15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Call for Papers: Beyond Biology: The Crucial Role of Sex and Gender in Oncology

      Submit here before July 31, 2024

      About Oncology Research and Treatment: 2.0 Impact Factor I 3.2 CiteScore I 0.521 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Diagnosis and Management of Multifocal Gliomas

      case-report

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      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

          Patients who present with multiple cerebral tumors are usually considered as having metastatic disease. If they have a history of a primary cancer in another site, the brain tumors are considered metastases and are usually managed with standard whole-brain radiotherapy. If no primary cancer site is known, a diagnostic work-up is performed, but if no primary site is found, they are still considered as brain metastases from an unknown primary site. Thus, such patients can either have brain biopsy (recommended) for further diagnostic consideration or, occasionally, they can be treated with whole-brain radiotherapy, depending on the age, performance status and wish of the patient. However, in some of these patients the multiple brain tumors represent multifocal glioma rather than metastases, resulting in incorrect treatment. In such cases, various MRI characteristics may be helpful in directing towards the correct diagnosis. Thus, patients who present with multiple brain tumors should not always be considered to have metastatic disease even if they have a previous diagnosis of systemic cancer, and multifocal glioma should be ruled out.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          FDA drug approval summary: bevacizumab (Avastin) as treatment of recurrent glioblastoma multiforme.

          On May 5, 2009, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval to bevacizumab injection (Avastin; Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA) as a single agent for patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) with progressive disease following prior therapy. The approval was based on durable objective responses (independent radiologic review with stable or decreasing corticosteroid use). Two trials evaluating bevacizumab, 10 mg/kg by i.v. infusion every 2 weeks, were submitted. One trial also randomized patients to bevacizumab plus irinotecan treatment. All patients had received prior surgery, radiotherapy, and temozolomide. Patients with active brain hemorrhage were excluded. One trial enrolled 78 independently confirmed GBM patients. Partial responses were observed in 25.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.0%-36.1%) of the patients. The median response duration was 4.2 months (95% CI, 3.0-5.7 months). The second trial enrolled 56 GBM patients. Partial responses were observed in 19.6% (95% CI, 10.9%-31.3%) of the patients. The median response duration was 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.4-17.4 months). Safety data were provided for the first study. The most frequently reported bevacizumab adverse events of any grade were infection, fatigue, headache, hypertension, epistaxis, and diarrhea. Grade 3-5 bevacizumab-related adverse events included bleeding/hemorrhage, central nervous system (CNS) hemorrhage, hypertension, venous and arterial thromboembolic events, wound-healing complications, proteinuria, gastrointestinal perforation, and reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy. The attribution of certain adverse events (e.g., CNS hemorrhage, wound-healing complications, and thromboembolic events) to either bevacizumab, underlying disease, or both could not be determined because of the single-arm, noncomparative study design.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Relationship of glioblastoma multiforme to neural stem cell regions predicts invasive and multifocal tumor phenotype.

            Neural stem cells with astrocyte-like characteristics exist in the human brain subventricular zone (SVZ), and these cells may give rise to glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). We therefore analyzed MRI features of GBMs in specific relation to the SVZ. We reviewed the preoperative and serial postoperative MR images of 53 patients with newly diagnosed GBM. The spatial relationship of the contrast-enhancing lesion (CEL) with the SVZ and cortex was determined preoperatively. Classification was as follows: group I, CEL contacting SVZ and infiltrating cortex; group II, CEL contacting SVZ but not involving cortex; group III, CEL not contacting SVZ but involving cortex; and group IV, CEL neither contacting SVZ nor infiltrating cortex. Patients with group I GBMs (n = 16) were most likely to have multifocal disease at diagnosis (9 patients, 56%, p = 0.001). In contrast, group IV GBMs (n = 14) were never multifocal. Group II (n = 14) and group III (n = 9) GBMs were multifocal in 11% and 29% of cases, respectively. Group I GBMs always had tumor recurrences noncontiguous with the initial lesion(s), while group IV GBM recurrences were always bordering the primary lesion. Group I GBMs may be most related to SVZ stem cells; these tumors were in intimate contact with the SVZ, were most likely to be multifocal at diagnosis, and recurred at great distances to the initial lesion(s). In contrast, group IV GBMs were always solitary lesions; these may arise from non-SVZ, white matter glial progenitors. Our MRI-based classification of GBMs may further our understanding of GBM histogenesis and help predict tumor recurrence pattern.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Multifocal glioblastoma multiforme: prognostic factors and patterns of progression.

              To assess the progression patterns in patients with multifocal glioblastoma multiforme who had undergone whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT), the historical standard, versus three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, and to identify predictive treatment and pretreatment factors. The records of 50 patients with multifocal glioblastoma multiforme treated with RT were reviewed. Univariate analyses were performed using survival methods and the Cox proportional hazards regression method. Multivariate analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazards regression method. The mean age was 61 years, and 71% had a Karnofsky performance status (KPS) score of > or =70. Of the 50 patients, 32% underwent WBRT and 68%, three-dimensional conformal RT. Progression was local in all evaluable patients, as determined by imaging in 38 patients and early neurologic progression in 12. The median time to progression (TTP) was 3.1 months, and the median survival time (MST) was 8.1 months. The significant independent predictors of TTP on multivariate analysis were a KPS score <70 (p = 0.001), the extent of surgery (p = 0.040), a radiation dose <60 Gy (p = 0.027), and the lack of chemotherapy (p = 0.001). The significant independent predictors of a reduced MST were a KPS score <70 (p = 0.022) and the absence of salvage surgery (p = 0.011) and salvage chemotherapy (p = 0.003). Local progression was observed in all patients. On multivariate analysis, no significant difference was found in the TTP or MST between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and WBRT. The KPS was a consistent independent predictor of both TTP and MST. On the basis of the progression pattern, we do not recommend WBRT as a mandatory component of the treatment of multifocal glioblastoma multiforme.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                OCL
                Oncology
                10.1159/issn.0030-2414
                Oncology
                S. Karger AG
                0030-2414
                1423-0232
                2010
                March 2011
                17 March 2011
                : 79
                : 3-4
                : 306-312
                Affiliations
                aDepartment of Neurology and bNeurosurgical Research Institute, University of Ioannina School of Medicine, Ioannina, Greece
                Author notes
                *Sotirios Giannopoulos, MD, DSc, Department of Neurology, University of Ioannina School of Medicine, University Campus, GR–45110 Ioannina (Greece), Tel. +30 26510 07514, E-Mail sgiannop@uoi.gr
                Article
                323492 Oncology 2010;79:306–312
                10.1159/000323492
                21412017
                c0e700cc-e23c-4f3e-89a0-d7fc592b40fc
                © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                : 10 August 2010
                : 24 November 2010
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 2, Pages: 7
                Categories
                Review

                Oncology & Radiotherapy,Pathology,Surgery,Obstetrics & Gynecology,Pharmacology & Pharmaceutical medicine,Hematology
                Chemotherapy,Glioblastoma,Multifocal glioma,Radiotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article