Literature DB >> 29576419

Patterns of care and outcomes for glioblastoma in patients with poor performance status.

Nikita Malakhov1, Anna Lee2, Elizabeth Garay3, Daniel J Becker4, David Schreiber5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE/
OBJECTIVES: While treatment with tumor resection followed by chemoradiation is generally the accepted standard of care for glioblastoma (GBM), the treatment for patients with poor performance status remains uncertain. Therefore we sought to examine patterns of care and survival outcomes among patients with poor performance status utilizing a large hospital database. METHODS/MATERIALS: We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients with GBM and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) <60 between 2010 and 2013. Data was collected regarding surgery, radiation therapy and chemotherapy. Logistic regression was used to analyze predictors for utilization of chemoradiation. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare survival between those who received chemoradiation to radiation alone and Cox regression was performed to assess covariates associated with survival.
RESULTS: There were 488 patients included in the analysis of which 51.2% received chemoradiation and 46.1% underwent subtotal or gross total resection. None of the factors analyzed were significantly associated with increased likelihood of receiving chemoradiation over radiation alone. Survival data was available for 236 patients that received radiation therapy with and without combination chemotherapy. The median overall survival for those receiving radiation alone was 3.6 months and 8.7 months in those who received chemoradiation (p < 0.001). On multivariable Cox regression, increasing age (HR 1.80-2.10, p = 0.001) was associated with worse survival while subtotal/gross total resection (HR 0.60, p = 0.003) and chemoradiation (HR 0.57, CI 0.40-0.83, p = 0.003) were associated with improved survival.
CONCLUSION: Even patients with poor performance status had better survival outcomes when they received treatment with chemoradiation over radiation alone.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chemoradiation; Glioblastoma; NCDB; Poor performance status

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29576419     DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2018.03.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Neurosci        ISSN: 0967-5868            Impact factor:   1.961


  4 in total

Review 1.  Molecular and Circulating Biomarkers in Patients with Glioblastoma.

Authors:  Nadia Senhaji; Asmae Squalli Houssaini; Salma Lamrabet; Sara Louati; Sanae Bennis
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 6.208

2.  EGFR amplification is a real independent prognostic impact factor between young adults and adults over 45yo with wild-type glioblastoma?

Authors:  Daniele Armocida; Alessandro Pesce; Alessandro Frati; Antonio Santoro; Maurizio Salvati
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 4.130

3.  Long Term Survival in Patients Suffering from Glio-blastoma Multiforme: A Single-Center Observational Cohort Study.

Authors:  Daniele Armocida; Alessandro Pesce; Federico Di Giammarco; Alessandro Frati; Antonio Santoro; Maurizio Salvati
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2019-11-30

4.  Prognostic value of tumour volume in patients with a poor Karnofsky performance status scale - a bicentric retrospective study.

Authors:  Melanie Barz; Julia Gerhardt; Stefanie Bette; A Kaywan Aftahy; Thomas Huber; Stephanie E Combs; Yu-Mi Ryang; Benedikt Wiestler; Marco Skardelly; Irina Gepfner-Tuma; Felix Behling; Friederike Schmidt-Graf; Bernhard Meyer; Jens Gempt
Journal:  BMC Neurol       Date:  2021-11-15       Impact factor: 2.474

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.