Literature DB >> 21487410

Early toxicity predicts long-term survival in high-grade glioma.

Y R Lawrence1, M Wang, A P Dicker, D Andrews, W J Curran, J M Michalski, L Souhami, W-Ka Yung, M Mehta.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients with high-grade gliomas are treated with surgery followed by chemoradiation. The risk factors and implications of neurological side effects are not known.
METHODS: Acute and late ≥ grade 3 neurological toxicities (NTs) were analysed among 2761 patients from 14 RTOG trials accrued from 1983 to 2003. The association between acute and late toxicity was analysed using a stepwise logistic regression model. The association between the occurrence of acute NT and survival was analysed as an independent variable.
RESULTS: There were 2610 analysable patients (86% glioblastoma, 10% anaplastic astrocytoma). All received a systemic agent during radiation (83% chemotherapy, 17% biological agents). Median radiation dose was 60 Gy. There were 182 acute and 83 late NT events. On univariate analysis, older age, poor performance status, aggressive surgery, pre-existing neurological dysfunction, poor mental status and twice-daily radiation were associated with increased acute NT. In a stepwise logistic regression model the occurrence of acute NT was significantly associated with late NT (OR=2.40; 95% CI=1.2-4.8; P=0.014). The occurrence of acute NT predicted poorer overall survival, independent of recursive partitioning analysis class (median 7.8 vs 11.8 months).
INTERPRETATION: Acute NT is significantly associated with both late NT and overall survival.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21487410      PMCID: PMC3101937          DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2011.123

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


Second to meningioma, high-grade gliomas (WHO grade 3, 4) are the most frequent type of primary brain tumours in adults. Treatment consists of maximal safe resection followed by partial brain radiation. Following the introduction of concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide, long-term survival for grade 4 gliomas (glioblastoma, GBM) has improved, with almost 10% of subjects now living 5 years (Stupp ). The long-term toxicity of treatment is, therefore, of increasing importance. Patients with high-grade glioma undergoing chemoradiation experience various side effects, including dermatological, endocrine, systemic and neurological events. Dermatological side effects such as radiation dermatitis and alopecia occur early and are generally transient, although alopecia may take several months to reverse. These rarely interfere with functional independence, but may contribute significantly to a reduction in quality of life because of a diminution in self-worth. Endocrine side effects are usually delayed by several months to years, are gradual in onset and often subtle, in terms of clinical presentation, and hence are underdiagnosed; they are more frequent in children than adults (Cross and Glantz, 2003). Systemic side effects such as myelosuppression and diarrhoea are generally attributable to chemotherapy. Neurological side effects occur both early and late. Acute effects (within 90 days of the commencement of therapy) are often transient and include fatigue, headache, nausea, motor/sensory disturbances, raised intracranial pressure, cranial nerve palsies, visual disturbances, seizures and subtle changes in short-term memory. Late side effects (more than 90 days after the commencement of therapy) include many of the same symptoms, with the addition of cognitive decline (Taphoorn and Klein, 2004), cerebellar dysfunction and the consequences of white matter atrophy such as normal pressure hydrocephalus; these are rarely reversible. It is often impossible to determine whether such neurological symptoms are side effects of radiation therapy (RT), surgery, chemotherapy, medications (e.g., anti-epileptics), an effect of the tumour itself or a combination of the above. The pathophysiology of radiation-induced neurological damage is complex and imperfectly understood; it is thought to involve (1) an increase in permeability of the blood–brain barrier, (2) death of oligodendroglial precursor cells leading to demyelination, (3) subtle changes in neuronal activity and vascular damage leading to frank radiation necrosis and (4) loss of radio-sensitive stem cell compartments, which under the inflammatory stress, induced by radiation, preferentially undergo gliogenic maturation, as opposed to participating in neurogenesis (Mizumatsu ; Soussain ). A recent review across a wide range of tumour types suggested that risk factors for radiation-induced neurological toxicity (NT) include both treatment variables (radiation dose, fraction size, conformality index, volume treated, overall treatment time, chemotherapy use) and patient variables (older age, diabetes mellitus) (Lawrence ). We are not aware of any large studies that have specifically examined the NT of radiation treatment in subjects with high-grade gliomas, with a view to identifying risk factors and associations between acute and late toxicity, and eventual survival. Purpose By performing a retrospective analysis of RTOG high-grade glioma studies we sought to answer the following questions: What is the incidence of acute and late NT following RT for high-grade glioma? What are the risk factors for acute and late NT following RT for high-grade glioma? Is there an association between acute and late NT? What are the long-term implications of acute NT?

Materials and methods

Patient data was pooled from 14 RTOG high-grade glioma trials that accrued a total of 2761 subjects (Table 1). Eligibility criteria were consistent in all of the studies: histologically confirmed supratentorial malignant glioma; age of at least 18 years; normal hepatic, renal and bone marrow function; and an interval of 6 weeks or less from surgery to initiation of radiotherapy. Ineligibility criteria included previous malignancies (except skin carcinomas), previous chemotherapy, or head and neck irradiation. All the trials combined RT with systemic anti-tumour therapy.
Table 1

Clinical trial data analysed

Study Phase Study question BID RT Concurrent systemic agent Number of analysable subjects BED Acute neurological toxicity Late neurological toxicity Overall toxicity Survival Ref.
8302I/IIHyperfractionated RT, dose escalationYBCNU75673.6–114.2869AcceptableHC(Curran et al, 1992)
8409I/IIRole of AZQNAZQ5474–95110NRHC(1998)
9006III (R)Conventional vs hyperfractionated RTY/NBCNU693100–100.82815NRHC(Scott et al, 1998a)
9305III (R)Radiosurgical boostNBCNU187100, >12064AcceptableHC(Souhami et al, 2004)
9411IIDose escalation for small tumoursYBCNU10598.1–10853AcceptableHC(Coughlin et al, 2000)
9417IIRole of tirapazamineNTirapazamine12210031More toxicities at higher doseHC(Del Rowe et al, 2000)
9513IIRole of topotecanNTopotecan8410043Significant haematological toxicityHC(Fisher et al, 2002)
9602IIRole of paclitaxelNPaclitaxel6110014AcceptableHC(Langer et al, 2001)
9710IIRole of beta-interferonNBeta-interferon5510012AcceptableHC(Colman et al, 2006)
9803I/IIConventional fractionation, dose escalationNBCNU203110–1401013AcceptableHC(Tsien et al, 2009)
9806IIRole of thalidomideNThalidomide1251001912AcceptableSlightly better than HC(Yung et al, 2001)
0013IIIntra-tumoral bleomycinNBleomycin1410014aaa
0021IIRole of tamoxifenNTamoxifen7510024AcceptableHC(Robins et al, 2006)
0023IIRole of stereotactic RT boostNBCNU7617259AcceptableHC(Cardinale et al, 2006)

Abbreviations: AZQ=diaziquone; BCNU=carmustine; BED=biological-equivalent dose; BID=twice daily radiation; HC=historical controls; N=no; NR=not reported; R=randomised; RT=radiation therapy; Y=yes.

Small study, never published.

Definition of acute and late neurological toxicity

‘Acute toxicity’ is defined as adverse events that occurred within 3 months of commencing therapy; events occurring after this were classified as ‘late’. RTOG Acute Morbidity Scoring Criteria and RTOG/EORTC Late Radiation Morbidity Scoring Schema were used for the following studies: 8302, 8409, 9006, 9305, 9411, 9417, 9513, 9602 and 9710. NCI – CTC version 2.0 and RTOG/EORTC Late Radiation Morbidity Scoring Schema were used for the following studies: 9803, 9806, 0013, 0021 and 0023. For the purposes of this report, we only considered NTs of grade 3 or greater, without regard to attribution. Owing to the database's design we were unable to scrutinise details of the NTs. The trials analysed used a range of doses and fractionation schemes. The effects of different fractionation schemes on the normal brain were compared by calculating the biological-equivalent dose (BED) (Fowler, 1989) using a normal tissue alpha/beta ratio of 3 (Lee ). The RTOG trial 9305 combined fractionated therapy (60 Gy, BED 100) with a single-fraction radiosurgical boost. Although there is no accepted way to convert this into a BED, we considered the BED to be ‘above 120’ for the purposes of statistical analysis.

Statistical methods

Frequency distributions of patient survival time (survive ⩾3 month vs survive <3 months) for two groups (acute NT vs no acute NT) were compared using χ2-tests. McNemar's test was used to test the difference between two correlated proportions – occurrence/no occurrence of acute and late NTs. Logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between acute and late NTs. It was also used to assess the relationship between pre-treatment characteristics, treatment options and the occurrence of acute NTs. For the survival end point, the Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate the rates, and the log-rank test was used to compare them between the two patient groups (acute NT vs no acute NT). The Cox proportional hazards (PH) model was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) associated with overall survival while adjusting patient-specific factors. A two-sided test was used at a significance level of 0.05 for all the evaluations. Patients dying within 3 months of RT are by definition not able to develop late NT; they were therefore excluded from analyses of late toxicity.

Results

A total of 2761 patients were accrued; 151 patients (5%) were excluded from the analysis because of being ineligible, no protocol treatment or withdrawal of consent leaving 2610 patients. Baseline characteristics are listed in Table 2.
Table 2

Pretreatment characteristics, (n=2610)

  N %
Age
 <5090734
 ⩽50169165
 Unknown/missing12<1
   
Zubrod
 0129450
 1, 2, 3130450
 Unknown/missing12<1
   
Surgery
 Biopsy65025
 Partial/total resection190073
 Other/unknown/missing702
   
Neurological dysfunction
 None/minor163162
 Moderate/severe96136
 Unknown/missing181
   
Mental status
 Normal function172566
 Minor, gross confusion70627
 Unknown/missing1797
   
RPA class
 I, II1837
 III41016
 IV104340
 V, VI84433
 Unknown1305
   
Histology
 GBM223386
 AA25010
 Other1275
   
Twice-daily RT
 No139754
 Yes121346
   
Chemotherapy
 No43117
 Yes217983
   
Biological drug
 No217983
 Yes43117
   
Biological-equivalent dose
 ⩽120234490
 >12026610

Abbreviations: AA=anaplastic astrocytoma; GBM=glioblastoma; RPA=recursive partitioning analysis; RT=radiation therapy.

Median follow-up of all subjects was 11.2 months; median follow-up of the 279 patients censored subjects who were still alive at last follow-up was 57.3 months (this difference in length of follow-up between all subjects (censored and uncensored) and censored subjects reflects the fact that the risk of dying apparently decreases after living up to a certain time). The 265 patients who lived less than 3 months were excluded from analyses of late toxicity. A total of 182 cases (7.0%, crude rate) of acute NT and 83 cases (3.5%, crude rate) of late NT were reported. Pretreatment characteristics and treatment options were assessed in logistic regression models to predict the occurrence of acute CNS toxicities. Table 3 lists the results, based on the univariate logistic regression analyses. Histology, chemotherapy and BED were considered as non-statistically significant at the significance level of 0.1 and not included in the further multivariate logistic regression analysis. In a stepwise logistic regression model considering the remaining six variables, Zubrod performance status, previous surgery type, neurological function, mental status and twice-daily (BID) radiation were significantly associated with acute NT (Table 3).
Table 3

Univariate and multivariate analyses/logistic regression for acute neurological toxicities (n=2610)

   Univariate analysis
Multivariate analysis b
Variable Comparison OR (95% CI) a P-value OR (95% CI) a P-value
Age<50   
 ⩾501.59 (1.1, 2.2)0.008
Zubrod0   
 1, 2, 32.72 (1.9, 3.8)<0.00011.77 (1.1, 2.7)0.010
SurgeryPartial/total resection  
 Biopsy1.63 (1.2, 2.2)0.00291.43 (1.0, 2.0)0.038
Neurological dysfunctionNone/minor  
 Moderate/severe2.91 (2.1, 4.0)<0.00011.80 (1.2, 2.7)0.0054
Mental statusNormal function  
 Minor/gross confusion2.48 (1.8, 3.4)<0.00011.69 (1.2, 2.4)0.0025
Twice-daily RTNo  
 Yes1.79 (1.32, 2.43)0.00021.67 (1.2, 2.3)0.0025
HistologyAA   
 GBM0.95 (0.6, 1.6)0.84
ChemotherapyNo   
 Yes0.79 (0.5, 1.2)0.22
Biological-equivalent dose⩽120   
 >1200.84 (0.5, 1.4)0.52

Abbreviations: AA=anaplastic astrocytoma; BED=biological-equivalent dose; CI=confidence interval; GBM=glioblastoma; OR=odds ratio; RT=radiation therapy.

Odds ratio: the odds ratio of 1 indicates no difference between the two subgroups.

Multivariate model derived from stepwise selection.

Variable(s) not included in final model: age (dropped out during the stepwise selection process).

Variable(s) dropped from modelling as not significant with reference variables: histology, chemotherapy, BED (not significant during the univariate setting).

Pretreatment characteristics, treatment-related variables and the occurrence of acute NT were assessed in logistic regression models to predict the occurrence of late CNS toxicities. The following variables were considered in the univariate logistic regression analysis: age at diagnosis (<50 vs ⩾50), surgery type (biopsy vs partial/total resection), neurological dysfunction (no dysfunction/minor vs moderate/severe), mental status (normal function vs minor/confusion), once-daily radiation (yes vs no), Zubrod performance status (0 vs 1/2/3), histology (GBM vs anaplastic astrocytoma), chemotherapy (yes vs no), BED (⩽120 vs >120) and acute CNS toxicities (yes vs no). Age, Zubrod performance status, type of surgery, neurological function, mental status and histology were considered non-statistically significant at a significance level of 0.1 and not included in further multivariate logistic regression analysis. In a stepwise logistic regression model considering the four remaining variables, once-daily radiation, BED and previous occurrence of acute NT were all statistically associated with late NT (Table 4).
Table 4

Univariate and multivariate analyses/logistic regression for late neurological toxicities

   Univariate analysis
Multivariate analysis b
Variable Comparison OR (95% CI) a P-value OR (95% CI) a P-value
Age<50 
 ⩾500.95 (0.6, 1.5)0.81
Zubrod0 
 1, 2, 30.93 (0.6, 1.4)0.75
SurgeryPartial/total resection 
 Biopsy1.09 (0.7, 1.8)0.73
Neurological dysfunctionNone/minor 
 Moderate/severe0.76 (0.5, 1.2)0.26
Mental statusNormal function 
 Minor/gross confusion0.86 (0.5, 1.5)0.62
Twice-daily RTNo 
 Yes0.37 (0.2, 0.6)0.00010.42 (0.2, 0.7)0.002
HistologyAA 
 GBM1.76 (0.7, 4.4)0.23
ChemotherapyNo 
 Yes0.64 (0.4, 1.1)0.09
BED⩽120 
 >1202.83 (1.7, 4.8)<0.00011.98 (1.1, 3.4)0.016
Acute CNSNo 
 Yes2.11 (1.1, 4.2)0.032.40 (1.2, 4.8)0.014

Abbreviations: AA=anaplastic astrocytoma; BED=biological-equivalent dose; CI=confidence interval; CNS=central nervous system; GBM=glioblastoma; OR=odds ratio; RT=radiation therapy.

Odds ratio: The odds ratio of 1 indicates no difference between the two subgroups, less than 1 indicates a protective effect.

Multivariate model derived from stepwise selection.

Variable(s) not included in final model: chemotherapy (dropped out during the stepwise selection process).

Variable(s) dropped from modelling as not significant with reference variables: age, Zubrod performance status, surgery, neurologic function, mental status, histology (not significant during the univariate setting).

The association between acute and late toxicity amongst subjects who survived at least 3 months was examined by means of McNemar's test. Among the 148 patients experiencing acute NT, 10 (7%) patients experienced late NT; among the 2197 patients not experiencing acute NT, only 73 (3%) patients experienced late NT, P<0.0001, suggesting that acute CNS toxicities are statistically associated with late CNS toxicities. When the two patient groups (patients with and without acute NT) were compared with regard to overall survival, based on the log-rank test, a statistical difference was found (HR=1.77; 95% CI=1.52–2.06; P<0.0001). The median survival times were 7.8 and 11.8 months, respectively. The Kaplan–Meier curve is presented in Figure 1. Subjects with acute CNS toxicities were more likely to die within 3 months of treatment. Approximately 19% of patients with acute CNS toxicities died within 3 months, whereas 10% of patients without acute CNS toxicities died within 3 months, P<0.001.
Figure 1

Overall survival, stratified by the presence/absence of acute neurological toxicity.

Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) class (a combination of age, histology, Zubrod performance status, mental status, neurological function, symptom time and previous surgery) has been robustly established as a prognostic scale for patients with newly diagnosed high-grade glioma (Curran ; Scott ; Mirimanoff ). Recursive partitioning analysis class, BID radiation (yes vs no), chemotherapy (yes vs no), BED (⩽120 vs >120) and the occurrence of acute NT were assessed in a PH Cox model for overall survival (Table 5, Figure 2). Twice-daily radiation and BED were considered non-statistically significant and were not included in the multivariate Cox analysis. In a stepwise multivariate Cox model considering RPA class, chemotherapy and acute CNS toxicities, only RPA class and acute NT remained statistically associated with the overall survival (HR=1.43; 95% CI=1.2–1.7; P<0.0001) after adjusting for the RPA classes (Table 5).
Table 5

Univariate and multivariate analysis/cox proportional hazards model for overall survival

Variable Comparison HR (95% CI) P-value HR (95% CI) P-value
RPAI, II   
 III3.24 (2.6, 4.1)<0.00013.27 (2.6, 4.1)<0.0001
 IV5.41 (4.4, 6.7)<0.00015.41 (4.4, 6.7)<0.0001
 V, VI10.10 (8.1, 12.6)<0.00019.92 (7.9, 12.4)<0.0001
Twice-daily RTNo   
 Yes0.93 (0.9, 1.0)0.09  
ChemotherapyNo   
 Yes0.78 (0.7, 0.9)<0.0001  
BED⩽120   
 >1200.99 (0.9, 1.1)0.86  
Acute CNSNo   
 Yes1.77 (1.5, 2.1)<0.00011.43 (1.2, 1.7)<0.0001

Abbreviations: BED=biological-equivalent dose; CI=confidence interval; CNS=central nervous system; HR=hazards ratio; RPA=recursive partitioning analysis; RT=radiation therapy.

Multivariate model derived from stepwise selection.

Variable(s) not included in final model: twice-daily RT and chemotherapy (dropped out during the stepwise selection process).

Variable dropped from modelling as not significant with reference variables: BED (not significant during the univariate setting).

Figure 2

Overall survival stratified by the use of chemotherapy. Of note, 93% of subjects who received chemotherapy received BCNU. All patients who did not receive chemotherapy did receive a systemic agent (temozolomide, diaziquone, tamoxifen, thalidomide or β-interferon).

Discussion

We performed an analysis of the RTOG database to understand the risk factors and consequences of acute NT in patients with high-grade gliomas undergoing RT. We found that both early and late toxicity are comparatively rare (3–7%) – in agreement with published experience (Dinapoli ; Stupp ; Keime-Guibert ). Risk factors for acute NT that remained significant in the multivariate analysis were both patient (functional status, neurological function, mental status) and treatment (biopsy only, BID radiation) related. These findings, though novel in the field of brain tumours, are in keeping with the general oncology literature that frail patients experience more toxicity (Brian ; Artz ; Kumar Pal ). The lack of association between chemotherapy and toxicity differs with the findings of the pivotal EORTC/NCIC phase III trial that established temozolomide and radiation as the standard of care. In that trial, in-field acute grade 3 and 4 toxicities (dermatological, infection and vision and nausea/vomiting) occurred in 7 and 14% of subjects in the control and temozolomide arms, respectively, (Stupp ). This difference may reflect the type and extended duration of chemotherapy in the EORTC/NCIC trial. Conversely the rate of late toxicity reported by us (3.5%) is much higher than that reported in each arm of the EORTC/NCIC trial (<1%), it is not clear whether this is due to differences in treatment, population (the EORTC trial excluded older patients) or reporting practices. An important difference is that the statistics from the Stupp trial refer to any non-haematological toxic event, whereas the data presented here are specifically for NT. Risk factors for late toxicity, significant in multivariate analysis, were once-daily radiation, high total radiation dose and previous acute NT. It is interesting to compare our findings with the recently published QUANTEC meta-analysis of the tolerance of the normal brain to irradiation, which investigated risk factors for late brain toxicity (Lawrence ). Many of the studies analysed by the QUANTEC team involved the treatment of non-primary brain tumours (e.g., brain metastases and nasopharyngeal carcinoma). The QUANTEC authors demonstrated a sharp incidence in radiation necrosis when the BED rose above 120. Although the end points are not identical, in the current study we likewise found that a BED above 120, doubled the risk of late toxicity. The association between acute and late toxicity has not previously been reported, and challenges the classic teaching that acute toxicity is fully reversible. A possible explanation is that these acute toxicities were so severe that healing was not possible; alternatively this may reflect a predisposition to toxicity amongst certain patients, possibly related to either tumour location (e.g., close to critical structures) or genetic makeup. The relationship between acute NT and overall survival was unexpected. Patients who did not experience acute NT were found to have a 4 month longer median survival than those who experienced NT (of at least grade 3). This survival advantage was independent of RPA class. Although we lack a complete explanation, this may demonstrate the importance of normal tissue damage in determining long-term survival. A recent study likewise demonstrated that GBM patients who acquired motor or language deficits post-operatively had poorer overall survival than those who remained neurologically intact (Shinoda ). Our findings are in contrast with the association between pseudo-progression and improved prognosis in high-grade gliomas (Gerstner ). Pseudoprogression is generally defined as radiological progression (oedema and sometimes contrast enhancement on MRI) soon after the completion of RT in patients with malignant gliomas, which is followed by spontaneous recovery and stabilisation (Brandsma ). Pathologically it is thought to represent a mild form of radiation necrosis. Possible explanations for the difference between our findings and those associating pseudoprogression with a good prognosis are (1) pseudoprogression is especially associated with the use of temozolomide (Chamberlain ; Brandsma ). None of the patients in our study received this agent; rather the most frequently used systemic agent was BCNU, which appears to be much less potent. (2) Our patients were universally symptomatic, whereas most patients with pseudoprogression are asymptomatic. Hence, whereas pseudoprogression may be a form of intra-tumour necrosis, we suspect that the ‘acute toxicity’ cases described here represent damage to surrounding normal tissues. A more thorough understanding would require a case-by-case review of imaging, which unfortunately is not possible. Despite the fact that our study dates from the pre-temozolomide era, we found that the use of chemotherapy was associated with increased survival (Figure 2). Of those who received chemotherapy, 93% received BCNU. As this association was only found on univariate, but not in multivariate analysis, its significance is unclear. Nevertheless, the association is in agreement with previous meta-analyses that have likewise identified methylating agents to be effective radiosensitsers in this disease (Chang ; Fine ; Spiegel ). A weakness of this retrospective study is our inability to assess completeness of reporting, and accurate attribution of neurological events. The definition of NT varied between the studies depending on the toxicity scale used; further we do not have descriptions of these events. A possible explanation of our findings associating acute NT with long-term survival is ‘misclassification bias’, that is, the treating physicians had difficulty distinguishing treatment-related side effects from tumour symptoms, and that what was reported as ‘acute toxicity’ was in fact early tumour progression. A close reading of our results however, supports the fact that these were indeed true treatment-related side effects: (1) We found that compared with once-daily radiation, BID radiation produced increased acute toxicity, but decreased late toxicity. This is entirely in keeping with classic radiobiology teaching of normal tissue damage. The lack of impact of fractionation scheme on overall survival (Table 5) further supports the supposition that this is related to normal tissue injury and not tumour control. (2) Conversely, histology (GBM vs anaplastic astrocytoma) had no impact on either acute or late toxicity, despite the more aggressive nature of GBM. If ‘NT’ was in fact a measure of ‘tumour progression’, a correlation would have been expected. (3) This ‘misclassification’ bias would be expected to especially affect subjects whose tumours progressed very early. Nevertheless, if patients who died within the first 3 months are excluded from the analysis, the survival benefit associated with lack of acute toxicity remains (HR=1.69; 95% CI=1.43–2.01; P<0.0001, Supplementary Figure). A further weakness of our study is the small number of patients encountering toxicity. Although we analysed 2610 subjects, there were only 182 acute toxic events and 83 late toxic events. Confirmatory studies from other large databases, or population-based cohorts are therefore needed to validate our findings. In conclusion we have elucidated the risk factors for NT amongst patients with high-grade glioma undergoing RT. These should be considered when designing eligibility criteria for clinical trials. The finding that acute NT predicts for both late NT and poor overall survival in patients not receiving temozolomide is provocative and requires validation. This phenomenon appears to be distinct to the ‘pseudoprogression’ seen when temozolomide is combined with RT.
  34 in total

Review 1.  Evaluating the older patient with cancer: understanding frailty and the geriatric assessment.

Authors:  Sumanta Kumar Pal; Vani Katheria; Arti Hurria
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 508.702

2.  Selection of eligible patients with supratentorial glioblastoma multiforme for gross total resection.

Authors:  J Shinoda; N Sakai; S Murase; H Yano; T Matsuhisa; T Funakoshi
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 4.130

3.  Phase II radiation therapy oncology group trial of weekly paclitaxel and conventional external beam radiation therapy for supratentorial glioblastoma multiforme.

Authors:  C J Langer; J Ruffer; H Rhodes; R Paulus; K Murray; B Movsas; W Curran
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2001-09-01       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  Extreme sensitivity of adult neurogenesis to low doses of X-irradiation.

Authors:  Shinichiro Mizumatsu; Michelle L Monje; Duncan R Morhardt; Radoslaw Rola; Theo D Palmer; John R Fike
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2003-07-15       Impact factor: 12.701

5.  Phase II study of topotecan plus cranial radiation for glioblastoma multiforme: results of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9513.

Authors:  Barbara Fisher; M Won; David Macdonald; Douglas W Johnson; Wilson Roa
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2002-07-15       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 6.  Neurologic complications of radiation therapy.

Authors:  Nicole E Cross; Michael J Glantz
Journal:  Neurol Clin       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.806

7.  Randomized comparison of stereotactic radiosurgery followed by conventional radiotherapy with carmustine to conventional radiotherapy with carmustine for patients with glioblastoma multiforme: report of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 93-05 protocol.

Authors:  Luis Souhami; Wendy Seiferheld; David Brachman; Ervin B Podgorsak; Maria Werner-Wasik; Robert Lustig; Christopher J Schultz; William Sause; Paul Okunieff; Jan Buckner; Lucia Zamorano; Minesh P Mehta; Walter J Curran
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2004-11-01       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  Single-arm, open-label phase II study of intravenously administered tirapazamine and radiation therapy for glioblastoma multiforme.

Authors:  J Del Rowe; C Scott; M Werner-Wasik; J P Bahary; W J Curran; R C Urtasun; B Fisher
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Comparison of postoperative radiotherapy and combined postoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy in the multidisciplinary management of malignant gliomas. A joint Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study.

Authors:  C H Chang; J Horton; D Schoenfeld; O Salazer; R Perez-Tamayo; S Kramer; A Weinstein; J S Nelson; Y Tsukada
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1983-09-15       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 10.  Cognitive deficits in adult patients with brain tumours.

Authors:  Martin J B Taphoorn; Martin Klein
Journal:  Lancet Neurol       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 44.182

View more
  9 in total

1.  NRG oncology RTOG 9006: a phase III randomized trial of hyperfractionated radiotherapy (RT) and BCNU versus standard RT and BCNU for malignant glioma patients.

Authors:  Arif N Ali; Peixin Zhang; W K Alfred Yung; Yuhchyau Chen; Benjamin Movsas; Raul C Urtasun; Christopher U Jones; Kwang N Choi; Jeff M Michalski; A Jennifer Fischbach; Arnold M Markoe; Christopher J Schultz; Marta Penas-Prado; Madhur K Garg; Alan C Hartford; Harold E Kim; Minhee Won; Walter J Curran
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 4.130

2.  Neural stem cell-mediated enzyme/prodrug therapy for glioma: preclinical studies.

Authors:  Karen S Aboody; Joseph Najbauer; Marianne Z Metz; Massimo D'Apuzzo; Margarita Gutova; Alexander J Annala; Timothy W Synold; Larry A Couture; Suzette Blanchard; Rex A Moats; Elizabeth Garcia; Soraya Aramburo; Valerie V Valenzuela; Richard T Frank; Michael E Barish; Christine E Brown; Seung U Kim; Behnam Badie; Jana Portnow
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2013-05-08       Impact factor: 17.956

3.  Provocative Question: Should Ketogenic Metabolic Therapy Become the Standard of Care for Glioblastoma?

Authors:  Thomas N Seyfried; Laura Shelton; Gabriel Arismendi-Morillo; Miriam Kalamian; Ahmed Elsakka; Joseph Maroon; Purna Mukherjee
Journal:  Neurochem Res       Date:  2019-04-25       Impact factor: 3.996

Review 4.  Treatment of Glioblastoma in the Elderly.

Authors:  Rebecca A Harrison; John F de Groot
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 3.923

5.  Management of Glioblastoma Multiforme in a Patient Treated With Ketogenic Metabolic Therapy and Modified Standard of Care: A 24-Month Follow-Up.

Authors:  Ahmed M A Elsakka; Mohamed Abdel Bary; Eman Abdelzaher; Mostafa Elnaggar; Miriam Kalamian; Purna Mukherjee; Thomas N Seyfried
Journal:  Front Nutr       Date:  2018-03-29

6.  O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase promoter methylation and isocitrate dehydrogenase mutation as prognostic factors in a cohort of Saudi patients with glioblastoma.

Authors:  Ali H Alassiri; Ali Alkhaibary; Saud Al-Sarheed; Fahd Alsufani; Mohammed Alharbi; Ahmed Alkhani; Ahmed Aloraidi
Journal:  Ann Saudi Med       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 1.526

7.  Association between microRNAs 10b/21/34a and acute toxicity in glioblastoma patients treated with radiotherapy and temozolomide.

Authors:  Aleksandar Stepanović; Marina Nikitović; Tatjana P Stanojković; Danica Grujičić; Zoran Bukumirić; Ivana Srbljak; Rosanda Ilić; Snežana Milošević; Tatjana Arsenijević; Nina Petrović
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-05-07       Impact factor: 4.996

Review 8.  Metabolic management of microenvironment acidity in glioblastoma.

Authors:  Thomas N Seyfried; Gabriel Arismendi-Morillo; Giulio Zuccoli; Derek C Lee; Tomas Duraj; Ahmed M Elsakka; Joseph C Maroon; Purna Mukherjee; Linh Ta; Laura Shelton; Dominic D'Agostino; Michael Kiebish; Christos Chinopoulos
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-08-17       Impact factor: 5.738

Review 9.  SIRT in 2025.

Authors:  Francesca Romana Ponziani; Francesco Santopaolo; Antonio Gasbarrini; Roberto Iezzi; Alessandro Posa; Maurizio Pompili; Alessandro Tanzilli; Marta Maestri; Maria Pallozzi; Francesca Ibba; Riccardo Manfredi
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 2.797

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.