| Literature DB >> 29344153 |
Weichang Li1, Ruiming Zhang1, Jisheng Yang2, Ruili Wang3.
Abstract
This study evaluated the efficacy of surgery combined with 125I seed implantation in the treatment of recurrent glioma, and analyzed prognosis-influencing factors. A total of 66 patients with recurrent gliomas in Yidu Central Hospital of Weifang were enrolled in the study from April, 2011 to March, 2014. Patients were randomly divided into a control and an observation group, with 33 patients in each group. Patients in the control group were treated with surgery alone, and those in the observation group received surgery combined with 125I seed implantation. Short-term curative effects in the two groups were compared using evaluation criteria for solid tumors. The comparison included the postoperative adverse reactions, the life quality (using the Karnofsky Performance Status or KPS), the survival time and prognostic factors (using the Kaplan-Meier survival, log-rank test and Cox regression analyses). Our results showed the objective response and disease control rates in the observation group were significantly higher than those in the control group (P<0.05). While no significant differences in postoperative adverse reactions were found between the two groups (P>0.05). The KPS score in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group at different time points after surgery (P<0.05). The survival rate and overall survival time of those in the observation group were significantly higher than those of the patients in the control group (P<0.05). The univariate analysis showed that preoperative KPS score, tumor pathological grade and degree of tumor resection were adverse factors influencing the prognosis of the patients (P<0.05). Also, multivariate Cox regression showed that preoperative KPS score, tumor pathological grade, and degree of tumor resection were independent risk factors of prognosis. Based on our findings, surgery combined with 125I seed implantation can improve the survival rate of patients with recurrent glioma and prolong their survival time. Tumor pathological grade, degree of tumor resection and KPS score are the most important factors influencing the prognosis.Entities:
Keywords: 125I seed implantation; efficacy; prognosis; recurrent glioma
Year: 2017 PMID: 29344153 PMCID: PMC5754831 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2017.7138
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
Comparison of general information between two groups.
| Items | Control group (n=33) | Observation group (n=33) | t/χ2-test | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex (male/female) | 16/17 | 18/15 | 0.061 | 0.806 |
| Age (years) | 40–70 | 40–75 | ||
| Average age (years) | 54.78±6.49 | 54.32±6.58 | 0.286 | 0.776 |
| Preoperative KPS score | 62.78±5.49 | 62.32±5.58 | 0.338 | 0.737 |
| Tumor site (n, %) | ||||
| Superficial | 19 (57.58) | 21 (63.64) | 0.064 | 0.801 |
| Near midline | 14 (42.42) | 12 (36.36) | ||
| Pathological grade (n, %) | ||||
| Grade II | 8 (24.24) | 7 (21.21) | 0.011 | 0.995 |
| Grade III | 15 (45.45) | 17 (51.52) | ||
| Grade IV | 10 (30.30) | 9 (27.27) |
KPS, Karnofsky Performance Status.
KPS scoring criteria.
| Status of patients | Score | Status of patients | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Normal, no symptoms or abnormal physical signs | 100 | Dependant on others for daily life and special care is needed | 40 |
| Normal activities with minor illness | 90 | Seriously dependant in daily life | 30 |
| Normal activities with slight difficulties | 80 | Bed-ridden, hospitalization is needed but no threat to life | 20 |
| Independent in daily life but cannot work normally | 70 | Life-threatening situation | 10 |
| Mostly independent in daily life and help is needed occasionally | 60 | Death | 0 |
| Help is needed frequently | 50 |
KPS, Karnofsky Performance Status.
Comparison of short-term efficacy in the two groups (n, %).
| Groups | CR | PR | SD | PD | ORR | DCR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observation group | 12 (36.36) | 11 (33.33) | 8 (24.24) | 2 (6.06) | 23 (69.69) | 31 (93.94) |
| Control group | 6 (18.18) | 8 (24.24) | 9 (27.27) | 10 (30.30) | 14 (42.42) | 23 (69.69) |
| χ2 test | 3.937 | 4.991 | ||||
| P-value | 0.047 | 0.026 |
CR, complete remission; PR, partial remission; SD, stable disease; PD, Progression of disease; ORR, objective response rate; DCR, disease control rate.
Comparison of adverse reactions between the groups (n, %).
| Groups | Cases | Grade I | Grade II | Grade III | Grade IV | Grade V |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observation group | 33 | 24 (72.73) | 7 (21.21) | 2 (6.06) | 0 (0.00) | 0 (0.00) |
| Control group | 33 | 26 (78.79) | 6 (18.18) | 1 (3.03) | 0 (0.00) | 0 (0.00) |
| χ2 test | 0.490 | |||||
| P-value | 0.783 |
Comparison of KPS scores between the two groups.
| Groups | 6 months after operation | 12 months after operation | 18 months after operation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Observation group | 84.67±3.23 | 71.35±3.28 | 60.68±3.24 |
| Control group | 76.27±3.64 | 62.47±3.36 | 45.83±3.78 |
| t-test | 9.215 | 8.812 | 11.084 |
| P-value | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
KPS, Karnofsky Performance Status.
Comparison of survival between two groups.
| Group | Cases | 6-month survival rate (n, %) | 12-month survival rate (n, %) | 18-month survival rate (n, %) | Mean survival time (week) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observation group | 33 | 32 (96.97) | 27 (81.82) | 19 (57.58) | 67.56±7.48 |
| Control group | 33 | 25 (75.76) | 18 (54.55) | 10 (30.30) | 52.64±7.53 |
| χ2/t-test | 4.632 | 4.470 | 3.937 | 8.075 | |
| P-value | 0.031 | 0.035 | 0.047 | <0.001 |
Figure 1.Survival curve for two groups of patients.
Univariate analysis for prognosis.
| cLog-rank test | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Items | Proportion (n, %) | Median survival time (weeks) | 95% confidence interval (95% CI) | χ2 test | P-value |
| Age | |||||
| <60 years | 30 (45.45) | 54.93 | 23.62–62.75 | 0.122 | 0.531 |
| ≥60 years | 36 (54.55) | 52.43 | 20.74–61.62 | ||
| Sex | |||||
| Male | 34 (51.52) | 55.82 | 21.53–63.84 | 0.006 | 0.943 |
| Female | 32 (48.48) | 56.63 | 22.72–68.47 | ||
| Tumor pathological grade | |||||
| Grade II | 15 (22.73) | 74.86 | 29.82–81.39 | 23.759 | <0.001 |
| Grade III | 32 (48.48) | 56.75 | 28.71–66.32 | ||
| Grade IV | 19 (28.79) | 41.32 | 14.36–56.73 | ||
| Tumor site | |||||
| Superficial | 39 (59.09) | 63.48 | 25.76–78.32 | 7.994 | 0.019 |
| Near midline | 27 (40.91) | 51.56 | 23.48–59.65 | ||
| Tumor resection degree | |||||
| Total resection | 45 (68.18) | 66.57 | 28.31–79.46 | 9.264 | 0.017 |
| Subtotal resection | 21 (32.82) | 50.72 | 24.46–58.23 | ||
| Preoperative KPS score | |||||
| ≥70 | 44 (66.67) | 63.62 | 28.33–70.36 | 11.543 | 0.001 |
| <70 | 22 (33.33) | 54.58 | 23.48–59.53 | ||
| Tumor diameter (cm) | |||||
| >3 | 30 (45.45) | 56.39 | 27.73–74.92 | 0.469 | 0.541 |
| ≤3 | 36 (54.55) | 58.47 | 24.86–76.53 | ||
Multivariate Cox regression analysis for prognosis.
| Factors | B | SE | Wald | HR | 95% CI | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preoperative KPS score | 0.789 | 0.030 | 9.021 | 3.215 | 1.731–6.158 | 0.008 |
| Degree of tumor resection | 0.331 | 0.512 | 3.783 | 1.231 | 0.975–2.957 | 0.014 |
| Tumor pathological grade | 0.467 | 0.673 | 5.327 | 9.013 | 3.456–14.854 | 0.026 |
KPS, Karnofsky Performance Status.