So Young Ji1, Jongjin Lee2, Joo Ho Lee3, Soon-Tae Lee4, Jae Kyung Won5, Jin Wook Kim1, Yong Hwy Kim1, Tae Min Kim6, Seung Hong Choi7, Sung-Hye Park5, Yongdai Kim2, Chul-Kee Park1. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine. 2. Department of Statistics, Seoul National University. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Hospital. 4. Department of Neurology, Seoul National University Hospital. 5. Department of Pathology, Seoul National University Hospital. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital. 7. Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An optimal radiological surveillance plan is crucial for high-grade glioma (HGG) patients, which is determined arbitrarily in daily clinical practice. We propose the radiological assessment schedule using a parametric model of standardized progression-free survival (PFS) curves. METHODS: A total of 277 HGG patients (178 glioblastoma [GBM] and 99 anaplastic astrocytoma [AA]) from a single institute who completed the standard treatment protocol were enrolled in this cohort study and retrospectively analyzed. The patients were stratified into each layered risk group by genetic signatures and residual mass or through recursive partitioning analysis. PFS curves were estimated using the piecewise exponential survival model. The criterion of a 10% progression rate among the remaining patients at each observation period was used to determine the optimal radiological assessment time point. RESULTS: The optimal follow-up intervals for MRI evaluations of isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type GBM was every 7.4 weeks until 120 weeks after the end of standard treatment, followed by a 22-week inflection period and every 27.6 weeks thereafter. For the IDH mutated GBM, scans every 13.2 weeks until 151 weeks are recommended. The optimal follow-up intervals were every 22.8 weeks for IDH wild-type AA, and 41.2 weeks for IDH mutated AA until 241 weeks. Tailored radiological assessment schedules were suggested for each layered risk group of the GBM and the AA patients. CONCLUSIONS: The optimal schedule of radiological assessments for each layered risk group of patients with HGG could be determined from the parametric model of PFS.
BACKGROUND: An optimal radiological surveillance plan is crucial for high-grade glioma (HGG) patients, which is determined arbitrarily in daily clinical practice. We propose the radiological assessment schedule using a parametric model of standardized progression-free survival (PFS) curves. METHODS: A total of 277 HGG patients (178 glioblastoma [GBM] and 99 anaplastic astrocytoma [AA]) from a single institute who completed the standard treatment protocol were enrolled in this cohort study and retrospectively analyzed. The patients were stratified into each layered risk group by genetic signatures and residual mass or through recursive partitioning analysis. PFS curves were estimated using the piecewise exponential survival model. The criterion of a 10% progression rate among the remaining patients at each observation period was used to determine the optimal radiological assessment time point. RESULTS: The optimal follow-up intervals for MRI evaluations of isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type GBM was every 7.4 weeks until 120 weeks after the end of standard treatment, followed by a 22-week inflection period and every 27.6 weeks thereafter. For the IDH mutated GBM, scans every 13.2 weeks until 151 weeks are recommended. The optimal follow-up intervals were every 22.8 weeks for IDH wild-type AA, and 41.2 weeks for IDH mutated AA until 241 weeks. Tailored radiological assessment schedules were suggested for each layered risk group of the GBM and the AA patients. CONCLUSIONS: The optimal schedule of radiological assessments for each layered risk group of patients with HGG could be determined from the parametric model of PFS.
Authors: Christian Hartmann; Bettina Hentschel; Wolfgang Wick; David Capper; Jörg Felsberg; Matthias Simon; Manfred Westphal; Gabriele Schackert; Richard Meyermann; Torsten Pietsch; Guido Reifenberger; Michael Weller; Markus Loeffler; Andreas von Deimling Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2010-11-19 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: M Azoulay; F Santos; G Shenouda; K Petrecca; A Oweida; M C Guiot; S Owen; V Panet-Raymond; L Souhami; Bassam S Abdulkarim Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2017-04-03 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Monika E Hegi; Annie-Claire Diserens; Thierry Gorlia; Marie-France Hamou; Nicolas de Tribolet; Michael Weller; Johan M Kros; Johannes A Hainfellner; Warren Mason; Luigi Mariani; Jacoline E C Bromberg; Peter Hau; René O Mirimanoff; J Gregory Cairncross; Robert C Janzer; Roger Stupp Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-03-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Roger Stupp; Monika E Hegi; Warren P Mason; Martin J van den Bent; Martin J B Taphoorn; Robert C Janzer; Samuel K Ludwin; Anouk Allgeier; Barbara Fisher; Karl Belanger; Peter Hau; Alba A Brandes; Johanna Gijtenbeek; Christine Marosi; Charles J Vecht; Karima Mokhtari; Pieter Wesseling; Salvador Villa; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; Thierry Gorlia; Michael Weller; Denis Lacombe; J Gregory Cairncross; René-Olivier Mirimanoff Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2009-03-09 Impact factor: 41.316