| Literature DB >> 21610702 |
M R Guilfoyle1, R A Weerakkody, A Oswal, I Oberg, C Jeffery, K Haynes, P J Kullar, D Greenberg, S J Jefferies, F Harris, S J Price, S Thomson, C Watts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brain tumours account for <2% of all primary neoplasms but are responsible for 7% of the years of life lost from cancer before age 70 years. The latest survival trends for patients with CNS malignancies have remained largely static. The objective of this study was to evaluate the change in practice as a result of implementing the Improving Outcomes Guidance from the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21610702 PMCID: PMC3111193 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2011.153
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
Historical survival of GBM patients
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| All patients | 685 | 5.0 (4.6–5.5) | 8.7 (7.6–9.8) | 44 | 20 | 6 |
|
| ||||||
| <45 | 63 | 14.1 (7.4–20.9) | 25.1 (16.6–33.5) | 75 | 54 | 31 |
| 45–54 | 112 | 8.3 (6.3–10.2) | 9.9 (8.4–11.5) | 60 | 34 | 8 |
| 55–64 | 229 | 5.6 (5.0–6.3) | 7.3 (6.4–8.2) | 45 | 16 | 2 |
| 65–74 | 226 | 3.7 (3.1–4.2) | 5.6 (4.8–6.5) | 30 | 12 | 2 |
| ⩾75 | 55 | 2.8 (2.0–3.5) | 3.6 (2.8–4.4) | 24 | 2 | 0 |
|
| ||||||
| Biopsy | 333 | 3.8 (3.3–4.4) | 6.2 (5.4–6.9) | 34 | 14 | 3 |
| Debulking | 324 | 6.6 (5.7–7.5) | 11.3 (9.1–13.5) | 53 | 26 | 9 |
|
| ||||||
| None | 251 | 2.0 (1.7–2.3) | 3.8 (3.0–4.6) | 14 | 6 | 2 |
| Radiotherapy | 329 | 6.2 (5.5–7.0) | 9.2 (7.7–10.6) | 51 | 17 | 5 |
| Chemoradiotherapy | 105 | 14.5 (13.0–16.0) | 17.4 (14.4–20.4) | 90 | 62 | 15 |
|
| ||||||
| 1997–2001 | 360 | 4.4 (4.0–4.9) | 6.8 (5.9–7.7) | 38 | 15 | 3 |
| 2002–2006 | 325 | 5.8 (5.1–6.5) | 10.2 (8.6–11.7) | 49 | 25 | 9 |
Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval; GBM=glioblastoma.
Figure 1Survival for historical cohort. Kaplan–Meier curves for patients with GBM diagnosed 1997–2006. Survival of all patients (A), stratified by age (B), comparing stereotactic biopsy and tumour debulking (C) and comparing sequential radiotherapy and chemotherapy (D).
Figure 2Change in management and outcome. Proportions of patients receiving tumour debulking surgery (vs biopsy) and adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CT) in the two 5-year periods of the study ((A) all comparisons with χ2-test, P<0.05). Kaplan–Meier curves for the two study periods (B). Comparison with log-rank test shows significant improvement in survival (P<0.001).
Figure 3Implementation of NICE guidelines. Proportions of cases discussed at pre-operative MDT for management planning and receiving post-operative MRI (A). Change in proportion of patients admitted as emergencies or as urgent elective cases (B). Box and whisker plots of length of stay (C) and cost of inpatient stay plus imaging (D). Box represents interquartile range with median marked by solid bar.
Figure 4Survival with modern optimal RT-TMZ treatment. Kaplan–Meier curves for overall survival (median OS, 18 months (A)) and clinical progression-free survival (PFS, 12 months (B)) of patients treated with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide. Two-year survival is 35%.
Figure 5Service reconfiguration supports research for patient benefit. Our ability to interrogate each stage of the patient journey with an array of screening, diagnostic and analytical tools is unique. This results in a highly integrated research infrastructure capable of delivering tangible results evidenced by the number of clinical studies into which we are recruiting patients. NB: RT in Meningioma, MALTINGS and GALA-5 are all led by Cambridge PIs.