Ki67 Index Is the Most Powerful Factor for Predicting the Recurrence in Atypical Meningioma : Retrospective Analysis of 99 Patients in Two Institutes

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to identify predicting factors for local control (LC) of atypical meningioma, and we validated them with comparing the predicting factors for recurrence-free survival (RFS). We also examined the rate of LC after surgical resection with or without adjuvant treatment and RFS. METHODS: Clinical and radiological records of patients with atypical meningiomas diagnosed at two institutes from January 2000 to December 2018 were reviewed retrospectively. Histopathological features were also reviewed using formalin-fixed paraffin embedded samples from pathological archives. RESULTS: Of the 99 atypical meningiomas eligible for analysis, 36 (36.4%) recurred during the follow-up period (mean, 83.3 months; range, 12–232 months). The rate of 3-year LC and 5-year LC was 80.8% and 74.7%, respectively. The mean time-to-recurrence was 49.4 months (range, 12–150). The mean RFS was 149.3 months (95% confidence interval, 128.8–169.8 months) during the mean follow-up duration of 83.3 months (range, 12–232 months). Multivariate analysis using Cox proportional-hazard regression model showed that the extent of resection (hazard ratio [HR], 4.761; p=0.013), Ki67 index (HR, 8.541; p=0.004), mitotic index (HR, 3.275; p=0.044), and tumor size (HR, 3.228; p=0.041) were independently associated with LC. These factors were also statistically associated with RFS. In terms of radiotherapy after surgical resection, the recurrence was not prevented by immediate radiotherapy because of the strong effect of proliferative index on recurrence. CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that the extent of resection, proliferative index (according to Ki67 expression) and mitotic index, and tumor size are associated with recurrence of atypical meningiomas. However, our results should be further validated through prospective and randomized clinical trials to overcome the inborn bias of retrospective nature of the study design.