BACKGROUND: In 2005, maximum safe surgical resection, followed by radiotherapy with concomitant temozolomide (TMZ), followed by adjuvant TMZ became the standard of care for glioblastoma (GBM). Furthermore, a modest, but meaningful, population-based survival improvement for GBM patients occurred in the US between 1999 (when TMZ was first introduced) and 2008. We hypothesized that TMZ usage explained this GBM survival improvement. METHODS: We used national Veterans Health Administration (VHA) databases to construct a cohort of GBM patients, with detailed treatment information, diagnosed 1997-2008 (n = 1645). We compared survival across 3 periods of diagnosis (1997-2000, 2001-2004, and 2005-2008) using Kaplan-Meier curves. We used proportional hazards models to calculate period hazard rate ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusted for demographic, clinical, and treatment covariates. RESULTS: Survival increased over calendar time (stratified log-rank P < .0001). After adjusting for age and Charlson comorbidity score, for cases diagnosed in 2005-2008 versus 1997-2000, the HR was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.64-0.82; p-trend < .0001). Sequentially adding non-TMZ treatment variables (ie, surgery, radiotherapy, non-TMZ chemotherapy) to the model did not change this result. However, adding TMZ to the model containing age, Charlson comorbidity score, and all non-TMZ treatments eliminated the period effect entirely (HR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.86-1.19; p-trend = 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: The observed survival improvement among GBM patients diagnosed in the VHA system between 1997 and 2008 was completely explained by TMZ. Similar studies in other populations are warranted to test the generalizability of our finding to other patient cohorts and health care settings.
BACKGROUND: In 2005, maximum safe surgical resection, followed by radiotherapy with concomitant temozolomide (TMZ), followed by adjuvant TMZ became the standard of care for glioblastoma (GBM). Furthermore, a modest, but meaningful, population-based survival improvement for GBM patients occurred in the US between 1999 (when TMZ was first introduced) and 2008. We hypothesized that TMZ usage explained this GBM survival improvement. METHODS: We used national Veterans Health Administration (VHA) databases to construct a cohort of GBM patients, with detailed treatment information, diagnosed 1997-2008 (n = 1645). We compared survival across 3 periods of diagnosis (1997-2000, 2001-2004, and 2005-2008) using Kaplan-Meier curves. We used proportional hazards models to calculate period hazard rate ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusted for demographic, clinical, and treatment covariates. RESULTS: Survival increased over calendar time (stratified log-rank P < .0001). After adjusting for age and Charlson comorbidity score, for cases diagnosed in 2005-2008 versus 1997-2000, the HR was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.64-0.82; p-trend < .0001). Sequentially adding non-TMZ treatment variables (ie, surgery, radiotherapy, non-TMZ chemotherapy) to the model did not change this result. However, adding TMZ to the model containing age, Charlson comorbidity score, and all non-TMZ treatments eliminated the period effect entirely (HR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.86-1.19; p-trend = 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: The observed survival improvement among GBM patients diagnosed in the VHA system between 1997 and 2008 was completely explained by TMZ. Similar studies in other populations are warranted to test the generalizability of our finding to other patient cohorts and health care settings.
Entities:
Keywords:
brain neoplasms; glioblastoma; survival; temozolomide; time trends
Authors: Amy C Justice; Joseph Erdos; Cynthia Brandt; Joseph Conigliaro; William Tierney; Kendall Bryant Journal: Med Care Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Roger Stupp; Warren P Mason; Martin J van den Bent; Michael Weller; Barbara Fisher; Martin J B Taphoorn; Karl Belanger; Alba A Brandes; Christine Marosi; Ulrich Bogdahn; Jürgen Curschmann; Robert C Janzer; Samuel K Ludwin; Thierry Gorlia; Anouk Allgeier; Denis Lacombe; J Gregory Cairncross; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; René O Mirimanoff Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-03-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David J Sher; John W Henson; Bindu Avutu; Fred H Hochberg; Tracy T Batchelor; Robert L Martuza; Fred G Barker; Jay S Loeffler; Arnab Chakravarti Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2008-01-30 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Karl Y Bilimoria; David J Bentrem; James S Tomlinson; Ryan P Merkow; Andrew K Stewart; Clifford Y Ko; Jay B Prystowsky; Mark S Talamonti Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Thierry Gorlia; Martin J van den Bent; Monika E Hegi; René O Mirimanoff; Michael Weller; J Gregory Cairncross; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; Karl Belanger; Alba A Brandes; Anouk Allgeier; Denis Lacombe; Roger Stupp Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2007-12-21 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: James A D Berry; Dan E Miulli; Benjamin Lam; Christopher Elia; Julia Minasian; Stacey Podkovik; Margaret R S Wacker Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2018-09-24 Impact factor: 3.315
Authors: Sebastian Otto-Meyer; Jan Lumibao; Eugene Kim; Erik Ladomersky; Lijie Zhai; Kristen L Lauing; Denise M Scholtens; Frank Penedo; Christina Amidei; Rimas V Lukas; Derek A Wainwright Journal: Curr Opin Behav Sci Date: 2019-02-26
Authors: Emily V Dressler; Meng Liu; Catherine R Garcia; Therese A Dolecek; Thomas Pittman; Bin Huang; John L Villano Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2018-05-22
Authors: J R Bergquist; C A Thiels; C R Shubert; E B Habermann; A V Hayman; M D Zielinski; K L Mathis Journal: World J Surg Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Amy Johnston; Nicola Creighton; Jonathon Parkinson; Eng-Siew Koh; Helen Wheeler; Elizabeth Hovey; Michael Rodriguez; David C Currow Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2019-07-06