan Lavezo; Donald Born; Hannes Vogel; J Martin Brown; Lawrence D Recht Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2019-09-19 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: J Sherriff; J Tamangani; L Senthil; G Cruickshank; D Spooner; B Jones; C Brookes; P Sanghera Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Amanda R King; Christopher D Corso; Evan M Chen; Eric Song; Paul Bongiorni; Zhe Chen; Ranjini K Sundaram; Ranjit S Bindra; W Mark Saltzman Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2017-05-31 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Cindy R Timme; Barbara H Rath; John W O'Neill; Kevin Camphausen; Philip J Tofilon Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2018-03-16 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Michelle Alonso-Basanta; Penny Fang; Amit Maity; Stephen M Hahn; Robert A Lustig; Jay F Dorsey Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2013-11-06 Impact factor: 4.130