| Literature DB >> 25966341 |
Anna-Luisa Thiepold1, Sebastian Luger2, Marlies Wagner3, Natalie Filmann4, Michael W Ronellenfitsch1, Patrick N Harter5, Anne K Braczynski5, Stephan Dützmann6, Elke Hattingen3, Joachim P Steinbach1, Christian Senft6, Johannes Rieger1, Oliver Bähr1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hypoxia is a key driver for infiltrative growth in experimental gliomas. It has remained elusive whether tumor hypoxia in glioblastoma patients contributes to distant or diffuse recurrences. We therefore investigated the influence of perioperative cerebral ischemia on patterns of progression in glioblastoma patients.Entities:
Keywords: MRI; glioblastoma; hypoxia; patterns of progression; perioperative ischemia
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25966341 PMCID: PMC4546485 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.3994
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Patient characteristics
| Characteristics | Patients with perioperative ischemia (n=46) | Matched pairs without perioperative ischemia (n=46) |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Age, median (range) | 62 (25-79) | 63 (36-79) |
| Female, (n) | 39.1% (18) | 39.1% (18) |
| KPS, median (range) | 80% (20-100) | 90% (40-100) |
| Surgery | ||
| GTR or STR, (n) | 84.8% (39) | 82.6% (38) |
| Partial resection, (n) | 15.2% (7) | 15.2% (7) |
| Unknown | 0% (0) | 2.2% (1) |
| Histology | ||
| Glioblastoma, (n) | 100% (46) | 100% (46) |
| MGMT-Promoter | ||
| Methylated | 45.7% (21) | 41.3% (19) |
| Not methylated | 45.7% (21) | 47.8% (22) |
| Unknown | 8.7% (4) | 10.9% (5) |
| Days to treatment, median (range) | 28 (12-66) | 30 (13-345) |
| Adjuvant treatment | ||
| Radiochemotherapy, (n) | 71.7% (33) | 71.7% (33) |
| Radiotherapy, (n) | 10.9% (5) | 10.9 % (5) |
| Temozolomide, (n) | 4.3% (2) | 4.3% (2) |
| Unknown, (n) | 10.9 % (5) | 10.9% (5) |
| No therapy, (n) | 2.2% (1) | 2.2% (1) |
Figure 4Frequency of patterns of progression
A. shows the distribution of local and infiltrative recurrences (diffuse or distant) for patients with and without perioperative ischemia. B. shows the cumulative incidence of recurrences over time (competing risk analysis).
Figure 5Survival analysis
PFS for patients with perioperative ischemia (red line) and matched controls (blue line) are shown in A. OS for both groups is shown in B. Tick marks indicate censored patients.
Figure 1Patient selection
Patient selection of the current study is shown. 193 patients were biopsied and therefore excluded. Another 80 patients were excluded due to small and unspecific lesions of restricted diffusion or BEV first line treatment. In 46 patients we identified unequivocal new perioperative cerebral ischemia on postoperative MRI, whereas 119 did not show lesions of restricted diffusion. These patients served as selection cohort for the 1:1 matched pairs analysis as described in methods.
Figure 2Perioperative ischemia
Representative pre- and postoperative (< 72h after surgery) MRI scans from a patient with perioperative ischemia ARE shown.
Figure 3Represantative images for patterns of progression
MRI scans for the three types of progression (local, diffuse, distant), as predefined in Methods, are shown. The first two columns show the postoperative situation on contrast enhanced T1 sequences (T1+c) and T2 weighted sequences. The last two columns show the corresponding scans at the time of first progression.