Re-irradiation in elderly patients with glioblastoma: a single institution experience.
Elderly
Glioblastoma
Overall survival
Re-irradiation
Recurrent glioblastoma
Journal
Journal of neuro-oncology
ISSN: 1573-7373
Titre abrégé: J Neurooncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8309335
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Apr 2019
Historique:
received:
10
10
2018
accepted:
11
01
2019
pubmed:
20
1
2019
medline:
20
8
2019
entrez:
20
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Re-Irradiation (Re-RT) is an established treatment option for young patients with recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). Multiple reports show a low risk of side-effects as well as a good efficacy resulting in median survival times ranging from 5 to 18 months. Elderly patients, however, are underrepresented in reports about Re-RT. Even in the elderly, with concomitant radiochemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy, progression-free survival times now are approaching 6 months or even longer. We report on 25 consecutive patients with at least 65 years of age treated with Re-RT for recurrent GBM. We analyzed the patient's files for the treatment regimens, side-effects and survival times. Survival times, as well as hazards, were calculated by the Kaplan Meier method as well as Cox-regression method, respectively. The median overall survival was 6.9 months, treatment was well tolerated with only minor side effects. Use of systemic treatments as well as the length of the interval between 1st -line radiotherapy and re-irradiation were associated with a favorable prognosis. The latter remained significant after multivariate analysis. Re-RT of elderly GBM patients should not be withheld based purely on age since the treatment is safe and results in comparable survival times to younger patients. When counseling elderly patients with recurrent GBM, especially the length of the interval since 1st line radiotherapy should be considered as a prognostic factor and an additional systemic treatment option should be considered.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Re-Irradiation (Re-RT) is an established treatment option for young patients with recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). Multiple reports show a low risk of side-effects as well as a good efficacy resulting in median survival times ranging from 5 to 18 months. Elderly patients, however, are underrepresented in reports about Re-RT. Even in the elderly, with concomitant radiochemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy, progression-free survival times now are approaching 6 months or even longer.
METHODS
METHODS
We report on 25 consecutive patients with at least 65 years of age treated with Re-RT for recurrent GBM. We analyzed the patient's files for the treatment regimens, side-effects and survival times. Survival times, as well as hazards, were calculated by the Kaplan Meier method as well as Cox-regression method, respectively.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The median overall survival was 6.9 months, treatment was well tolerated with only minor side effects. Use of systemic treatments as well as the length of the interval between 1st -line radiotherapy and re-irradiation were associated with a favorable prognosis. The latter remained significant after multivariate analysis.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Re-RT of elderly GBM patients should not be withheld based purely on age since the treatment is safe and results in comparable survival times to younger patients. When counseling elderly patients with recurrent GBM, especially the length of the interval since 1st line radiotherapy should be considered as a prognostic factor and an additional systemic treatment option should be considered.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30659523
doi: 10.1007/s11060-019-03101-6
pii: 10.1007/s11060-019-03101-6
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
327-335Références
J Clin Oncol. 2004 May 1;22(9):1583-8
pubmed: 15051755
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Dec 1;23(34):8863-9
pubmed: 16314646
N Engl J Med. 2007 Apr 12;356(15):1527-35
pubmed: 17429084
Strahlenther Onkol. 2009 Apr;185(4):235-40
pubmed: 19370426
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Apr 10;28(11):1963-72
pubmed: 20231676
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Apr 1;79(5):1487-95
pubmed: 20399573
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Jul;13(7):707-15
pubmed: 22578793
Acta Oncol. 2013 Jan;52(1):147-52
pubmed: 22686472
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Sep;13(9):916-26
pubmed: 22877848
Cancers (Basel). 2011 Oct 28;3(4):4061-89
pubmed: 24213125
Lancet Oncol. 2014 Aug;15(9):e395-403
pubmed: 25079102
Clin Cancer Res. 2014 Dec 15;20(24):6304-13
pubmed: 25338498
J Neurooncol. 2016 May;128(1):85-92
pubmed: 26907492
Acta Oncol. 2017 Mar;56(3):422-426
pubmed: 28075197
N Engl J Med. 2017 Mar 16;376(11):1027-1037
pubmed: 28296618
Strahlenther Onkol. 2017 Jun;193(6):510-512
pubmed: 28409249
Radiat Oncol. 2017 Apr 28;12(1):77
pubmed: 28454549
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Jun;18(6):e315-e329
pubmed: 28483413
Strahlenther Onkol. 2017 Nov;193(11):897-909
pubmed: 28616821
PLoS One. 2017 Jul 5;12(7):e0180457
pubmed: 28678889
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018 Jan 1;100(1):38-44
pubmed: 29102648
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018 Aug 1;101(5):1087-1095
pubmed: 29885994
J Neurooncol. 2019 Mar;142(1):79-90
pubmed: 30523605