Literature DB >> 20627551

Radiation induced early necrosis in patients with malignant gliomas receiving temozolomide.

Emel Yaman1, Suleyman Buyukberber, Mustafa Benekli, Yusuf Oner, Ugur Coskun, Muge Akmansu, Banu Ozturk, Ali Osman Kaya, Dogan Uncu, Ramazan Yildiz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Temozolomide is the major drug in the treatment of malignant gliomas. Radiation induced necrosis can behave radiologically and clinically like a recurrent tumor. The major problem is the differentiation between recurrence and radiation injury especially in early phases of treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the patients receiving temozolomide showing early clinical or radiological progression and impact of early necrosis on follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated medical records of 67 patients with malignant glioma receiving temozolomide. All patients received concomitant radiotherapy and temozolomide followed by adjuvant temozolomide. In case of any radiological or clinical progression, MRI spectroscopy evaluation was used to confirm tumoral progression.
RESULTS: Radiological or clinical progression was observed in 17 (25.4%) patients. Early radiation induced necrosis was diagnosed in 4 of 17 patients (23.5%) by surgery (n=3) and MRI spectroscopy (n=1). The observed incidence of pseudoprogression was 4 in 67 (6%) patients. Patients with diagnosis of early radiation injury had median progression-free survival of 7 months compared to 5 months in patients without radiation damage (p=0.004). However, there was no statistically significant difference in terms of overall survival between groups.
CONCLUSION: Temozolomide can cause early radiation induced injury which can mimic progressive tumor. Although the discrimination between two entities results in the accurate evaluation of response to therapy and benefits those patients, it did not affect overall survival. MRI spectroscopy is a valuable tool to define early radiation necrosis and should be further evaluated in larger prospective studies. (c) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20627551     DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2010.05.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Neurol Neurosurg        ISSN: 0303-8467            Impact factor:   1.876


  14 in total

Review 1.  Novel Approaches to Imaging Tumor Metabolism.

Authors:  Sui-Seng Tee; Kayvan R Keshari
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.360

2.  Temozolomide and pasireotide treatment for aggressive pituitary adenoma: expertise at a tertiary care center.

Authors:  Filippo Ceccato; Giuseppe Lombardi; Renzo Manara; Enzo Emanuelli; Luca Denaro; Laura Milanese; Marina Paola Gardiman; Roberta Bertorelle; Massimo Scanarini; Domenico D'Avella; Gianluca Occhi; Marco Boscaro; Vittorina Zagonel; Carla Scaroni
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2015-01-03       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 3.  Radiation necrosis: relevance with respect to treatment of primary and secondary brain tumors.

Authors:  James Fink; Donald Born; Marc C Chamberlain
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 5.081

4.  Variability and accuracy of different software packages for dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging for distinguishing glioblastoma progression from pseudoprogression.

Authors:  Zachary S Kelm; Panagiotis D Korfiatis; Ravi K Lingineni; John R Daniels; Jan C Buckner; Daniel H Lachance; Ian F Parney; Rickey E Carter; Bradley J Erickson
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2015-05-26

Review 5.  Liquid Biopsy Strategies to Distinguish Progression from Pseudoprogression and Radiation Necrosis in Glioblastomas.

Authors:  Anudeep Yekula; Koushik Muralidharan; Zachary S Rosh; Anna E Youngkin; Keiko M Kang; Leonora Balaj; Bob S Carter
Journal:  Adv Biosyst       Date:  2020-06-02

6.  PET/MRI in cancer patients: first experiences and vision from Copenhagen.

Authors:  Andreas Kjær; Annika Loft; Ian Law; Anne Kiil Berthelsen; Lise Borgwardt; Johan Löfgren; Camilla Bardram Johnbeck; Adam Espe Hansen; Sune Keller; Søren Holm; Liselotte Højgaard
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2012-12-25       Impact factor: 2.310

7.  Pseudoprogression in glioblastoma patients: the impact of extent of resection.

Authors:  Hun Ho Park; Tae Hoon Roh; Seok Gu Kang; Eui Hyun Kim; Chang-Ki Hong; Se Hoon Kim; Sung Soo Ahn; Seung Koo Lee; Hye Jin Choi; Jaeho Cho; Sun Ho Kim; Kyu-Sung Lee; Chang-Ok Suh; Jong Hee Chang
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2015-11-25       Impact factor: 4.130

8.  Histopathological correlates with survival in reoperated glioblastomas.

Authors:  Graeme F Woodworth; Tomas Garzon-Muvdi; Xiaobu Ye; Jaishri O Blakeley; Jon D Weingart; Peter C Burger
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2013-05-11       Impact factor: 4.130

9.  Early Pseudoprogression following Chemoradiotherapy in Glioblastoma Patients: The Value of RANO Evaluation.

Authors:  Paulo Linhares; Bruno Carvalho; Rita Figueiredo; Rui M Reis; Rui Vaz
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 4.375

10.  Pseudoprogression in children, adolescents and young adults with non-brainstem high grade glioma and diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma.

Authors:  Fernando Carceller; Lucy A Fowkes; Komel Khabra; Lucas Moreno; Frank Saran; Anna Burford; Alan Mackay; David T W Jones; Volker Hovestadt; Lynley V Marshall; Sucheta Vaidya; Henry Mandeville; Neil Jerome; Leslie R Bridges; Ross Laxton; Safa Al-Sarraj; Stefan M Pfister; Martin O Leach; Andrew D J Pearson; Chris Jones; Dow-Mu Koh; Stergios Zacharoulis
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2016-05-14       Impact factor: 4.130

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.