PURPOSE: The treatment of low-grade glioma is still debated. Surgery is the first-line approach, and the correct timing of radiation therapy has not yet been defined since "early" radiation therapy improves relapse-free survival but not overall survival. Since a longer progression-free survival is desirable, the main issue related to radiotherapy is the incidence of late neurocognitive toxicity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-five patients with low-grade glioma were consecutively treated with early (within 3 months) or late (at disease progression) post-surgical radiation therapy. Clinical and therapeutic factors were entered into the analysis overall (OS) and progression-free (PFS) survival, and the distribution in two accrual periods identified based on the evolution of imaging procedures and radiotherapy techniques were compared. For 6/18 long survivors (LS) without evidence of disease, neurocognitive evaluation was obtained and the dose to the hippocampus region was retrospectively calculated. RESULTS: Univariate analysis of OS showed a statistically significant advantage for grade 1 and oligodendroglioma histology, better performance status [Karnofsky index (KI)], age <40 years, radical surgery, no steroid treatment; PFS was significantly related with younger age, better KI and "early" radiotherapy. Multivariate analysis of OS confirmed the significance of all variables except surgery; for PFS, only "early" radiotherapy and better KI retained significance. Memory impairment was evident in 4/6 of the LS tested; quality of life was good and executive functions were normal. CONCLUSION: Radiotherapy remains an essential component in the treatment of low-grade glioma. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate the relative contributions of the disease itself and of surgery, radiation and chemotherapy to long-term neurocognitive damage.
PURPOSE: The treatment of low-grade glioma is still debated. Surgery is the first-line approach, and the correct timing of radiation therapy has not yet been defined since "early" radiation therapy improves relapse-free survival but not overall survival. Since a longer progression-free survival is desirable, the main issue related to radiotherapy is the incidence of late neurocognitive toxicity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-five patients with low-grade glioma were consecutively treated with early (within 3 months) or late (at disease progression) post-surgical radiation therapy. Clinical and therapeutic factors were entered into the analysis overall (OS) and progression-free (PFS) survival, and the distribution in two accrual periods identified based on the evolution of imaging procedures and radiotherapy techniques were compared. For 6/18 long survivors (LS) without evidence of disease, neurocognitive evaluation was obtained and the dose to the hippocampus region was retrospectively calculated. RESULTS: Univariate analysis of OS showed a statistically significant advantage for grade 1 and oligodendroglioma histology, better performance status [Karnofsky index (KI)], age <40 years, radical surgery, no steroid treatment; PFS was significantly related with younger age, better KI and "early" radiotherapy. Multivariate analysis of OS confirmed the significance of all variables except surgery; for PFS, only "early" radiotherapy and better KI retained significance. Memory impairment was evident in 4/6 of the LS tested; quality of life was good and executive functions were normal. CONCLUSION: Radiotherapy remains an essential component in the treatment of low-grade glioma. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate the relative contributions of the disease itself and of surgery, radiation and chemotherapy to long-term neurocognitive damage.
Authors: J S Smith; A Perry; T J Borell; H K Lee; J O'Fallon; S M Hosek; D Kimmel; A Yates; P C Burger; B W Scheithauer; R B Jenkins Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nadia N Laack; Paul D Brown; Robert J Ivnik; Alfred F Furth; Karla V Ballman; Julie E Hammack; Robert M Arusell; Edward G Shaw; Jan C Buckner Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-06-20 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: M J Taphoorn; A K Schiphorst; F J Snoek; J Lindeboom; J G Wolbers; A B Karim; P C Huijgens; J J Heimans Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 1994-07 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Matthew J McGirt; Kaisorn L Chaichana; Frank J Attenello; Jon D Weingart; Khoi Than; Peter C Burger; Alessandro Olivi; Henry Brem; Alfredo Quinoñes-Hinojosa Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: G Kaloshi; A Benouaich-Amiel; F Diakite; S Taillibert; J Lejeune; F Laigle-Donadey; M-A Renard; W Iraqi; A Idbaih; S Paris; L Capelle; H Duffau; P Cornu; J-M Simon; K Mokhtari; M Polivka; A Omuro; A Carpentier; M Sanson; J-Y Delattre; K Hoang-Xuan Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-05-22 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Nasuda Danchaivijitr; Adam D Waldman; Daniel J Tozer; Christopher E Benton; Gisele Brasil Caseiras; Paul S Tofts; Jeremy H Rees; H Rolf Jäger Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Theresa A Lawrie; David Gillespie; Therese Dowswell; Jonathan Evans; Sara Erridge; Luke Vale; Ashleigh Kernohan; Robin Grant Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-08-05
Authors: Jaap Jaspers; Alejandra Mèndez Romero; Mischa S Hoogeman; Martin van den Bent; Ruud G J Wiggenraad; Martin J B Taphoorn; Danielle B P Eekers; Frank J Lagerwaard; Anna Maria Lucas Calduch; Brigitta G Baumert; Martin Klein Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 6.244