Dataset Information

A Crowdsourced Consensus on Supratotal Resection Versus Gross Total Resection for Anatomically Distinct Primary Glioblastoma.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Gross total resection (GTR) of contrast-enhancing tumor is associated with increased survival in primary glioblastoma. Recently, there has been increasing interest in performing supratotal resections (SpTRs) for glioblastoma.

Objective

To address the published results, which have varied in part due to lack of consensus on the definition and appropriate use of SpTR.

Methods

A crowdsourcing approach was used to survey 21 neurosurgical oncologists representing 14 health systems nationwide. Participants were presented with 11 definitions of SpTR and asked to rate the appropriateness of each definition. Participants reviewed T1-weighed postcontrast and fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery magnetic resonance imaging for 22 anatomically distinct glioblastomas. Participants were asked to assess the tumor location's eloquence, the perceived equipoise of enrolling patients in a randomized trial comparing gross total to SpTR, and their personal treatment plans.

Results

Most neurosurgeons surveyed (n = 18, 85.7%) agree that GTR plus resection of some noncontrast enhancement is an appropriate definition for SpTR. Overall, moderate inter-rater agreement existed regarding eloquence, equipoise, and personal treatment plans. The 4 neurosurgeons who had performed >10 SpTRs for glioblastomas in the past year were more likely to recommend it as their treatment plan (P < .005). Cases were divided into 3 anatomically distinct groups based upon perceived eloquence. Anterior temporal and right frontal glioblastomas were considered the best randomization candidates.

Conclusion

We established a consensus definition for SpTR of glioblastoma and identified anatomically distinct locations deemed most amenable to SpTR. These results may be used to plan prospective trials investigating the potential clinical utility of SpTR for glioblastoma.

SUBMITTER: Khalafallah AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8440068 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDNA methylation-based tumor classification allows an enhanced distinction into subgroups of glioblastoma. However, the clinical benefit of DNA methylation-based stratification of glioblastomas remains inconclusive.MethodsMulticentric cohort study including 430 patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma subjected to global DNA methylation profiling. Outcome measures included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), prognostic relevance of EOR and MGMT promoter methylation status as well as a surgical benefit for recurrent glioblastoma.Results345 patients (80.2%) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and 305 patients received combined adjuvant therapy. DNA methylation subclasses RTK I, RTK II, and mesenchymal (MES) revealed no significant survival differences (RTK I: Ref.; RTK II: HR 0.9 [95% CI, 0.64-1.28]; p = 0.56; MES: 0.69 [0.47-1.02]; p = 0.06). Patients with RTK I (GTR/near GTR: Ref.; PR: HR 2.87 [95% CI, 1.36-6.08]; p < 0.01) or RTK II (GTR/near GTR: Ref.; PR: HR 5.09 [95% CI, 2.80-9.26]; p < 0.01) tumors who underwent gross-total resection (GTR) or near GTR had a longer OS and PFS than partially resected patients. The MES subclass showed no survival benefit for a maximized EOR (GTR/near GTR: Ref.; PR: HR 1.45 [95% CI, 0.68-3.09]; p = 0.33). Therapy response predictive value of MGMT promoter methylation was evident for RTK I (HR 0.37 [95% CI, 0.19-0.71]; p < 0.01) and RTK II (HR 0.56 [95% CI, 0.34-0.91]; p = 0.02) but not the MES subclass (HR 0.52 [95% CI, 0.27-1.02]; p = 0.06). For local recurrence (n = 112), re-resection conveyed a progression-to-overall survival (POS) benefit (p < 0.01), which was evident in RTK I (p = 0.03) and RTK II (p < 0.01) tumors, but not in MES tumors (p = 0.33).ConclusionWe demonstrate a survival benefit from maximized EOR for newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastomas of the RTK I and RTK II but not the MES subclass. Hence, it needs to be debated whether the MES subclass should be treated with maximal surgical resection, especially when located in eloquent areas and at time of recurrence.

Project description:Optimal extent of surgical resection (EOR) of high-grade gliomas (HGGs) remains uncertain in the elderly given the unclear benefits and potentially higher rates of mortality and morbidity associated with more extensive degrees of resection.We undertook a meta-analysis according to a predefined protocol and systematically searched literature databases for reports about HGG EOR. Elderly patients (?60 y) undergoing biopsy, subtotal resection (STR), and gross total resection (GTR) were compared for the outcome measures of overall survival (OS), postoperative karnofsky performance status (KPS), progression-free survival (PFS), mortality, and morbidity. Treatment effects as pooled estimates, mean differences (MDs), or risk ratios (RRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined using random effects modeling.A total of 12 607 participants from 34 studies met eligibility criteria, including our current cohort of 211 patients. When comparing overall resection (of any extent) with biopsy, in favor of the resection group were OS (MD 3.88 mo, 95% CI: 2.14-5.62, P < .001), postoperative KPS (MD 10.4, 95% CI: 6.58-14.22, P < .001), PFS (MD 2.44 mo, 95% CI: 1.45-3.43, P < .001), mortality (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.12-0.61, P = .002), and morbidity (RR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.46-1.46, P = .514) . GTR was significantly superior to STR in terms of OS (MD 3.77 mo, 95% CI: 2.26-5.29, P < .001), postoperative KPS (MD 4.91, 95% CI: 0.91-8.92, P = .016), and PFS (MD 2.21 mo, 95% CI: 1.13-3.3, P < .001) with no difference in mortality (RR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.05-5.71, P = .600) or morbidity (RR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.18-1.49, P = .223).Our findings suggest an upward improvement in survival time, functional recovery, and tumor recurrence rate associated with increasing extents of safe resection. These benefits did not result in higher rates of mortality or morbidity if considered in conjunction with known established safety measures when managing elderly patients harboring HGGs.