Chikezie I Eseonu1, Karim ReFaey2, Oscar Garcia2, Gugan Raghuraman1, Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa3. 1. Department of Neurological Surgery and Oncology Outcomes Laboratory, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 2. Department of Neurological Surgery and Oncology Outcomes Laboratory, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA. 3. Department of Neurological Surgery and Oncology Outcomes Laboratory, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA. Electronic address: quinones@mayo.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Insular gliomas are challenging tumors to surgically resect owing to the anatomy surrounding them. This study evaluates the role of extent of resection (EOR) and molecular markers in surgical outcome and survival for insular gliomas. METHODS: Seventy-four patients who had undergone initial resection for insular glioma by the same surgeon between 2006 and 2016 were analyzed. Low-grade gliomas (LGGs) (grade II) and high-grade gliomas (HGGs) (grade III/IV) were analyzed for the prognostic role of volumetric EOR and molecular markers in patient survival outcomes. RESULTS: The cohort included 25 patients with LGGs (33.8%) and 49 patients with HGGs (66.2%). Median EOR was 91.7% (range, 10%-100%). New permanent postoperative deficits were found in 2.7% of patients. Patients with LGGs with ≥90% EOR had 5-year survival of 100%, and patients with <90% EOR had 5-year survival of 80%. Patients with HGGs with ≥90% EOR had 2-year survival of 83.7%, and patients with <90% EOR had 2-year survival of 43.8%. For LGGs, EOR was predictive of overall survival (P = 0.017), progression-free survival (PFS) (P = 0.039), and malignant PFS (P = 0.014), whereas 1p/19q codeletion was predictive of PFS (P = 0.014). For HGGs, EOR was predictive of overall survival (P = 0.020) and PFS (P = 0.024). Preoperative tumor volume most significantly affected EOR for insular gliomas (R2 = 0.053, P = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: Extensive resections of insular gliomas can be achieved with low morbidity and can improve overall survival and PFS. In this series of LGGs, EOR was associated with longer malignant PFS, and 1p/19q codeletion was predictive of PFS.
BACKGROUND:Insular gliomas are challenging tumors to surgically resect owing to the anatomy surrounding them. This study evaluates the role of extent of resection (EOR) and molecular markers in surgical outcome and survival for insular gliomas. METHODS: Seventy-four patients who had undergone initial resection for insular glioma by the same surgeon between 2006 and 2016 were analyzed. Low-grade gliomas (LGGs) (grade II) and high-grade gliomas (HGGs) (grade III/IV) were analyzed for the prognostic role of volumetric EOR and molecular markers in patient survival outcomes. RESULTS: The cohort included 25 patients with LGGs (33.8%) and 49 patients with HGGs (66.2%). Median EOR was 91.7% (range, 10%-100%). New permanent postoperative deficits were found in 2.7% of patients. Patients with LGGs with ≥90% EOR had 5-year survival of 100%, and patients with <90% EOR had 5-year survival of 80%. Patients with HGGs with ≥90% EOR had 2-year survival of 83.7%, and patients with <90% EOR had 2-year survival of 43.8%. For LGGs, EOR was predictive of overall survival (P = 0.017), progression-free survival (PFS) (P = 0.039), and malignant PFS (P = 0.014), whereas 1p/19q codeletion was predictive of PFS (P = 0.014). For HGGs, EOR was predictive of overall survival (P = 0.020) and PFS (P = 0.024). Preoperative tumor volume most significantly affected EOR for insular gliomas (R2 = 0.053, P = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: Extensive resections of insular gliomas can be achieved with low morbidity and can improve overall survival and PFS. In this series of LGGs, EOR was associated with longer malignant PFS, and 1p/19q codeletion was predictive of PFS.
Authors: Karim ReFaey; Shashwat Tripathi; Adip G Bhargav; Sanjeet S Grewal; Erik H Middlebrooks; David S Sabsevitz; Mark Jentoft; Peter Brunner; Adela Wu; William O Tatum; Anthony Ritaccio; Kaisorn L Chaichana; Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2020-06-10 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Barbara Zarino; Martina Andrea Sirtori; Tommaso Meschini; Giulio Andrea Bertani; Manuela Caroli; Cristina Bana; Linda Borellini; Marco Locatelli; Giorgio Carrabba Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) Date: 2020-11-24 Impact factor: 2.216
Authors: Tamara Ius; Edoardo Mazzucchi; Barbara Tomasino; Giada Pauletto; Giovanni Sabatino; Giuseppe Maria Della Pepa; Giuseppe La Rocca; Claudio Battistella; Alessandro Olivi; Miran Skrap Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Daniel Delev; Dieter Henrik Heiland; Pamela Franco; Peter Reinacher; Irina Mader; Ori Staszewski; Silke Lassmann; Stefan Grau; Oliver Schnell Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2018-11-22 Impact factor: 4.506
Authors: Philip C De Witt Hamer; Philip C De Witt Hamer; Martin Klein; Shawn L Hervey-Jumper; Jeffrey S Wefel; Mitchel S Berger Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2021-03-15 Impact factor: 4.654