Cargando…
Prognostic evaluation of re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma using the novel RANO classification for extent of resection: A report of the RANO resect group
BACKGROUND: The value of re-resection in recurrent glioblastoma remains controversial as a randomized trial that specifies intentional incomplete resection cannot be justified ethically. Here, we aimed to (1) explore the prognostic role of extent of re-resection using the previously proposed Respons...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10479742/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37253096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noad074 |
_version_ | 1785101660292382720 |
---|---|
author | Karschnia, Philipp Dono, Antonio Young, Jacob S Juenger, Stephanie T Teske, Nico Häni, Levin Sciortino, Tommaso Mau, Christine Y Bruno, Francesco Nunez, Luis Morshed, Ramin A Haddad, Alexander F Weller, Michael van den Bent, Martin Beck, Juergen Hervey-Jumper, Shawn Molinaro, Annette M Tandon, Nitin Rudà, Roberta Vogelbaum, Michael A Bello, Lorenzo Schnell, Oliver Grau, Stefan J Chang, Susan M Berger, Mitchel S Esquenazi, Yoshua Tonn, Joerg-Christian |
author_facet | Karschnia, Philipp Dono, Antonio Young, Jacob S Juenger, Stephanie T Teske, Nico Häni, Levin Sciortino, Tommaso Mau, Christine Y Bruno, Francesco Nunez, Luis Morshed, Ramin A Haddad, Alexander F Weller, Michael van den Bent, Martin Beck, Juergen Hervey-Jumper, Shawn Molinaro, Annette M Tandon, Nitin Rudà, Roberta Vogelbaum, Michael A Bello, Lorenzo Schnell, Oliver Grau, Stefan J Chang, Susan M Berger, Mitchel S Esquenazi, Yoshua Tonn, Joerg-Christian |
author_sort | Karschnia, Philipp |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The value of re-resection in recurrent glioblastoma remains controversial as a randomized trial that specifies intentional incomplete resection cannot be justified ethically. Here, we aimed to (1) explore the prognostic role of extent of re-resection using the previously proposed Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) classification (based upon residual contrast-enhancing (CE) and non-CE tumor), and to (2) define factors consolidating the surgical effects on outcome. METHODS: The RANO resect group retrospectively compiled an 8-center cohort of patients with first recurrence from previously resected glioblastomas. The associations of re-resection and other clinical factors with outcome were analyzed. Propensity score-matched analyses were constructed to minimize confounding effects when comparing the different RANO classes. RESULTS: We studied 681 patients with first recurrence of Isocitrate Dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type glioblastomas, including 310 patients who underwent re-resection. Re-resection was associated with prolonged survival even when stratifying for molecular and clinical confounders on multivariate analysis; ≤1 cm(3) residual CE tumor was associated with longer survival than non-surgical management. Accordingly, “maximal resection” (class 2) had superior survival compared to “submaximal resection” (class 3). Administration of (radio-)chemotherapy in the absence of postoperative deficits augmented the survival associations of smaller residual CE tumors. Conversely, “supramaximal resection” of non-CE tumor (class 1) was not associated with prolonged survival but was frequently accompanied by postoperative deficits. The prognostic role of residual CE tumor was confirmed in propensity score analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The RANO resect classification serves to stratify patients with re-resection of glioblastoma. Complete resection according to RANO resect classes 1 and 2 is prognostic. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10479742 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104797422023-09-06 Prognostic evaluation of re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma using the novel RANO classification for extent of resection: A report of the RANO resect group Karschnia, Philipp Dono, Antonio Young, Jacob S Juenger, Stephanie T Teske, Nico Häni, Levin Sciortino, Tommaso Mau, Christine Y Bruno, Francesco Nunez, Luis Morshed, Ramin A Haddad, Alexander F Weller, Michael van den Bent, Martin Beck, Juergen Hervey-Jumper, Shawn Molinaro, Annette M Tandon, Nitin Rudà, Roberta Vogelbaum, Michael A Bello, Lorenzo Schnell, Oliver Grau, Stefan J Chang, Susan M Berger, Mitchel S Esquenazi, Yoshua Tonn, Joerg-Christian Neuro Oncol Clinical Investigations BACKGROUND: The value of re-resection in recurrent glioblastoma remains controversial as a randomized trial that specifies intentional incomplete resection cannot be justified ethically. Here, we aimed to (1) explore the prognostic role of extent of re-resection using the previously proposed Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) classification (based upon residual contrast-enhancing (CE) and non-CE tumor), and to (2) define factors consolidating the surgical effects on outcome. METHODS: The RANO resect group retrospectively compiled an 8-center cohort of patients with first recurrence from previously resected glioblastomas. The associations of re-resection and other clinical factors with outcome were analyzed. Propensity score-matched analyses were constructed to minimize confounding effects when comparing the different RANO classes. RESULTS: We studied 681 patients with first recurrence of Isocitrate Dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type glioblastomas, including 310 patients who underwent re-resection. Re-resection was associated with prolonged survival even when stratifying for molecular and clinical confounders on multivariate analysis; ≤1 cm(3) residual CE tumor was associated with longer survival than non-surgical management. Accordingly, “maximal resection” (class 2) had superior survival compared to “submaximal resection” (class 3). Administration of (radio-)chemotherapy in the absence of postoperative deficits augmented the survival associations of smaller residual CE tumors. Conversely, “supramaximal resection” of non-CE tumor (class 1) was not associated with prolonged survival but was frequently accompanied by postoperative deficits. The prognostic role of residual CE tumor was confirmed in propensity score analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The RANO resect classification serves to stratify patients with re-resection of glioblastoma. Complete resection according to RANO resect classes 1 and 2 is prognostic. Oxford University Press 2023-05-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10479742/ /pubmed/37253096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noad074 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Clinical Investigations Karschnia, Philipp Dono, Antonio Young, Jacob S Juenger, Stephanie T Teske, Nico Häni, Levin Sciortino, Tommaso Mau, Christine Y Bruno, Francesco Nunez, Luis Morshed, Ramin A Haddad, Alexander F Weller, Michael van den Bent, Martin Beck, Juergen Hervey-Jumper, Shawn Molinaro, Annette M Tandon, Nitin Rudà, Roberta Vogelbaum, Michael A Bello, Lorenzo Schnell, Oliver Grau, Stefan J Chang, Susan M Berger, Mitchel S Esquenazi, Yoshua Tonn, Joerg-Christian Prognostic evaluation of re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma using the novel RANO classification for extent of resection: A report of the RANO resect group |
title | Prognostic evaluation of re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma using the novel RANO classification for extent of resection: A report of the RANO resect group |
title_full | Prognostic evaluation of re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma using the novel RANO classification for extent of resection: A report of the RANO resect group |
title_fullStr | Prognostic evaluation of re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma using the novel RANO classification for extent of resection: A report of the RANO resect group |
title_full_unstemmed | Prognostic evaluation of re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma using the novel RANO classification for extent of resection: A report of the RANO resect group |
title_short | Prognostic evaluation of re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma using the novel RANO classification for extent of resection: A report of the RANO resect group |
title_sort | prognostic evaluation of re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma using the novel rano classification for extent of resection: a report of the rano resect group |
topic | Clinical Investigations |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10479742/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37253096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noad074 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT karschniaphilipp prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT donoantonio prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT youngjacobs prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT juengerstephaniet prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT teskenico prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT hanilevin prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT sciortinotommaso prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT mauchristiney prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT brunofrancesco prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT nunezluis prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT morshedramina prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT haddadalexanderf prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT wellermichael prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT vandenbentmartin prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT beckjuergen prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT herveyjumpershawn prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT molinaroannettem prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT tandonnitin prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT rudaroberta prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT vogelbaummichaela prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT bellolorenzo prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT schnelloliver prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT graustefanj prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT changsusanm prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT bergermitchels prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT esquenaziyoshua prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup AT tonnjoergchristian prognosticevaluationofreresectionforrecurrentglioblastomausingthenovelranoclassificationforextentofresectionareportoftheranoresectgroup |