Risk Factors and Disease Course for Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption-Associated Maculopathy

Subretinal autofluorescent deposits: A review and proposal for clinical classification

Subretinal autofluorescent deposits (SADs) may be found in the posterior pole, associated with very various conditions. These disorders usually present a typical pattern of autofluorescent lesions seen on short-wavelength fundus autofluorescence. We describe SADs according to their putative pathophysiological origin and also according to their clinical pattern, i.e., number, shape, and usual location. Five main putative pathophysiological origins of SADs were identified in disorders associated with an intrinsic impairment of phagocytosis and protein transportation, with excess of retinal pigment epithelium phagocytic capacity, with direct or indirect retinal pigment epithelium injury, and/or disorders associated with long-standing serous retinal detachment with mechanical separation between the retinal pigment epithelium and the photoreceptor outer segments. Clinically, however, they could be classified into eight subclasses of SADs, as observed on fundus autofluorescence as follows: single vitelliform macular lesion, multiple roundish or vitelliform lesions, multiple peripapillary lesions, flecked lesions, leopard-spot lesions, macular patterned lesions, patterned lesions located in the same area as the causal disorder, or nonpatterned lesions. Thus, if multimodal imaging may be required to diagnose the cause of SADs, the proposed classification based on noninvasive, widely available short-wavelength fundus autofluorescence could guide clinicians in making their diagnosis decision tree before considering the use of more invasive tools.

Advances in Intraarterial Chemotherapy Delivery Strategies and Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption

Chemotherapeutics play a significant role in the management of most brain tumors. First pass effect, systemic toxicity, and more importantly, the blood-brain barrier pose significant challenges to the success of chemotherapy. Over the last 80 years, different techniques of intraarterial chemotherapy delivery have been performed in many studies but failed to become standard of care. The purpose of this article is to review the history of intraarterial drug delivery and osmotic blood-brain barrier disruption, identify the challenges for clinical translation, and identify future directions for these approaches.

Safety of intra-arterial chemotherapy with or without osmotic blood–brain barrier disruption for the treatment of patients with brain tumors

Background

Intra-arterial administration of chemotherapy with or without osmotic blood–brain barrier disruption enhances delivery of therapeutic agents to brain tumors. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety of these procedures.

Methods

Retrospectively collected data from a prospective database of consecutive patients with primary and metastatic brain tumors who received intra-arterial chemotherapy without osmotic blood–brain barrier disruption (IA) or intra-arterial chemotherapy with osmotic blood–brain barrier disruption (IA/OBBBD) at Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU) between December 1997 and November 2018 is reported. Chemotherapy-related complications are detailed per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) guidelines. Procedure-related complications are grouped as major and minor.

Results

4939 procedures (1102 IA; 3837 IA/OBBBD) were performed on 436 patients with various pathologies (primary central nervous system lymphoma [26.4%], glioblastoma [18.1%], and oligodendroglioma [14.7%]). Major procedure-related complications (IA: 12, 1%; IA/OBBBD: 27, 0.7%; P = .292) occurred in 39 procedures including 3 arterial dissections requiring intervention, 21 symptomatic strokes, 3 myocardial infarctions, 6 cervical cord injuries, and 6 deaths within 3 days. Minor procedure-related complications occurred in 330 procedures (IA: 41, 3.7%; IA/OBBBD: 289, 7.5%; P = .001). Chemotherapy-related complications with a CTCAE attribution and grade higher than 3 was seen in 359 (82.3%) patients.

Conclusions

We provide safety and tolerability data from the largest cohort of consecutive patients who received IA or IA/OBBBD. Our data demonstrate that IA or IA/OBBBD safely enhance drug delivery to brain tumors and brain around the tumor.