Linda Chen1, Kaisorn L Chaichana2, Lawrence Kleinberg1, Xiaobu Ye3, Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa4, Kristin Redmond5. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States. 2. Department of Neurosurgery and Oncology, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States. 3. Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States. 4. Department of Neurosurgery and Oncology, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States; Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States. Electronic address: aquinon2@jhmi.edu. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States. Electronic address: kjanson3@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Glioblastoma (GBM) cancer stem cells and their neural stem cell counterparts are hypothesized to contribute to tumor progression. We examined whether GBM contrast enhancement contact with neurogenic regions (NR) affect recurrence patterns, as contrast enhancement reflects regions of blood-brain barrier breakdown. METHODS: 102 patients with primary GBM, treated at Johns Hopkins Hospital between 2006 and 2009, were included. All patients underwent surgical resection followed by adjuvant IMRT (60 Gy/30 fractions) and concomitant temozolomide. Initial and recurrent tumor distance from the subventricular zone (SVZ) or subgranular zone (SGZ) was measured. Tumors were categorized as NR contacting or non-contacting. The chi-square test was used to analyze the association between tumor contact and recurrence pattern. RESULTS: 49 of 102 (48.0%, 95% CI: 0.386-0.576) tumors contacted NRs at initial presentation, and, of these tumors, 49/49 (100%) contacted NRs at recurrence. Of 53 tumors that were initially non-contacting, 37/53 (69.8%, 95% CI: 0.565-0.804) recurred contacting NRs. In total, 86/102 (84.3%, 95% CI: 0.760-0.901) recurrent GBM contacted NRs compared with 49/102 (48%, 95% CI: 0.386-0.576) at initial presentation. Of the recurrent tumors that did not contact NRs, 16/53 (30.1%, 95% CI: 0.195-0.435) recurred medially toward NRs with a significant decrease in distance between tumor contrast enhancement and NRs. 16/49 (32.6%, 95% CI: 0.212-0.466) initially NR-contacting GBMs recurred out-of field while 7/53 (13.2%, 95% CI: 0.0655-0.248) initially non-contacting recurred out of the radiation treatment field (p=0.0315, Odds ratio: 3.19, 95% CI: 1.18-8.62). CONCLUSIONS: GBM contrast-enhancing recurrence is significantly associated with proximity to NRs. NR-contacting initial tumors were more likely to recur out of radiation treatment fields.
PURPOSE:Glioblastoma (GBM) cancer stem cells and their neural stem cell counterparts are hypothesized to contribute to tumor progression. We examined whether GBM contrast enhancement contact with neurogenic regions (NR) affect recurrence patterns, as contrast enhancement reflects regions of blood-brain barrier breakdown. METHODS: 102 patients with primary GBM, treated at Johns Hopkins Hospital between 2006 and 2009, were included. All patients underwent surgical resection followed by adjuvant IMRT (60 Gy/30 fractions) and concomitant temozolomide. Initial and recurrent tumor distance from the subventricular zone (SVZ) or subgranular zone (SGZ) was measured. Tumors were categorized as NR contacting or non-contacting. The chi-square test was used to analyze the association between tumor contact and recurrence pattern. RESULTS: 49 of 102 (48.0%, 95% CI: 0.386-0.576) tumors contacted NRs at initial presentation, and, of these tumors, 49/49 (100%) contacted NRs at recurrence. Of 53 tumors that were initially non-contacting, 37/53 (69.8%, 95% CI: 0.565-0.804) recurred contacting NRs. In total, 86/102 (84.3%, 95% CI: 0.760-0.901) recurrent GBM contacted NRs compared with 49/102 (48%, 95% CI: 0.386-0.576) at initial presentation. Of the recurrent tumors that did not contact NRs, 16/53 (30.1%, 95% CI: 0.195-0.435) recurred medially toward NRs with a significant decrease in distance between tumor contrast enhancement and NRs. 16/49 (32.6%, 95% CI: 0.212-0.466) initially NR-contacting GBMs recurred out-of field while 7/53 (13.2%, 95% CI: 0.0655-0.248) initially non-contacting recurred out of the radiation treatment field (p=0.0315, Odds ratio: 3.19, 95% CI: 1.18-8.62). CONCLUSIONS: GBM contrast-enhancing recurrence is significantly associated with proximity to NRs. NR-contacting initial tumors were more likely to recur out of radiation treatment fields.
Authors: Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa; Nader Sanai; Mario Soriano-Navarro; Oscar Gonzalez-Perez; Zaman Mirzadeh; Sara Gil-Perotin; Richard Romero-Rodriguez; Mitchell S Berger; Jose Manuel Garcia-Verdugo; Arturo Alvarez-Buylla Journal: J Comp Neurol Date: 2006-01-20 Impact factor: 3.215
Authors: Percy Lee; Wietse Eppinga; Frank Lagerwaard; Timothy Cloughesy; Benjamin Slotman; Phioanh L Nghiemphu; Pin-Chieh Wang; Patrick Kupelian; Nzhde Agazaryan; John Demarco; Michael T Selch; Michael Steinberg; Jung Julie Kang Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2013-02-22 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Andrew T Parsa; Scott Wachhorst; Kathleen R Lamborn; Michael D Prados; Michael W McDermott; Mitchel S Berger; Susan M Chang Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 5.115
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: P S Eriksson; E Perfilieva; T Björk-Eriksson; A M Alborn; C Nordborg; D A Peterson; F H Gage Journal: Nat Med Date: 1998-11 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Akshitkumar M Mistry; Michael C Dewan; Gabrielle A White-Dzuro; Philip R Brinson; Kyle D Weaver; Reid C Thompson; Rebecca A Ihrie; Lola B Chambless Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Elizabeth Y Qin; Dominique D Cooper; Keene L Abbott; James Lennon; Surya Nagaraja; Alan Mackay; Chris Jones; Hannes Vogel; Peter K Jackson; Michelle Monje Journal: Cell Date: 2017-08-17 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Montserrat Lara-Velazquez; Natanael Zarco; Anna Carrano; Jordan Phillipps; Emily S Norton; Paula Schiapparelli; Rawan Al-Kharboosh; Jordina Rincon-Torroella; Stephanie Jeanneret; Teresa Corona; Jose Segovia; Mark E Jentoft; Kaisorn L Chaichana; Yan W Asmann; Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa; Hugo Guerrero-Cazares Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2021-04-12 Impact factor: 12.300