Anna Maria Zeitlberger1, Marie-Claire Flynn2, Monika Hollenstein2, Thomas Hundsberger2,3. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland. 2. Department of Clinical Oncology and Hematology, Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland. 3. Department of Neurology, Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The evaluation of treatment response in patients with gliomas is performed using the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria. These criteria are based on cerebral magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), steroid use, and neurological function. However, a standardized tool for evaluating neurological function was lacking. We compared changes in the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) to changes in the RANO categories to determine the relationship between clinical and neuroradiological findings. METHODS: We reviewed data on all adult patients with supratentorial gliomas WHO grade II-IV who were treated at the Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen from 2008 to 2015. The NIHSS was performed prospectively at baseline and at 3-month intervals simultaneously to MRI. Associations between changes in the NIHSS and RANO categories were assessed using the Stuart-Maxwell test. RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 61 patients from which 471 observations were analyzed. The most common histological diagnosis was glioblastoma (49.2%). In total, 74% of RANO categories and 81% of the NIHSS scores remained stable on follow-up. Statistically, contemporaneous changes in the RANO category did not correlate with changes in the NIHSS (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The application of the NIHSS is easy and feasible in the heterogeneous population of glioma patients. In our cohort, the RANO categories did not reflect contemporaneous changes in the NIHSS. A validated clinical outcome measure with a well-defined minimal clinically important difference is warranted in neuro-oncological research and clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: The evaluation of treatment response in patients with gliomas is performed using the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria. These criteria are based on cerebral magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), steroid use, and neurological function. However, a standardized tool for evaluating neurological function was lacking. We compared changes in the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) to changes in the RANO categories to determine the relationship between clinical and neuroradiological findings. METHODS: We reviewed data on all adult patients with supratentorial gliomas WHO grade II-IV who were treated at the Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen from 2008 to 2015. The NIHSS was performed prospectively at baseline and at 3-month intervals simultaneously to MRI. Associations between changes in the NIHSS and RANO categories were assessed using the Stuart-Maxwell test. RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 61 patients from which 471 observations were analyzed. The most common histological diagnosis was glioblastoma (49.2%). In total, 74% of RANO categories and 81% of the NIHSS scores remained stable on follow-up. Statistically, contemporaneous changes in the RANO category did not correlate with changes in the NIHSS (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The application of the NIHSS is easy and feasible in the heterogeneous population of glioma patients. In our cohort, the RANO categories did not reflect contemporaneous changes in the NIHSS. A validated clinical outcome measure with a well-defined minimal clinically important difference is warranted in neuro-oncological research and clinical practice.
Authors: Nancy U Lin; Eudocia Q Lee; Hidefumi Aoyama; Igor J Barani; Daniel P Barboriak; Brigitta G Baumert; Martin Bendszus; Paul D Brown; D Ross Camidge; Susan M Chang; Janet Dancey; Elisabeth G E de Vries; Laurie E Gaspar; Gordon J Harris; F Stephen Hodi; Steven N Kalkanis; Mark E Linskey; David R Macdonald; Kim Margolin; Minesh P Mehta; David Schiff; Riccardo Soffietti; John H Suh; Martin J van den Bent; Michael A Vogelbaum; Patrick Y Wen Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2015-05-27 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Mark E Oppenlander; Andrew B Wolf; Laura A Snyder; Robert Bina; Jeffrey R Wilson; Stephen W Coons; Lynn S Ashby; David Brachman; Peter Nakaji; Randall W Porter; Kris A Smith; Robert F Spetzler; Nader Sanai Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2014-01-31 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: H P Adams; P H Davis; E C Leira; K C Chang; B H Bendixen; W R Clarke; R F Woolson; M D Hansen Journal: Neurology Date: 1999-07-13 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Francesco Pignatti; Martin van den Bent; Desmond Curran; Channa Debruyne; Richard Sylvester; Patrick Therasse; Denes Afra; Philippe Cornu; Michel Bolla; Charles Vecht; Abul B M F Karim Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-04-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M J van den Bent; J S Wefel; D Schiff; M J B Taphoorn; K Jaeckle; L Junck; T Armstrong; A Choucair; A D Waldman; T Gorlia; M Chamberlain; B G Baumert; M A Vogelbaum; D R Macdonald; D A Reardon; P Y Wen; S M Chang; A H Jacobs Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2011-04-05 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Timothy H Ung; Douglas E Ney; Denise Damek; Chad G Rusthoven; A Samy Youssef; Kevin O Lillehei; D Ryan Ormond Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2019-03-01 Impact factor: 4.654