Mateo Tomas Fariña Nuñez1,2,3, Pamela Franco4,5,6, Debora Cipriani4,5,6, Nicolas Neidert4,5,6, Simon P Behringer4,5,6, Irina Mader7,8, Daniel Delev9, Christian Fung5,6, Jürgen Beck5,6, Roman Sankowski10,6, Nils Henrik Nicolay6,11, Dieter Henrik Heiland4,5,6, Oliver Schnell4,5,6. 1. Translational NeuroOncology Research Group, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. mateo.farina@uniklinik-freiburg.de. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Breisacher Straße 64, 79106, Freiburg, Germany. mateo.farina@uniklinik-freiburg.de. 3. Medical Faculty, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. mateo.farina@uniklinik-freiburg.de. 4. Translational NeuroOncology Research Group, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 5. Department of Neurosurgery, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Breisacher Straße 64, 79106, Freiburg, Germany. 6. Medical Faculty, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 7. Department of Neuroradiology, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 8. Clinic for Neuropediatrics and Neurorehabilitation, Epilepsy Center for Children and Adolescents, Schön Klinik, Vogtareuth, Germany. 9. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Aachen, Aachen, Germany. 10. Institute of Neuropathology, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 11. Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Elderly patients constitute an expanding part of our society. Due to a continuously increasing life expectancy, an optimal quality of life is expected even into advanced age. Glioblastoma (GBM) is more common in older patients, but they are still often withheld from efficient treatment due to worry of worse tolerance and have a significantly worse prognosis compared to younger patients. Our retrospective observational study aimed to investigate the therapeutic benefit from a second resection in recurrent glioblastoma of elderly patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included a cohort of 39 elderly patients (> 65 years) with a second resection as treatment option in the case of a tumor recurrence. A causal inference model was built by multiple non- and semiparametric models, which was used to identify matched patients from our elderly GBM database which comprises 538 patients. The matched cohorts were analyzed by a Cox-regression model adjusted by time-dependent covariates. RESULTS: The Cox-regression analysis showed a significant survival benefit (Hazard Ratio: 0.6, 95% CI 0.36-0.9, p-value = 0.0427) for the re-resected group (18.0 months, 95% CI 13.97-23.2 months) compared to the group without re-resection (10.1 months, 95% CI 8.09-20.9 months). No differences in the co-morbidities or hemato-oncological side effects during chemotherapy could be detected. Anesthetic- and surgical complications were rare and comparable to the complication rate of patients undergoing the first-line resection. CONCLUSION: Taken together, in elderly patients, re-resection is an acceptable treatment option in the recurrent state of a glioblastoma. The individual evaluation of the patients' medical status as well as the chances of withstanding general anesthesia needs to be done in close interdisciplinary consultation. If these requirements are met, elderly patients benefit from a re-resection.
INTRODUCTION: Elderly patients constitute an expanding part of our society. Due to a continuously increasing life expectancy, an optimal quality of life is expected even into advanced age. Glioblastoma (GBM) is more common in older patients, but they are still often withheld from efficient treatment due to worry of worse tolerance and have a significantly worse prognosis compared to younger patients. Our retrospective observational study aimed to investigate the therapeutic benefit from a second resection in recurrent glioblastoma of elderly patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included a cohort of 39 elderly patients (> 65 years) with a second resection as treatment option in the case of a tumor recurrence. A causal inference model was built by multiple non- and semiparametric models, which was used to identify matched patients from our elderly GBM database which comprises 538 patients. The matched cohorts were analyzed by a Cox-regression model adjusted by time-dependent covariates. RESULTS: The Cox-regression analysis showed a significant survival benefit (Hazard Ratio: 0.6, 95% CI 0.36-0.9, p-value = 0.0427) for the re-resected group (18.0 months, 95% CI 13.97-23.2 months) compared to the group without re-resection (10.1 months, 95% CI 8.09-20.9 months). No differences in the co-morbidities or hemato-oncological side effects during chemotherapy could be detected. Anesthetic- and surgical complications were rare and comparable to the complication rate of patients undergoing the first-line resection. CONCLUSION: Taken together, in elderly patients, re-resection is an acceptable treatment option in the recurrent state of a glioblastoma. The individual evaluation of the patients' medical status as well as the chances of withstanding general anesthesia needs to be done in close interdisciplinary consultation. If these requirements are met, elderly patients benefit from a re-resection.
Authors: Debra A Goldman; Koos Hovinga; Anne S Reiner; Yoshua Esquenazi; Viviane Tabar; Katherine S Panageas Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: M Lacroix; D Abi-Said; D R Fourney; Z L Gokaslan; W Shi; F DeMonte; F F Lang; I E McCutcheon; S J Hassenbusch; E Holland; K Hess; C Michael; D Miller; R Sawaya Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Kaisorn L Chaichana; Tomas Garzon-Muvdi; Scott Parker; Jon D Weingart; Alessandro Olivi; Richard Bennett; Henry Brem; Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2010-08-10 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Dieter Henrik Heiland; Gerrit Haaker; Ralf Watzlawick; Daniel Delev; Waseem Masalha; Pamela Franco; Marcia Machein; Ori Staszewski; Oliver Oelhke; Nils Henrik Nicolay; Oliver Schnell Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2018-08-03 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: K Ellicott Colson; Kara E Rudolph; Scott C Zimmerman; Dana E Goin; Elizabeth A Stuart; Mark van der Laan; Jennifer Ahern Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-03-16 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Dieter H Heiland; Robin Ohle; Debora Cipriani; Pamela Franco; Daniel Delev; Simon P Behriger; Elias Kellner; Gergana Petrova; Nicolas Neidert; Irina Mader; Mateo Fariña Nuñez; Horst Urbach; Roman Sankowski; Jürgen Beck; Oliver Schnell Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2020-08-27 Impact factor: 4.638