| Literature DB >> 29139095 |
William Sage1, Mathew Guilfoyle1, Catriona Luney1, Adam Young1, Rohitashwa Sinha1, Donatella Sgubin2, Joseph H McAbee3, Ruichong Ma4, Sarah Jefferies5, Rajesh Jena5, Fiona Harris5, Kieren Allinson6, Tomasz Matys7, Wendi Qian8, Thomas Santarius1, Stephen Price1, Colin Watts9,10.
Abstract
Grade IV glioma is the most common and aggressive primary brain tumour. Gross total resection with 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA) guided surgery combined with local chemotherapy (carmustine wafers) is an attractive treatment strategy in these patients. No previous studies have examined the benefit carmustine wafers in a treatment programme of 5-ALA guided resection followed by a temozolomide-based chemoradiotherapy protocol. The objective of this study was to examine the benefit of carmustine wafers on survival in patients undergoing 5-ALA guided resection. A retrospective cohort study of 260 patients who underwent 5-ALA resection of confirmed WHO 2007 Grade IV glioma between July 2009 and December 2014. Survival curves were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method from surgery. The log-rank test was used to compare survival curves between groups. Cox regression was performed to identify variables predicting survival. A propensity score matched analysis was used to compare survival between patients who did and did not receive carmustine wafers while controlling for baseline characteristics. Propensity matched analysis showed no significant survival benefit of insertion of carmustine wafers over 5-ALA resection alone (HR 0.97 [0.68-1.26], p = 0.836). There was a trend to higher incidence of wound infection in those who received carmustine wafers (15.4 vs. 7.1%, p = 0.064). The Cox regression analysis showed that intraoperative residual fluorescent tumour and residual enhancing tumour on post-operative MRI were significantly predictive of reduced survival. Carmustine wafers have no added benefit following 5-ALA guided resection. Residual fluorescence and residual enhancing disease following resection have a negative impact on survival.Entities:
Keywords: 5-Aminolevulinic acid; Carmustine; Glioma; Neurosurgery
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29139095 PMCID: PMC5770495 DOI: 10.1007/s11060-017-2649-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Neurooncol ISSN: 0167-594X Impact factor: 4.130
Details of the patient cohort
| 5-ALA; no wafers | 5-ALA; with wafers | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| N | 182 | 78 | |
| Age (years; median [IQR]) | 63 [ | 61 [ | P = 0.07 |
| Sex (% male) | 65.4 | 70.5 | P = 0.50 |
| RTOG class (%) | P = 0.043 | ||
| I | 52.2 | 66.7 | |
| II | 47.8 | 33.3 | |
| Location | P = 0.240 | ||
| Frontal | 31.3 | 32.1 | |
| Temporal | 43.4 | 33.3 | |
| Parietal | 27.5 | 41.0 | |
| Occipital | 11.0 | 14.1 | |
| Residual disease (%) | |||
| Fluorescence | 45.2 | 25 | P = 0.04 |
| MRI | 45.3 | 29.9 | P = 0.10 |
| Wound infection (%) | 7.1 | 15.4 | P = 0.06 |
| Pathology (%) | P = 0.16 | ||
| GBM | 78 | 69 | |
| GBMO | 17 | 26.9 | |
| GS | 2.7 | 3.8 | |
| GBMP | 2.2 | 0 | |
| Post-operative treatment (%) | P = 0.0009 | ||
| None | 20 | 11.5 | |
| Palliative RT (30 Gy) | 28.3 | 10.3 | |
| Radical RT (60 Gy) | 3.3 | 5.1 | |
| Chemotherapy + RT (60 Gy) | 48.3 | 73.1 | |
| Repeat resection (%) | 2.2 | 5.1 | P = 0.25 |
5-ALA 5-aminolevulinic acid, RT radiotherapy, RTOG radiation therapy oncology group, GBM glioblastoma multiforme, GBMO GBM with oligodendroglial component, GBMP GBM with primitive neuroectodermal tumour (PNET) differentiation, GS gliosarcoma
Fig. 1Comparison of survival for patients treated with or without carmustine wafers. Kaplan–Meier survival curves for patients having 5-ALA guided resection without carmustine wafers (No CW) and 5-ALA resection with carmustine wafers (CW). a Unadjusted analysis of the two patient groups. b Groups matched for baseline covariates by propensity score (see text for details). c Survival curves adjusted for baseline covariates and post-operative treatment by inverse probability weighting. HR hazard ratio for the log-rank test
Cox-regression analysis (n = 248)
| Factor | Coefficient | P value |
|---|---|---|
| Age (per year) | 1.02 |
|
| Sex (female vs. male) | 1.03 | 0.86 |
| Carmustine wafers | 1.28 | 0.13 |
| Residual | ||
| Fluorescence | 1.54 |
|
| MRI | 1.70 |
|
| Infection | 1.33 | 0.21 |
| Pathology (vs. GBM) | ||
| GBMO | 1.26 | 0.17 |
| GS | 0.90 | 0.80 |
| GBMP | 1.22 | 0.71 |
| MGMT methylation positive (n = 128) | 1.30 | 0.24 |
| IDH1 (n = 128) | 0.89 | 0.80 |
| Post-operative treatment (vs. none) | ||
| Palliative RT (30 Gy) | 0.58 |
|
| Radical RT (60 Gy) | 0.31 |
|
| Chemotherapy + RT (60 Gy) | 0.20 | < |
| Repeat resection | 1.33 | 0.21 |
Bold indicate P values of < 0.05
Abbreviations as in Table 1
Fig. 2Effect on Survival of Residual Enhancing Tumour on MRI. Kaplan–Meier survival curves, adjusted for baseline covariates and post-operative treatment, for patients with and without evidence of residual enhancing tumour on post-operative MRI within 72 h from surgery. HR hazard ratio for the log-rank test
Comparison of residual fluorescence with residual enhancement on MRI
| % | Residual MRI enhancement | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Negative | Positive | ||
| Residual 5-ALA fluorescence | Negative | 41.0 | 23.1 |
| Positive | 17.6 | 18.3 | |