OBJECTIVE: Glioblastoma (GB) is rarely found in the cerebellum. Because of its rarity, it is poorly understood if cerebellar GB (CGB) behaves similarly to supratentorial GB. Studies have been limited to case reports and small case series. A better understanding of CGB may help guide treatment strategies. METHODS: Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database was analyzed from 1973 to 2009 for all adult patients with GB located in the cerebellum. Stepwise multivariate proportional hazards regression analyses were used to identify factors independently associated with survival. RESULTS: Two hundred eight (0.9%) patients with CGB were identified from 23,329 GB patients with known locality. The mean age was 58 years. Median survival was 8 months, with 1-, 2- and 5-year survival rates of 21%, 13%, and 2%. When compared to supratentorial GB, CGB occurred in younger patients (58 ± 16 vs. 61 ± 13 years, P = 0.001), less commonly in Whites (85.6% vs. 91.3%, P = 0.005), and were smaller (3.7 ± 1.1 vs. 4.5 ± 1.7 cm, P = 0.001). A cerebellar location independently predicted poorer survival when compared to other GB locations (P = 0.048). In multivariate analysis for patients with CGB, younger age (P < 0.001), Asian or Pacific Islander race (P = 0.046), and radiation therapy (P < 0.001) were independently associated with prolonged survival. CONCLUSION: CGBs are difficult to analyze using institutional series because of their rarity. This study shows they are clinically different from supratentorial GB. Among patients with CGB, radiation therapy may prolong survival. This may help guide treatment strategies aimed at prolonging survival for patients with these extremely rare lesions.
OBJECTIVE:Glioblastoma (GB) is rarely found in the cerebellum. Because of its rarity, it is poorly understood if cerebellar GB (CGB) behaves similarly to supratentorial GB. Studies have been limited to case reports and small case series. A better understanding of CGB may help guide treatment strategies. METHODS: Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database was analyzed from 1973 to 2009 for all adult patients with GB located in the cerebellum. Stepwise multivariate proportional hazards regression analyses were used to identify factors independently associated with survival. RESULTS: Two hundred eight (0.9%) patients with CGB were identified from 23,329 GB patients with known locality. The mean age was 58 years. Median survival was 8 months, with 1-, 2- and 5-year survival rates of 21%, 13%, and 2%. When compared to supratentorial GB, CGB occurred in younger patients (58 ± 16 vs. 61 ± 13 years, P = 0.001), less commonly in Whites (85.6% vs. 91.3%, P = 0.005), and were smaller (3.7 ± 1.1 vs. 4.5 ± 1.7 cm, P = 0.001). A cerebellar location independently predicted poorer survival when compared to other GB locations (P = 0.048). In multivariate analysis for patients with CGB, younger age (P < 0.001), Asian or Pacific Islander race (P = 0.046), and radiation therapy (P < 0.001) were independently associated with prolonged survival. CONCLUSION: CGBs are difficult to analyze using institutional series because of their rarity. This study shows they are clinically different from supratentorial GB. Among patients with CGB, radiation therapy may prolong survival. This may help guide treatment strategies aimed at prolonging survival for patients with these extremely rare lesions.
Keywords:
CGB; Cerebellar; Cerebellar glioblastoma; Cerebellum; GB; GTR; Glioblastoma; Glioma; Gross total resection; ICD-O; International Classification of Disease for Oncology; SEER; STGB; Supratentorial glioblastoma; Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results; Survival
Authors: Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan; John L Maldonado; Vonetta L Williams; William T Curry; Elizabeth A Rodkey; Frederick G Barker; Andrew E Sloan Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2007-05-26 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Kaisorn L Chaichana; Khan K Chaichana; Alessandro Olivi; Jon D Weingart; Richard Bennett; Henry Brem; Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2010-10-01 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Dietmar Krex; Barbara Klink; Christian Hartmann; Andreas von Deimling; Torsten Pietsch; Matthias Simon; Michael Sabel; Joachim P Steinbach; Oliver Heese; Guido Reifenberger; Michael Weller; Gabriele Schackert Journal: Brain Date: 2007-09-04 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Michael Zhang; Richard Li; Erqi L Pollom; Arya Amini; Savita Dandapani; Gordon Li Journal: J Clin Neurosci Date: 2020-11-06 Impact factor: 1.961
Authors: Luc Bauchet; Jacques Guyotat; Thiébaud Picart; David Meyronet; Johan Pallud; Chloé Dumot; Philippe Metellus; Sonia Zouaoui; Moncef Berhouma; François Ducray Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2021-01-05 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Jigisha P Thakkar; Therese A Dolecek; Craig Horbinski; Quinn T Ostrom; Donita D Lightner; Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan; John L Villano Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-07-22 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Hee Jin Cho; Junfei Zhao; Sang Won Jung; Erik Ladewig; Doo-Sik Kong; Yeon-Lim Suh; Yeri Lee; Donggeon Kim; Sun Hee Ahn; Mykola Bordyuh; Hyun Ju Kang; Jason K Sa; Yun Jee Seo; Sung Tae Kim; Do Hoon Lim; Yun-Sik Dho; Jung-Il Lee; Ho Jun Seol; Jung Won Choi; Woong-Yang Park; Chul-Kee Park; Raul Rabadan; Do-Hyun Nam Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 12.300