Primary versus recurrent surgery for glioblastoma-a prospective cohort study

Recurrent Glioblastoma: A Review of the Treatment Options

Glioblastoma is a disease with a poor prognosis. Multiple efforts have been made to improve the long-term outcome, but the 5-year survival rate is still 5-10%. Recurrence of the disease is the usual way of progression. In this situation, there is no standard treatment. Different treatment options can be considered. Among them would be reoperation or reirradiation. There are different studies that have assessed the impact on survival and the selection of patients who may benefit most from these strategies. Chemotherapy treatments have also been considered in several studies, mainly with alkylating agents, with data mostly from phase II studies. On the other hand, multiple studies have been carried out with target-directed treatments. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody with anti-angiogenic activity, has demonstrated activity in several studies, and the FDA has approved it for this indication. Several other TKI drugs have been evaluated in this setting, but no clear benefit has been demonstrated. Immunotherapy treatments have been shown to be effective in other types of tumors, and several studies have evaluated their efficacy in this disease, both immune checkpoint inhibitors, oncolytic viruses, and vaccines. This paper reviews data from different studies that have evaluated the efficacy of different forms of relapsed glioblastoma.

Changes and significance of serum ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase L1 and glial fibrillary acidic protein in patients with glioma

BACKGROUND

Brain gliomas are malignant tumors with high postoperative recurrence rates. Early prediction of prognosis using specific indicators is of great significance.

AIM

To assess changes in ubiquitin carboxy-terminal hydrolase L1 (UCH-L1) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) levels in patients with glioma pre-and postoperatively.

METHODS

Between June 2018 and June 2021, 91 patients with gliomas who underwent surgery at our hospital were enrolled in the glioma group. Sixty healthy volunteers were included in the control group. Serum UCH-L1 and GFAP levels were measured in peripheral blood collected from patients with glioma before and 3 d after surgery. UCH-L1 and GFAP levels in patients with glioma with different clinicopathological characteristics were compared before and after surgery. The patients were followed-up until February 2022. Postoperative glioma recurrence was recorded to determine the serum UCH-L1 and GFAP levels, which could assist in predicting postoperative glioma recurrence.

RESULTS

UCH-L1 and GFAP levels in patients with glioma decreased significantly 3 d after surgery compared to those before therapy (P < 0.05). However, UCH-L1 and GFAP levels in the glioma group were significantly higher than those in the control group before and after surgery (P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in preoperative serum UCH-L1 and GFAP levels among patients with glioma according to sex, age, pathological type, tumor location, or number of lesions (P > 0.05). Serum UCH-L1 and GFAP levels were significantly lower in the patients with WHO grade I-II tumors than in those with grade III-IV tumors (P < 0.05). Serum UCH-L1 and GFAP levels were lower in the patients with tumor diameter ≤ 5 cm than in those with diameter > 5 cm, in which the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Glioma recurred in 22 patients. The preoperative and 3-d postoperative serum UCH-L1 and GFAP levels were significantly higher in the recurrence group than these in the non-recurrence group (P < 0.05). Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted. The areas under the curves of preoperative serum UCH-L1 and GFAP levels for predicting postoperative glioma recurrence were 0.785 and 0.775, respectively. However, the efficacy of serum UCH-L1 and GFAP levels 3 d after surgery in predicting postoperative glioma recurrence was slightly lower compared with their preoperative levels.

CONCLUSION

UCH-L1 and GFAP efficiently reflected the development and recurrence of gliomas and could be used as potential indicators for the recurrence and prognosis of glioma.

Effects of Reoperation Timing on Survival among Recurrent Glioblastoma Patients: A Retrospective Multicentric Descriptive Study

Glioblastoma inevitably recurs, but no standard regimen has been established for treating this recurrent disease. Several reports claim that reoperative surgery can improve survival, but the effects of reoperation timing on survival have rarely been investigated. We, therefore, evaluated the relationship between reoperation timing and survival in recurrent GBM. A consecutive cohort of unselected patients (real-world data) from three neuro-oncology cancer centers was analyzed (a total of 109 patients). All patients underwent initial maximal safe resection followed by treatment according to the Stupp protocol. Those meeting the following criteria during progression were indicated for reoperation and were further analyzed in this study: (1) The tumor volume increased by >20-30% or a tumor was rediscovered after radiological disappearance; (2) The patient's clinical status was satisfactory (KS ≥ 70% and PS WHO ≤ gr. 2); (3) The tumor was localized without multifocality; (4) The minimum expected tumor volume reduction was above 80%. A univariate Cox regression analysis of postsurgical survival (PSS) revealed a statistically significant effect of reoperation on PSS from a threshold of 16 months after the first surgery. Cox regression models that stratified the Karnofsky score with age adjustment confirmed a statistically significant improvement in PSS for time-to-progression (TTP) thresholds of 22 and 24 months. The patient groups exhibiting the first recurrence at 22 and 24 months had better survival rates than those exhibiting earlier recurrences. For the 22-month group, the HR was 0.5 with a 95% CI of (0.27, 0.96) and a p-value of 0.036. For the 24-month group, the HR was 0.5 with a 95% CI of (0.25, 0.96) and a p-value of 0.039. Patients with the longest survival were also the best candidates for repeated surgery. Later recurrence of glioblastoma was associated with higher survival rates after reoperation.

Laser Interstitial Thermal Therapy for First-Line Treatment of Surgically Accessible Recurrent Glioblastoma: Outcomes Compared With a Surgical Cohort

BACKGROUND

Laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) for glioblastoma (GBM) has been reserved for poor surgical candidates and deep "inoperable" lesions. We present the first reported series of LITT for surgically accessible recurrent GBM (rGBM) that would otherwise be treated with surgical resection.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the use of LITT for unifocal, lobar, first-time rGBM compared with a similar surgical cohort.

METHODS

A retrospective institutional database was used to identify patients with unifocal, lobar, first-time rGBM who underwent LITT or resection between 2013 and 2020. Clinical and volumetric lesional characteristics were compared between cohorts. Subgroup analysis of patients with lesions ≤20 cm 3 was also completed. Primary outcomes were overall survival and progression-free survival.

RESULTS

Of the 744 patients with rGBM treated from 2013 to 2020, a LITT cohort of 17 patients were compared with 23 similar surgical patients. There were no differences in baseline characteristics, although lesions were larger in the surgical cohort (7.54 vs 4.37 cm 3 , P = .017). Despite differences in lesion size, both cohorts had similar extents of ablation/resection (90.7% vs 95.1%, P = .739). Overall survival (14.1 vs 13.8 months, P = .578) and progression-free survival (3.7 vs 3.3 months, P = 0. 495) were similar. LITT patients had significantly shorter hospital stays (2.2 vs 3.0 days, P = .004). Subgroup analysis of patients with lesions ≤20 cm 3 showed similar outcomes, with LITT allowing for significantly shorter hospital stays.

CONCLUSION

We found no difference in survival outcomes or morbidity between LITT and repeat surgery for surgically accessible rGBM while LITT resulted in shorter hospital stays and more efficient postoperative care.

Health-Related Quality of Life for Patients Receiving Tumor Treating Fields for Glioblastoma

Background

To date, there has been no large-scale, real-world study of the health-related quality of life outcomes for patients using tumor treating fields (TTFields) therapy for glioblastoma (GBM) treatment.

Methods

A survey was mailed to 2,815 patients actively using TTFields for treatment of GBM in the USA (n = 2,182) and Europe (n = 633). The survey included patient-reported demographic and clinical information, as well as EuroQol’s EQ-5D-5L and visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) overall health score.

Results

A total of 1,106 applicable patients responded to the survey (USA = 782 and Europe = 324), with a mean age of 58.6 years (SD = 12.3). The average time since diagnosis and time using TTFields were 21.5 months (SD = 25.1) and 13.5 months (SD = 13.2), respectively. Over 61% of patients had been diagnosed at least 1 year prior and 28.4% at least 2 years prior; 45 patients (4.2%) had been diagnosed at least 5 years prior. Progressed disease was reported in 307 patients, while 690 reported non-progressed disease. Regression analyses showed that GBM disease progression and older age had predictable negative associations (p < 0.001) with most EQ-5D-5L dimensions and the EQ-VAS. However, longer time since diagnosis was associated with improved self-care (p < 0.05), usual activities (p < 0.01), and EQ-VAS (p < 0.05) overall and in patients with progressed disease (p < 0.01, p < 0.05, and p < 0.01, respectively). Additionally, longer time using TTFields was associated with improved mobility (p < 0.05), self-care (p < 0.001), usual activities (p < 0.01), and EQ-VAS (p < 0.01) overall; with improved EQ-VAS in progression-free patients (p < 0.05); and with improved mobility (p < 0.05), self-care (p < 0.01), usual activities (p < 0.05), and EQ-VAS (p < 0.05) in patients with progressed disease.

Conclusion

This is the largest real-world study of patient-reported quality of life in GBM and TTFields treatment to date. It shows unsurprising negative associations between quality of life and disease progression and older age, as well as more novel, positive associations between quality of life and longer time since diagnosis and time using TTFields therapy.