Evaluating Surgical Resection Extent and Adjuvant Therapy in the Management of Gliosarcoma

Primary and secondary gliosarcoma: differences in treatment and outcome

INTRODUCTION

There are only few studies comparing differences in the outcome of primary versus secondary gliosarcoma. This study aimed to review the outcome and survival of patients with primary or secondary gliosarcoma following surgical resection and adjuvant treatment. The data were also matched with data of patients with primary and secondary glioblastoma (GBM).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Treatment histories of 10 patients with primary gliosarcoma and 10 patients with secondary gliosarcoma were analysed and compared. Additionally, data of 20 patients with primary and 20 patients with secondary GBM were analysed and compared. All patients underwent surgical resection of the tumour in our department. Follow-up data, progression-free survival (PFS), and median overall survival (mOS) were evaluated.

RESULTS

The median PFS in patients with primary gliosarcoma was significantly higher than in patients with secondary gliosarcoma (p = 0.037). The 6-month PFS rates were 80.0% in patients with primary and 30.0% in patients with secondary gliosarcoma. Upon recurrence, five patients with primary gliosarcoma and four patients with secondary gliosarcoma underwent repeat surgical resection. The mOS of patients with primary gliosarcoma was significantly higher than that of patients with secondary gliosarcoma (p = 0.031). The percentage of patients surviving at 1-year/2-year follow-up in primary gliosarcoma was 70%/20%, while it was only 10%/10% in secondary gliosarcoma. When PFS and mOS of primary gliosarcoma was compared to primary GBM, there were no statistically differences (p = 0.509; p = 0.435). The PFS and mOS of secondary gliosarcoma and secondary GBM were also comparable (p = 0.290 and p = 0.390).

CONCLUSION

Patients with primary gliosarcoma have a higher PFS and mOS compared to those with secondary gliosarcoma. In the case of tumour recurrence, patients with secondary gliosarcoma harbour an unfavourable prognosis with limited further options. The outcome of patients with primary or secondary gliosarcoma is comparable to that of patients with primary or secondary GBM.

Competing Risk Model to Determine the Prognostic Factors for Patients with Gliosarcoma

BACKGROUND

Gliosarcoma (GSM) is a highly aggressive variant of brain cancer with an extremely unfavorable prognosis. Prognosis is not feasible by traditional methods because of a lack of staging criteria, and the present study aims to screen more detailed demographic factors to predict the prognostic factors of the tumors.

METHODS

For this study, we extracted data of patients diagnosed with GSM from the SEER (Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results) database between 2000 and 2019. To account for the influence of competing risks, we used a Cumulative Incidence Function. Subsequently, univariate analysis was conducted to evaluate the individual variables under investigation. Specifically for patients with GSM, we generated cumulative risk curves for specific mortality outcomes and events related to competing risks. In addition, we used both univariate and multivariate Cox analysis to account for non-GSM-related deaths that may confound our research.

RESULTS

The competing risk model showed that age, marital status, tumor size, and adjuvant therapy were prognostic factors in GSM-related death. The analysis results showed that older age (60-70 years, ≥71 years) and larger tumor size (≥5.3 cm) significantly increased the risk of GSM-related death. Conversely, surgical intervention, chemotherapy, and being single were identified as protective factors against GSM-related death.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study using a competing risk model provided valuable insights into the prognostic factors associated with GSM-related death. Further research and clinical interventions targeted at minimizing these risk factors and promoting the use of protective measures may contribute to improved outcomes and reduced mortality for patients with GSM.

Primary Intracranial Gliosarcoma: Is It Really a Variant of Glioblastoma? An Update of the Clinical, Radiological, and Biomolecular Characteristics

Gliosarcomas (GS) are sporadic malignant tumors classified as a Glioblastoma (GBM) variant with IDH-wild type phenotype. It appears as a well-circumscribed lesion with a biphasic, glial, and metaplastic mesenchymal component. The current knowledge about GS comes from the limited literature. Furthermore, recent studies describe peculiar characteristics of GS, such as hypothesizing that it could be a clinical-pathological entity different from GBM. Here, we review radiological, biomolecular, and clinical data to describe the peculiar characteristics of PGS, treatment options, and outcomes in light of the most recent literature. A comprehensive literature review of PubMed and Web of Science databases was conducted for articles written in English focused on gliosarcoma until 2023. We include relevant data from a few case series and only a single meta-analysis. Recent evidence describes peculiar characteristics of PGS, suggesting that it might be a specific clinical-pathological entity different from GBM. This review facilitates our understanding of this rare malignant brain tumor. However, in the future we recommend multi-center studies and large-scale metanalyses to clarify the biomolecular pathways of PGS to develop new specific therapeutic protocols, different from conventional GBM therapy in light of the new therapeutic opportunities.

Clinicopathological and Neuroimaging Features of Primary Gliosarcoma: A Case Series and Review of Literature

BACKGROUND

Gliosarcoma (GS) is a rare primary high-grade brain neoplasm with a poor prognosis and challenging surgical resection. Although it is now considered a morphologic variant of IDH-wildtype glioblastoma (World Health Organization Classification of Tumours 2021), GS may display peculiarities that hamper both surgical and oncological management.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we searched our registry for histologically confirmed GS patients between 2006 and 2020. Cases were reviewed for clinical information, pathologic characteristics, imaging findings, management, and outcome.

RESULTS

21 patients with histologically confirmed GS were identified with a median age of 62 years. Twelve were men and 9 women. The temporal lobe was the most common location (9 patients, 42.9%). Nineteen patients underwent surgical resection, and only 4 (19%) demonstrated gross total resection on postsurgical MRI, with an overall median survival of 7 months (range, 0.5-37). Diagnostic MRI demonstrated heterogenous lesions with necrotic-cystic areas and a ring-enhancement pattern. Only 1 case of extracranial extension was seen in our sample, and no patient showed distant metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

The rarity of primary GS and the absence of specific therapeutic guidelines represent a significant clinical challenge. Our study provides a comprehensive analysis of clinical and neuroimaging characteristics in a real-world patient cohort and compares our findings with the available literature.

Gliosarcoma with extensive extracranial metastatic spread and familial coincidence: A case report

Gliosarcoma is a rare histopathological subtype of glioblastoma. Metastatic spreading is unusual. In this report, we illustrate a case of gliosarcoma with extensive extracranial metastases with confirmation of histological and molecular concordance between the primary tumor and a metastatic lesion of the lung. Only the autopsy revealed the extent of metastatic spread and the hematogenous pattern of metastatic dissemination. Moreover, the case bared a familial coincidence of malignant glial tumors as the patient's son was diagnosed with a high-grade glioma shortly after the patient's death. By molecular analysis (Sanger and next generation panel sequencing), we could confirm that both patient's tumors carried mutations in the TP53 gene. Interestingly, the detected mutations were located in different exons. Altogether, this case draws attention to the fact that sudden clinical aggravation could be caused by the rare phenomenon of metastatic spread and should therefore be always taken into consideration, even at an early disease stage. Furthermore, the presented case highlights the contemporary value of autoptic pathological examination.

Prognostic and predictive factors of secondary gliosarcoma: A single-institution series of 18 cases combined with 89 cases from literature

Introduction

Secondary gliosarcomas (SGS) are rare malignancies that are diagnosed subsequent to pre-existing glioma. Clinical features and optimal treatment strategies for SGS have not been conclusively established. This study aimed to assess the clinicopathological features and outcomes of SGS.

Methods

We assessed the clinicopathological features and outcomes of SGS via retrospective analysis of data for SGS patients at Tangdu Hospital. Data from SGS patients in prior publications were also analyzed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines.

Results

Eighteen SGS patients who had been treated at Tangdu Hospital between 2013 and 2020 were enrolled in this study. Additional 89 eligible SGS patients were identified from 39 studies. The median age for the patients was 53 years old, and the most common location was the temporal lobe. The most common initial diagnosis was glioblastoma (GBM) (72.0%). Radiology revealed enhanced masses in 94.8% (73/77) of patients. Ten patients (10/107, 9.35%) had extracranial metastases at or after SGS diagnosis. Patients with initial diagnosis of non-GBM and who were younger than 60 years of age were significantly associated with a long duration of disease progression to SGS. After SGS diagnosis, patients with initial non-GBM diagnosis, gross total resection and chemoradiotherapy exhibited prolonged survival outcomes. Patients who had been initially diagnosed with GBM and received both chemoradiotherapy and active therapy after disease progression to SGS, had a significantly longer overall survival than patients who did not.

Conclusion

Initial diagnosis of GBM was a poor prognostic factor for SGS. Patients who underwent gross total resection and chemoradiation had better overall survival outcomes than those who did not. However, during treatment, clinicians should be cognizant of possible extracranial metastases.

Prognostic Factors of Gliosarcoma in the Real World: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Purpose

Gliosarcoma is a histopathological variant of glioblastoma, which is characterized by a biphasic growth pattern consisting of glial and sarcoma components. Owing to its scarcity, data regarding the impact of available treatments on the clinical outcomes of gliosarcoma are inadequate. The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to analyze the prognostic factors of gliosarcoma.

Methods

By screening the clinical database of neurosurgical cases at a single center, patients with gliosarcoma diagnosed histologically from 2013 to 2021 were identified. Clinical, pathological, and molecular data were gathered founded on medical records and follow-up interviews. Prognostic factors were derived using the Cox proportional hazards model with backward stepwise regression analysis.

Results

Forty-five GSM patients were included. Median overall survival was 25.6 months (95% CI 8.0-43.1), and median relapse-free survival was 15.2 months (95% CI 9.7-20.8). In multivariable analysis, total resection (p = 0.023, HR = 0.192, 95% CI 0.046-0.797) indicated an improved prognosis. And low expression of Ki-67 (p = 0.059, HR = 2.803, 95% CI 0.963-8.162) would be likely to show statistical significance. However, there might be no statistically significant survival benefit from radiotherapy with concurrent temozolomide (n = 33, 73.3%, log-rank p = 0.99) or adjuvant temozolomide (n = 32, 71.1%, log-rank p = 0.74).

Conclusion

This single-center retrospective study with a limited cohort size has demonstrated the treatment of gross total resection and low expression of Ki-67 which are beneficial for patients with GSM, while radiotherapy or temozolomide is not.

Primary versus secondary gliosarcoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Gliosarcomas are extremely rare malignant brain tumors, which can be classified as primary gliosarcoma (PGS) if the tumors arise de novo or secondary gliosarcoma (SGS) in patients who had previously been treated for glioblastoma. Given their rarity, it is unclear if PGS is clinically and genetically different from SGS. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the clinicopathological features, prognostic survivals, and molecular profiles of these rare tumors.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Web of Science for relevant studies. Odds ratio (OR), hazard ratio (HR), and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled using the random-effect model.

RESULTS

We included eight studies with 239 PGS and 79 SGS for meta-analyses. Compared to PGS, SGS occurred at a younger age and had lower rates of gross total resection and radiation therapy. Bevacizumab was more commonly administered in SGS. SGS patients had a significantly worse PFS (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.40-0.89) and OS (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.31-0.68) in comparison to PGS. The incidences of EGFR mutation, IDH mutation, and MGMT methylation were not statistically different between PGS and SGS.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrated that PGS and SGS had distinct clinicopathological profiles and prognoses but shared similar genetic profiles. This study facilitates our understanding of how these two malignant brain tumors behave clinically, but future studies will be required to elucidate the genetic pathways of PGS and SGS.

Chasing a rarity: a retrospective single-center evaluation of prognostic factors in primary gliosarcoma

Background and purpose

Primary gliosarcoma (GS) is a rare variant of IDH-wildtype glioblastoma multiforme. We performed a single-center analysis to identify prognostic factors.

Patients and methods

We analyzed the records of 26 patients newly diagnosed with primary WHO grade IV GS. Factors of interest were clinical and treatment data, as well as molecular markers, time to recurrence, and time to death.

Results

Median follow-up was 9 months (range 5–21 months). Gross total resection did not lead to improved survival, most likely due to the relatively small sample size. Low symptom burden at the time of diagnosis was associated with longer PFS (P = 0.023) and OS (P = 0.018). Median OS in the entire cohort was 12 months. Neither MGMT promoter hypermethylation nor adjuvant temozolomide therapy influenced survival, consistent with some previous reports.

Conclusion

In this retrospective study, patients exhibiting low symptom burden at diagnosis showed improved survival. None of the other factors analyzed were associated with an altered outcome.

Do gliosarcomas have distinct imaging features on routine MRI?

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was the development and external validation of a logistic regression model to differentiate gliosarcoma (GSC) and glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) on standard MR imaging.

METHODS

A univariate and multivariate analysis was carried out of a logistic regression model to discriminate patients histologically diagnosed with primary GSC and an age and sex-matched group of patients with primary GBM on presurgical MRI with external validation.

RESULTS

In total, 56 patients with GSC and 56 patients with GBM were included. Evidence of haemorrhage suggested the diagnosis of GSC, whereas cystic components and pial as well as ependymal invasion were more commonly observed in GBM patients. The logistic regression model yielded a mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.919 on the training dataset and of 0.746 on the validation dataset. The accuracy in the validation dataset was 0.67 with a sensitivity of 0.85 and a specificity of 0.5.

CONCLUSIONS

Although some imaging criteria suggest the diagnosis of GSC or GBM, differentiation between these two tumour entities on standard MRI alone is not feasible.