Cargando…

Biopsy vs. extensive resection for first recurrence of glioblastoma: is a prospective clinical trial warranted?

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma is an aggressive and almost universally fatal tumor. The prognosis at the time of recurrence has generally been poor, with overall survival typically in the range of 4–40 weeks. The merits of surgical resection (vs. open biopsy, to confirm recurrence via histology) in additi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dardis, Christopher, Ashby, Lynn, Shapiro, William, Sanai, Nader
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4560929/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26341541
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1386-3
_version_ 1782388982289530880
author Dardis, Christopher
Ashby, Lynn
Shapiro, William
Sanai, Nader
author_facet Dardis, Christopher
Ashby, Lynn
Shapiro, William
Sanai, Nader
author_sort Dardis, Christopher
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma is an aggressive and almost universally fatal tumor. The prognosis at the time of recurrence has generally been poor, with overall survival typically in the range of 4–40 weeks. The merits of surgical resection (vs. open biopsy, to confirm recurrence via histology) in addition to conventional adjuvant chemotherapy have been the subject of longstanding debate. We wondered whether it would possible to conduct a trial at our institution to settle this question definitively with Class I evidence. RESULTS: Initially, we had hoped to conduct a randomized, unblinded prospective clinical trial. However on closer inspection it appeared that such an undertaking would pose significant practical challenges. Thus we present our protocol in draft form. In keeping with recommended outcomes for these tumors, the primary endpoint would be median progression free survival. Secondary end points would be: median overall survival (mOS, from time of recurrence) and change in Karnofsky Performance Status over time. Patients would be eligible at the time of first recurrence if they had received conventional treatment until that point and at least 1 month had elapsed since the time of radiation. All patients would be considered potentially eligible for enrollment (unless the decision regarding resection was already clear-cut in view of other factors). Using Cox’s proportional hazards model, we estimate that at least 456 patients would be necessary to demonstrate an increase in the hazard ratio to 1.3 for those undergoing biopsy alone. This magnitude of benefit is estimated based on a review of retrospective studies. DISCUSSION: If restricted to our Institution alone, which sees approximately 100–150 new cases of glioblastoma each year, a trial of this nature would be likely to take around 10 years. Furthermore, there may be significant reluctance on the part of patients and physicians to participate. There is also the opportunity cost of excluding patients from other trials to consider. We recognize that the estimate of the magnitude of effect may be conservative. As things stand, we feel that multi-institutional collaboration would almost certainly be required for an undertaking of this kind. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13104-015-1386-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4560929
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45609292015-09-06 Biopsy vs. extensive resection for first recurrence of glioblastoma: is a prospective clinical trial warranted? Dardis, Christopher Ashby, Lynn Shapiro, William Sanai, Nader BMC Res Notes Correspondence BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma is an aggressive and almost universally fatal tumor. The prognosis at the time of recurrence has generally been poor, with overall survival typically in the range of 4–40 weeks. The merits of surgical resection (vs. open biopsy, to confirm recurrence via histology) in addition to conventional adjuvant chemotherapy have been the subject of longstanding debate. We wondered whether it would possible to conduct a trial at our institution to settle this question definitively with Class I evidence. RESULTS: Initially, we had hoped to conduct a randomized, unblinded prospective clinical trial. However on closer inspection it appeared that such an undertaking would pose significant practical challenges. Thus we present our protocol in draft form. In keeping with recommended outcomes for these tumors, the primary endpoint would be median progression free survival. Secondary end points would be: median overall survival (mOS, from time of recurrence) and change in Karnofsky Performance Status over time. Patients would be eligible at the time of first recurrence if they had received conventional treatment until that point and at least 1 month had elapsed since the time of radiation. All patients would be considered potentially eligible for enrollment (unless the decision regarding resection was already clear-cut in view of other factors). Using Cox’s proportional hazards model, we estimate that at least 456 patients would be necessary to demonstrate an increase in the hazard ratio to 1.3 for those undergoing biopsy alone. This magnitude of benefit is estimated based on a review of retrospective studies. DISCUSSION: If restricted to our Institution alone, which sees approximately 100–150 new cases of glioblastoma each year, a trial of this nature would be likely to take around 10 years. Furthermore, there may be significant reluctance on the part of patients and physicians to participate. There is also the opportunity cost of excluding patients from other trials to consider. We recognize that the estimate of the magnitude of effect may be conservative. As things stand, we feel that multi-institutional collaboration would almost certainly be required for an undertaking of this kind. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13104-015-1386-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-09-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4560929/ /pubmed/26341541 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1386-3 Text en © Dardis et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Correspondence
Dardis, Christopher
Ashby, Lynn
Shapiro, William
Sanai, Nader
Biopsy vs. extensive resection for first recurrence of glioblastoma: is a prospective clinical trial warranted?
title Biopsy vs. extensive resection for first recurrence of glioblastoma: is a prospective clinical trial warranted?
title_full Biopsy vs. extensive resection for first recurrence of glioblastoma: is a prospective clinical trial warranted?
title_fullStr Biopsy vs. extensive resection for first recurrence of glioblastoma: is a prospective clinical trial warranted?
title_full_unstemmed Biopsy vs. extensive resection for first recurrence of glioblastoma: is a prospective clinical trial warranted?
title_short Biopsy vs. extensive resection for first recurrence of glioblastoma: is a prospective clinical trial warranted?
title_sort biopsy vs. extensive resection for first recurrence of glioblastoma: is a prospective clinical trial warranted?
topic Correspondence
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4560929/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26341541
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1386-3
work_keys_str_mv AT dardischristopher biopsyvsextensiveresectionforfirstrecurrenceofglioblastomaisaprospectiveclinicaltrialwarranted
AT ashbylynn biopsyvsextensiveresectionforfirstrecurrenceofglioblastomaisaprospectiveclinicaltrialwarranted
AT shapirowilliam biopsyvsextensiveresectionforfirstrecurrenceofglioblastomaisaprospectiveclinicaltrialwarranted
AT sanainader biopsyvsextensiveresectionforfirstrecurrenceofglioblastomaisaprospectiveclinicaltrialwarranted