Literature DB >> 24484232

An extent of resection threshold for recurrent glioblastoma and its risk for neurological morbidity.

Mark E Oppenlander1, Andrew B Wolf, Laura A Snyder, Robert Bina, Jeffrey R Wilson, Stephen W Coons, Lynn S Ashby, David Brachman, Peter Nakaji, Randall W Porter, Kris A Smith, Robert F Spetzler, Nader Sanai.   

Abstract

OBJECT: Despite improvements in the medical and surgical management of patients with glioblastoma, tumor recurrence remains inevitable. For recurrent glioblastoma, however, the clinical value of a second resection remains uncertain. Specifically, what proportion of contrast-enhancing recurrent glioblastoma tissue must be removed to improve overall survival and what is the neurological cost of incremental resection beyond this threshold?
METHODS: The authors identified 170 consecutive patients with recurrent supratentorial glioblastomas treated at the Barrow Neurological Institute from 2001 to 2011. All patients previously had a de novo glioblastoma and following their initial resection received standard temozolomide and fractionated radiotherapy.
RESULTS: The mean clinical follow-up was 22.6 months and no patient was lost to follow-up. At the time of recurrence, the median preoperative tumor volume was 26.1 cm(3). Following re-resection, median postoperative tumor volume was 3.1 cm(3), equating to an 87.4% extent of resection (EOR). The median overall survival was 19.0 months, with a median progression-free survival following re-resection of 5.2 months. Using Cox proportional hazards analysis, the variables of age, Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) score, and EOR were predictive of survival following repeat resection (p = 0.0001). Interestingly, a significant survival advantage was noted with as little as 80% EOR. Recursive partitioning analysis validated these findings and provided additional risk stratification at the highest levels of EOR. Overall, at 7 days after surgery, a deterioration in the NIH stroke scale score by 1 point or more was observed in 39.1% of patients with EOR ≥ 80% as compared with 16.7% for those with EOR < 80% (p = 0.0049). This disparity in neurological morbidity, however, did not endure beyond 30 days postoperatively (p = 0.1279).
CONCLUSIONS: For recurrent glioblastomas, an improvement in overall survival can be attained beyond an 80% EOR. This survival benefit must be balanced against the risk of neurological morbidity, which does increase with more aggressive cytoreduction, but only in the early postoperative period. Interestingly, this putative EOR threshold closely approximates that reported for newly diagnosed glioblastomas, suggesting that for a subset of patients, the survival benefit of microsurgical resection does not diminish despite biological progression.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24484232     DOI: 10.3171/2013.12.JNS13184

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg        ISSN: 0022-3085            Impact factor:   5.115


  63 in total

Review 1.  Optimizing glioblastoma resection: intraoperative mapping and beyond.

Authors:  Joseph A Osorio; Manish K Aghi
Journal:  CNS Oncol       Date:  2014

2.  Minimally invasive resection of intracranial lesions using tubular retractors: a large, multi-surgeon, multi-institutional series.

Authors:  Daniel G Eichberg; Long Di; Ashish H Shah; Evan M Luther; Christina Jackson; Lina Marenco-Hillembrand; Kaisorn L Chaichana; Michael E Ivan; Robert M Starke; Ricardo J Komotar
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2020-06-18       Impact factor: 4.130

3.  Ischemic stroke in patients with gliomas at The University of Texas-M.D. Anderson Cancer Center.

Authors:  Carlos Kamiya-Matsuoka; David Cachia; Shlomit Yust-Katz; Yvo A Rodriguez; Pedro Garciarena; Elsa M Rodarte; Ivo W Tremont-Lukats
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 4.130

4.  The relationship between repeat resection and overall survival in patients with glioblastoma: a time-dependent analysis.

Authors:  Debra A Goldman; Koos Hovinga; Anne S Reiner; Yoshua Esquenazi; Viviane Tabar; Katherine S Panageas
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 5.115

5.  Re-resection for recurrent high-grade glioma in the setting of re-irradiation: more is not always better.

Authors:  Joshua D Palmer; Joshua Siglin; Kosj Yamoah; Tu Dan; Colin E Champ; Voichita Bar-Ad; Maria Werner-Wasik; James J Evans; Lyndon Kim; Jon Glass; Christopher Farrell; David W Andrews; Wenyin Shi
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2015-05-30       Impact factor: 4.130

6.  Maximize surgical resection beyond contrast-enhancing boundaries in newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme: is it useful and safe? A single institution retrospective experience.

Authors:  Federico Pessina; Pierina Navarria; Luca Cozzi; Anna Maria Ascolese; Matteo Simonelli; Armando Santoro; Elena Clerici; Marco Rossi; Marta Scorsetti; Lorenzo Bello
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2017-07-08       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 7.  Treatment options for recurrent high-grade gliomas.

Authors:  Harjus S Birk; Seunggu J Han; Nicholas A Butowski
Journal:  CNS Oncol       Date:  2016-12-21

Review 8.  Treating recurrent glioblastoma: an update.

Authors:  Carlos Kamiya-Matsuoka; Mark R Gilbert
Journal:  CNS Oncol       Date:  2015

Review 9.  Surgical strategy for insular glioma.

Authors:  Colin J Przybylowski; Shawn L Hervey-Jumper; Nader Sanai
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2021-02-21       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 10.  Beyond guidelines: analysis of current practice patterns of AANS/CNS tumor neurosurgeons.

Authors:  Evan D Bander; Jonathan H Sherman; Chetan Bettegowda; Manish K Aghi; Jason Sheehan; Rohan Ramakrishna
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2021-02-21       Impact factor: 4.130

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.