1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      P01.105 Clinical and imaging features of pseudoprogression in malignant glioma.

      abstract

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Pseudoprogression (PP) likely represents a unique phenomenon encountered in high-grade glioma patients within the first six months of combined chemoradiation. As PP mimics recurrent disease, patients may need a tissue biopsy to guide management. We here characterize the clinical and imaging features of biopsy-proven PP, aiming to establish pre-selection criteria for patients requiring biopsy.

          Material and Methods

          Clinical, radiographic, and histopathological data of patients with malignant glioma and biopsy-proven PP (defined as appearance ≤6 months post radiotherapy (RT) initiation) were retrospectively analyzed. The spatiotemporal pattern of each imaging event/lesion diagnosed as PP defined a region of interest (ROI) and was evaluated via standard T1+C weighted MRI sequences and spatially correlated to the RT treatment plan. Additional non-biopsied ROIs in the same patient with radiographic PP were included in the analysis.

          Results

          24 patients with biopsy-proven PP were analyzed. All had high-grade gliomas, the vast majority of which were glioblastomas (WHO Grade IV; 87.5%). Tumor pathology revealed MGMT-promoter methylation in 53% (n=9/17), EGFR amplification in 33% (n=7/21) and IDH mutation in 6% (n=1/16). Patient male-to-female ratio was approximately 2:1 and median age at diagnosis was 57.5 years (range: 32 -76 years). All patients underwent RT, 83% had concurrent and adjuvant TMZ-based chemotherapy. Median OS from initial diagnosis was 2.2 years; 12.5% of patients reached 5-year OS. 27 individual radiographic ROIs (n=26 biopsy-proven, n=1 radiographically diagnosed) were analyzed in our cohort. While histopathology of most specimens revealed tissue necrosis, 27% (7/26) showed findings of treatment effect intermixed with foci of solid tumor. Median onset of PP from RT initiation was 2 months (range: 7.5 weeks - 6 months) and associated with new symptoms in over two-thirds of patients, most of which (75%) required steroid treatment.Most patients developed a single ROI (median=1; range: 1 - 5 ROIs) of non-nodular, ring-like enhancing appearance around the tumor resection cavity (RC). Individual ROI size was highly variable (median=3.7 cm 2; range: 0.5 - 32 cm 2; n=16/27) and only one-fourth of ROIs were located at a distance from the RC (range: 1,2 - 6 cm). Accordingly, 100% of ROIs were located within the main radiation field.

          Conclusion

          PP was enriched in patients with glioblastoma, occurring mostly within 2 months after chemoradiation as a single, ring-like enhancing lesion of variable size. Lesions located to areas exposed to maximum therapeutic radiation dosages, and patients were typically symptomatic requiring anti-edematous therapy and/or surgical debulking. The considerable incidence of lesions with mixed pathology highlights the diagnostic challenge associated with this important neuro-oncological condition.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Neuro Oncol
          Neuro-oncology
          neuonc
          Neuro-Oncology
          Oxford University Press (US )
          1522-8517
          1523-5866
          September 2018
          19 September 2018
          : 20
          : Suppl 3 , 13th Meeting of the European Association of Neurooncology October 10-14, 2018 Stockholm, Sweden
          : iii255
          Affiliations
          [1 ]MGH Cancer Center and Center for Regenerative Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
          [2 ]Department of Neurosurgery, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
          [3 ]Biostatistics Center, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
          [4 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
          [5 ]C S Kubik Laboratory for Neuropathology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
          [6 ]Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
          Article
          PMC6144384 PMC6144384 6144384 noy139.147
          10.1093/neuonc/noy139.147
          6144384
          588ae3c5-e8d7-44e9-986c-1f78ba440620
          © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com

          This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)

          History
          Page count
          Pages: 1
          Categories
          Poster Presentations
          P01 Glioma - Clinical Aspects

          Comments

          Comment on this article