Tae Hoon Roh1,2, Seok-Gu Kang3, Ju Hyung Moon3, Kyoung Su Sung4, Hun Ho Park5, Se Hoon Kim6, Eui Hyun Kim3, Chang-Ki Hong5, Chang-Ok Suh7, Jong Hee Chang3. 1. 1Yonsei University Graduate School, Seoul. 2. 2Department of Neurosurgery, Brain Tumor Center, Ajou University Hospital, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon. 3. 3Department of Neurosurgery, Brain Tumor Center, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System, Seoul. 4. 4Department of Neurosurgery, Dong-A University Hospital, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Busan. 5. 5Department of Neurosurgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System, Seoul. 6. 6Department of Pathology, Brain Tumor Center, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System, Seoul; and. 7. 7Department of Radiation Oncology, Brain Tumor Center, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Following resection of glioblastoma (GBM), microscopic remnants of the GBM tumor remaining in nearby tissue cause tumor recurrence more often than for other types of tumors, even after gross-total resection (GTR). Although surgical oncologists traditionally resect some of the surrounding normal tissue, whether further removal of nearby tissue may improve survival in GBM patients is unknown. In this single-center retrospective study, the authors assessed whether lobectomy confers a survival benefit over GTR without lobectomy when treating GBMs in the noneloquent area. METHODS: The authors selected 40 patients who had undergone GTR of a histopathologically diagnosed isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-wild type GBM in the right frontal or temporal lobe and divided the patients into 2 groups according to whether GTR of the tumor involved lobectomy, defined as a supratotal resection (SupTR group, n = 20) or did not (GTR group, n = 20). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) scores were compared between groups (p ≤ 0.05 for statistically significant differences). RESULTS: The median postoperative PFS times for each group were as follows: GTR group, 11.5 months (95% CI 8.8-14.2) and SupTR group, 30.7 months (95% CI 4.3-57.1; p = 0.007). The median postoperative OS times for each group were as follows: GTR group, 18.7 months (95% CI 14.3-23.1) and SupTR group, 44.1 months (95% CI 25.1-63.1; p = 0.040). The mean postoperative KPS scores (GTR, 76.5; SupTR, 77.5; p = 0.904) were not significantly different. In multivariate analysis, survival for the SupTR group was significantly longer than that for the GTR group in terms of both PFS (HR 0.230; 95% CI 0.090-0.583; p = 0.002) and OS (HR 0.247; 95% CI 0.086-0.704; p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: In cases of completely resectable, noneloquent-area GBMs, SupTR provides superior PFS and OS without negatively impacting patient performance.
OBJECTIVE: Following resection of glioblastoma (GBM), microscopic remnants of the GBM tumor remaining in nearby tissue cause tumor recurrence more often than for other types of tumors, even after gross-total resection (GTR). Although surgical oncologists traditionally resect some of the surrounding normal tissue, whether further removal of nearby tissue may improve survival in GBM patients is unknown. In this single-center retrospective study, the authors assessed whether lobectomy confers a survival benefit over GTR without lobectomy when treating GBMs in the noneloquent area. METHODS: The authors selected 40 patients who had undergone GTR of a histopathologically diagnosed isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-wild type GBM in the right frontal or temporal lobe and divided the patients into 2 groups according to whether GTR of the tumor involved lobectomy, defined as a supratotal resection (SupTR group, n = 20) or did not (GTR group, n = 20). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) scores were compared between groups (p ≤ 0.05 for statistically significant differences). RESULTS: The median postoperative PFS times for each group were as follows: GTR group, 11.5 months (95% CI 8.8-14.2) and SupTR group, 30.7 months (95% CI 4.3-57.1; p = 0.007). The median postoperative OS times for each group were as follows: GTR group, 18.7 months (95% CI 14.3-23.1) and SupTR group, 44.1 months (95% CI 25.1-63.1; p = 0.040). The mean postoperative KPS scores (GTR, 76.5; SupTR, 77.5; p = 0.904) were not significantly different. In multivariate analysis, survival for the SupTR group was significantly longer than that for the GTR group in terms of both PFS (HR 0.230; 95% CI 0.090-0.583; p = 0.002) and OS (HR 0.247; 95% CI 0.086-0.704; p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: In cases of completely resectable, noneloquent-area GBMs, SupTR provides superior PFS and OS without negatively impacting patient performance.
Authors: Do Hoon Lim; Dong Sup Chung; Young Zoon Kim; Chae Yong Kim; Jaejoon Lim; Kyoung Su Sung; Jihae Lee; Hyuk Jin Oh; Seok Gu Kang; Shin Hyuk Kang; Doo Sik Kong; Sung Hwan Kim; Se Hyuk Kim; Se Hoon Kim; Yu Jung Kim; Eui Hyun Kim; In Ah Kim; Ho Sung Kim; Tae Hoon Roh; Jae Sung Park; Hyun Jin Park; Sang Woo Song; Seung Ho Yang; Wan Soo Yoon; Hong In Yoon; Soon Tae Lee; Sea Won Lee; Youn Soo Lee; Chan Woo Wee; Jong Hee Chang; Tae Young Jung; Hye Lim Jung; Jae Ho Cho; Seung Hong Choi; Hyoung Soo Choi; Je Beom Hong Journal: Brain Tumor Res Treat Date: 2019-10
Authors: Hyeong-Cheol Oh; Jin-Kyoung Shim; Junseong Park; Ji-Hyun Lee; Ran Joo Choi; Nam Hee Kim; Hyun Sil Kim; Ju Hyung Moon; Eui Hyun Kim; Jong Hee Chang; Jong In Yook; Seok-Gu Kang Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2020-07-25 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Adham M Khalafallah; Maureen Rakovec; Chetan Bettegowda; Christopher M Jackson; Gary L Gallia; Jon D Weingart; Michael Lim; Yoshua Esquenazi; Brad E Zacharia; Ezequiel Goldschmidt; Mateo Ziu; Michael E Ivan; Andrew S Venteicher; Edjah K Nduom; Adam N Mamelak; Ray M Chu; John S Yu; Jason P Sheehan; Brian V Nahed; Bob S Carter; Mitchel S Berger; Raymond Sawaya; Debraj Mukherjee Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2021-09-15 Impact factor: 5.315