Yusuke Funakoshi1, Nobuhiro Hata2, Daisuke Kuga1, Ryusuke Hatae1, Yuhei Sangatsuda1, Yutaka Fujioka1, Kosuke Takigawa1, Koji Yoshimoto1,3, Masahiro Mizoguchi1, Koji Iihara4. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-Ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-Ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan. hatanobu@ns.med.kyushu-u.ac.jp. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima University, 8-35-1 Sakuragaoka, Kagoshima, 890-8520, Japan. 4. Department of Neurosurgery, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center, 6-1 Kishibe-Shimmachi, Suita, Osaka, 564-8565, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the treatment for glioblastoma (GBM), treatment modalities, such as bevacizumab (BEV) and carmustine wafers implants have been approved in Japan since 2013. However, it is unclear whether such a trend in treatment complexity can accelerate treatment centralization. The aim of this study was to reveal the current trend in the treatment of GBM in Japan. METHODS: We used diagnostic procedure combination (DPC) database to analyze the data of 1,774 patients from 305 institutions between April 2016 and March 2019. To analyze the situations associated with first-line BEV use during concurrent TMZ (temozolomide)-radiotherapy, we compared TMZ alone and TMZ-BEV groups. RESULTS: Of the 1,774 patients with GBM, tumor removal by craniotomy was performed in 1,572 (88.6%) patients, and stereotactic biopsy was performed in 156 (8.8%) patients. A total of 1,229 (69.3%) patients underwent radiotherapy, and 1,287 (72.5%) patients underwent chemotherapy. TMZ alone was administered to 878 (68.2%) and TMZ combined with BEV in 381 (29.6%) patients. In the TMZ-BEV group, as compared to the TMZ-alone group, the rate of discharge to home was significantly lower (P = 0.0044), and the rate of stereotactic biopsy was significantly higher (P < 0.0001). No significant difference was observed in the distribution of patients between the TMZ alone and TMZ-BEV groups depending on the scale of institution (P = 0.1240). CONCLUSION: First-line BEV administration seems to be selected properly regardless of the institutional scale. This Japan-wide study of GBM treatment revealed that high level and newly introduced treatments have been steadily generalized in Japanese institutions.
BACKGROUND: In the treatment for glioblastoma (GBM), treatment modalities, such as bevacizumab (BEV) and carmustine wafers implants have been approved in Japan since 2013. However, it is unclear whether such a trend in treatment complexity can accelerate treatment centralization. The aim of this study was to reveal the current trend in the treatment of GBM in Japan. METHODS: We used diagnostic procedure combination (DPC) database to analyze the data of 1,774 patients from 305 institutions between April 2016 and March 2019. To analyze the situations associated with first-line BEV use during concurrent TMZ (temozolomide)-radiotherapy, we compared TMZ alone and TMZ-BEV groups. RESULTS: Of the 1,774 patients with GBM, tumor removal by craniotomy was performed in 1,572 (88.6%) patients, and stereotactic biopsy was performed in 156 (8.8%) patients. A total of 1,229 (69.3%) patients underwent radiotherapy, and 1,287 (72.5%) patients underwent chemotherapy. TMZ alone was administered to 878 (68.2%) and TMZ combined with BEV in 381 (29.6%) patients. In the TMZ-BEV group, as compared to the TMZ-alone group, the rate of discharge to home was significantly lower (P = 0.0044), and the rate of stereotactic biopsy was significantly higher (P < 0.0001). No significant difference was observed in the distribution of patients between the TMZ alone and TMZ-BEV groups depending on the scale of institution (P = 0.1240). CONCLUSION: First-line BEV administration seems to be selected properly regardless of the institutional scale. This Japan-wide study of GBM treatment revealed that high level and newly introduced treatments have been steadily generalized in Japanese institutions.
Authors: Manfred Westphal; Dana C Hilt; Enoch Bortey; Patrick Delavault; Robert Olivares; Peter C Warnke; Ian R Whittle; Juha Jääskeläinen; Zvi Ram Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Olivier L Chinot; Wolfgang Wick; Warren Mason; Roger Henriksson; Frank Saran; Ryo Nishikawa; Antoine F Carpentier; Khe Hoang-Xuan; Petr Kavan; Dana Cernea; Alba A Brandes; Magalie Hilton; Lauren Abrey; Timothy Cloughesy Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-02-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mark R Gilbert; James J Dignam; Terri S Armstrong; Jeffrey S Wefel; Deborah T Blumenthal; Michael A Vogelbaum; Howard Colman; Arnab Chakravarti; Stephanie Pugh; Minhee Won; Robert Jeraj; Paul D Brown; Kurt A Jaeckle; David Schiff; Volker W Stieber; David G Brachman; Maria Werner-Wasik; Ivo W Tremont-Lukats; Erik P Sulman; Kenneth D Aldape; Walter J Curran; Minesh P Mehta Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-02-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Hans Christoph Bock; Maximilian Josef Anton Puchner; Frauke Lohmann; Michael Schütze; Simone Koll; Ralf Ketter; Ruediger Buchalla; Nikolai Rainov; Sven R Kantelhardt; Veit Rohde; Alf Giese Journal: Neurosurg Rev Date: 2010-08-13 Impact factor: 3.042
Authors: Matthew J McGirt; Khoi D Than; Jon D Weingart; Kaisorn L Chaichana; Frank J Attenello; Alessandro Olivi; John Laterra; Lawrence R Kleinberg; Stuart A Grossman; Henry Brem; Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 5.115