OBJECTIVE: To assess the survival and role of adjuvant chemotherapy in adult medulloblastoma. METHODS: We reviewed outcomes of 66 patients (aged 18 y or more; median age, 33 y) with medulloblastoma. Forty-four (67%) patients had M0 disease, 9 had M1-M4, and 13 had MX. Thirty-one patients each for whom risk stratification was available were classified as high risk or standard risk. Fifty-six patients had histologic results: classic histology was the most common (n=46 [84%]), followed by desmoplastic (n=9), and large cell/anaplastic (n=1). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests. Cox regression analysis was used to compare recurrences. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 6.7 years. The estimated 5-year OS and PFS were 74% and 59%, respectively. High-risk versus standard-risk classification was associated with worse OS (61% vs. 86%; P=0.03) and recurrence (hazard ratio, 2.56; P=0.05) and a trend for worse PFS (49% vs. 69%; P=0.13). Gross total resection was associated with improved OS (P=0.03) and a trend toward improved PFS (P=0.09). No chemotherapy benefit could be demonstrated for the group as a whole. For high-risk patients with classic histology (n=25), chemotherapy was associated with a trend for improvement in 5-year PFS from 36% to 71% (P=0.10) and in 5-year OS from 49% to 100% (P=0.08). CONCLUSIONS: In adult patients with medulloblastoma, the extent of resection and risk classification predicts the outcome. These results suggest a chemotherapy benefit for high-risk patients with classic histology.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the survival and role of adjuvant chemotherapy in adult medulloblastoma. METHODS: We reviewed outcomes of 66 patients (aged 18 y or more; median age, 33 y) with medulloblastoma. Forty-four (67%) patients had M0 disease, 9 had M1-M4, and 13 had MX. Thirty-one patients each for whom risk stratification was available were classified as high risk or standard risk. Fifty-six patients had histologic results: classic histology was the most common (n=46 [84%]), followed by desmoplastic (n=9), and large cell/anaplastic (n=1). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests. Cox regression analysis was used to compare recurrences. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 6.7 years. The estimated 5-year OS and PFS were 74% and 59%, respectively. High-risk versus standard-risk classification was associated with worse OS (61% vs. 86%; P=0.03) and recurrence (hazard ratio, 2.56; P=0.05) and a trend for worse PFS (49% vs. 69%; P=0.13). Gross total resection was associated with improved OS (P=0.03) and a trend toward improved PFS (P=0.09). No chemotherapy benefit could be demonstrated for the group as a whole. For high-risk patients with classic histology (n=25), chemotherapy was associated with a trend for improvement in 5-year PFS from 36% to 71% (P=0.10) and in 5-year OS from 49% to 100% (P=0.08). CONCLUSIONS: In adult patients with medulloblastoma, the extent of resection and risk classification predicts the outcome. These results suggest a chemotherapy benefit for high-risk patients with classic histology.
Authors: Arnold C Paulino; B-Chen Wen; Nina A Mayr; Raymond Tannous; Thomas W Loew; Frederick D Goldman; Sanford L Meeks; Timothy C Ryken; John M Buatti Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: R D Kortmann; J Kühl; B Timmermann; U Mittler; C Urban; V Budach; E Richter; N Willich; M Flentje; F Berthold; I Slavc; J Wolff; C Meisner; O Wiestler; N Sörensen; M Warmuth-Metz; M Bamberg Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2000-01-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: R J Packer; J Goldwein; H S Nicholson; L G Vezina; J C Allen; M D Ris; K Muraszko; L B Rorke; W M Wara; B H Cohen; J M Boyett Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: A W Chan; N J Tarbell; P M Black; D N Louis; M P Frosch; M Ancukiewicz; P Chapman; J S Loeffler Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: P R Thomas; M Deutsch; J L Kepner; J M Boyett; J Krischer; P Aronin; L Albright; J C Allen; R J Packer; R Linggood; R Mulhern; J A Stehbens; J Langston; P Stanley; P Duffner; L Rorke; J Cherlow; H S Friedman; J L Finlay; T J Vietti; L E Kun Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: S Coulbois; T Civit; Y Grignon; L Taillandier; F Girard; C Marchal; C Pinelli; J Auque Journal: Neurochirurgie Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 1.553
Authors: Roger E Taylor; Clifford C Bailey; Kath Robinson; Claire L Weston; David Ellison; James Ironside; Helen Lucraft; Richard Gilbertson; Diana M Tait; David A Walker; Barry L Pizer; John Imeson; Linda S Lashford Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-04-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Eric M Thompson; Alexa Bramall; James E Herndon; Michael D Taylor; Vijay Ramaswamy Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2018-05-23 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Benjamin H Kann; Nataniel H Lester-Coll; Henry S Park; Debra N Yeboa; Jacqueline R Kelly; Joachim M Baehring; Kevin P Becker; James B Yu; Ranjit S Bindra; Kenneth B Roberts Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Aleksandra Napieralska; Iwona Brąclik; Michał Radwan; Marek Mandera; Sławomir Blamek Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2018-12-04 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Mary Jane Lim-Fat; Maria Macdonald; Sarah Lapointe; Seth Andrew Climans; Chantel Cacciotti; Manik Chahal; Sebastien Perreault; Derek S Tsang; Andrew Gao; Stephen Yip; Julia Keith; Julie Bennett; Vijay Ramaswamy; Jay Detsky; Uri Tabori; Sunit Das; Cynthia Hawkins Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-09-23 Impact factor: 5.738
Authors: I-Chia Liu; Adam L Holtzman; Ronny L Rotondo; Daniel J Indelicato; Sridharan Gururangan; Robert Cavaliere; Bridgette Carter; Christopher G Morris; Daryoush Tavanaiepour; Michael S Rutenberg Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2021-06-08 Impact factor: 4.130