Matthew W Parsons1,2, Nicholas S Whipple3, Matthew M Poppe1,2, Joe S Mendez1,4, Donald M Cannon1,2, Lindsay M Burt5,6. 1. Huntsman Cancer Institute, 1950 Circle of Hope, Rm. 1570, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 3. Division of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 4. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 5. Huntsman Cancer Institute, 1950 Circle of Hope, Rm. 1570, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA. lindsay.burt@hci.utah.edu. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. lindsay.burt@hci.utah.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to understand the use of chemotherapy (CMT) and radiotherapy (RT) in pilocytic astrocytoma (PA) and their impact on overall survival (OS). METHODS: Data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients with non-metastatic WHO grade I PA from 2004 to 2014 were analyzed. Pearson's chi-squared test and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the distribution of demographic, clinical, and treatment factors. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to account for differences in baseline characteristics. Kaplan-Meier analyses and doubly-robust estimation with multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to analyze OS. RESULTS: Of 3865 patients analyzed, 294 received CMT (7.6%), 233 received RT (6.0%), and 42 (1.1%) received both. On multivariate analyses, decreasing extent of surgical resection was associated with receipt of both CMT and RT. Brainstem tumors were associated with RT, optic nerve tumors were associated with CMT. Cerebellar tumors were inversely associated with both CMT and RT. Younger age was associated with receipt of CMT; conversely, older age was associated with receipt of RT. After IPTW, receipt of CMT and/or RT were associated with an OS decrement compared with matched patients treated with surgery alone or observation (HR 3.29, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study to date to examine patterns of care and resultant OS outcomes in PA. We identified patient characteristics associated with receipt of CMT and RT. After propensity score matching, receipt of CMT and/or RT was associated with decreased OS.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to understand the use of chemotherapy (CMT) and radiotherapy (RT) in pilocytic astrocytoma (PA) and their impact on overall survival (OS). METHODS: Data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients with non-metastatic WHO grade I PA from 2004 to 2014 were analyzed. Pearson's chi-squared test and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the distribution of demographic, clinical, and treatment factors. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to account for differences in baseline characteristics. Kaplan-Meier analyses and doubly-robust estimation with multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to analyze OS. RESULTS: Of 3865 patients analyzed, 294 received CMT (7.6%), 233 received RT (6.0%), and 42 (1.1%) received both. On multivariate analyses, decreasing extent of surgical resection was associated with receipt of both CMT and RT. Brainstem tumors were associated with RT, optic nerve tumors were associated with CMT. Cerebellar tumors were inversely associated with both CMT and RT. Younger age was associated with receipt of CMT; conversely, older age was associated with receipt of RT. After IPTW, receipt of CMT and/or RT were associated with an OS decrement compared with matched patients treated with surgery alone or observation (HR 3.29, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study to date to examine patterns of care and resultant OS outcomes in PA. We identified patient characteristics associated with receipt of CMT and RT. After propensity score matching, receipt of CMT and/or RT was associated with decreased OS.
Authors: Kamila M Bond; Joshua D Hughes; Amanda L Porter; Josiah Orina; Shanna Fang; Ian F Parney Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2017-11-24 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Quinn T Ostrom; Haley Gittleman; Peter Liao; Toni Vecchione-Koval; Yingli Wolinsky; Carol Kruchko; Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2017-11-06 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: C Colin; L Padovani; C Chappé; S Mercurio; D Scavarda; A Loundou; F Frassineti; N André; C Bouvier; A Korshunov; G Lena; D Figarella-Branger Journal: Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 8.090
Authors: Jeffrey H Wisoff; Robert A Sanford; Linda A Heier; Richard Sposto; Peter C Burger; Allan J Yates; Emiko J Holmes; Larry E Kun Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: D C Bowers; T P Krause; L J Aronson; A Barzi; P C Burger; B S Carson; J D Weingart; M D Wharam; E R Melhem; K J Cohen Journal: Pediatr Neurosurg Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 1.162
Authors: Jacopo Falco; Julius Höhne; Morgan Broggi; Emanuele Rubiu; Francesco Restelli; Ignazio G Vetrano; Marco Schiariti; Elio Mazzapicchi; Giulio Bonomo; Paolo Ferroli; Karl-Michael Schebesch; Francesco Acerbi Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-08-09 Impact factor: 5.738
Authors: Omer Sager; Ferrat Dincoglan; Selcuk Demiral; Bora Uysal; Hakan Gamsiz; Esra Gumustepe; Fatih Ozcan; Onurhan Colak; Ahmet Tarik Gursoy; Cemal Ugur Dursun; Ahmet Oguz Tugcu; Galip Dogukan Dogru; Rukiyye Arslan; Yelda Elcim; Esin Gundem; Bahar Dirican; Murat Beyzadeoglu Journal: World J Exp Med Date: 2022-05-20