The effect of tumor growth kinetics on survival and time toxicity after resection of recurrent glioblastoma.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Adeline L Fecker, Cooper Stateler, Molly Joyce, Sidharth Sengupta, Hanna E Minns, Joseph G Nugent, Jordan L Smith, Seunggu Jude Han, Matthew D Wood, Ahmed M Raslan, Ramon F Barajas, Stephen G Bowden
{"title":"The effect of tumor growth kinetics on survival and time toxicity after resection of recurrent glioblastoma.","authors":"Adeline L Fecker, Cooper Stateler, Molly Joyce, Sidharth Sengupta, Hanna E Minns, Joseph G Nugent, Jordan L Smith, Seunggu Jude Han, Matthew D Wood, Ahmed M Raslan, Ramon F Barajas, Stephen G Bowden","doi":"10.3171/2025.5.FOCUS25331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Reoperation for recurrent glioblastoma (GBM) remains controversial but is commonly offered to maximize patient quality of life (QOL) and functional status. While there is mixed evidence that waiting for surgery in primary GBM does not affect survival, this has not been studied in the context of recurrent disease, which is more aggressive. The aim of this study was to assess how recurrent tumor kinetics (i.e., tumor growth relative to the time to resection) affect survival and QOL, as measured by time toxicity, after repeat resection in patients with recurrent GBM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospectively collected database was queried for patients with first-time recurrent IDH-wildtype GBM, with progression confirmed by the modified Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria, from 2012 to 2022. Only patients who were recommended surgery as the first-line treatment for disease progression were included. Recursive partitioning analysis was used to automatically detect growth rate and time to repeat resection (TTRR) thresholds that affected repeat resection survival (RRS). Time toxicity was the percentage of days of medical contact for the TTRR and RRS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-three patients were included in the analysis. The median TTRR of the overall cohort was 27.2 days (range 1-90 days), with a mean TTRR time toxicity of 25.2% (SD 29.2%). The median RRS was 270 days (range 23-1495 days), with a mean RRS time toxicity of 19.3% (SD 17.7%). Patients with tumor growth of 0.08 cm3 per day or faster (faster-growth group) had significantly worse RRS (p = 0.004) and time toxicity (p = 0.016). Patients who underwent repeat resection ≥ 43 days (longer TTRR group) after confirmed progression had significantly worse survival (p = 0.015) and the time toxicity increased after surgery (11.6% to 25.1%, p = 0.014). While there was no significant survival difference between the faster tumor growth and longer TTRR group compared with the faster growth and shorter TTRR group (p = 0.20), the group with faster tumor growth but shorter TTRR had better survival (median 179 days vs 81 days).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Faster-growing GBM recurrence was associated with worse survival and time toxicity. Patients with a shorter time to surgery had improved survival compared with those with longer wait times, and this effect partially attenuated the poor risk of fast tumor growth. Therefore, tumor kinetics in recurrent GBM appear to be an important consideration for patient prognosis and QOL after surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":19187,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgical focus","volume":"59 2","pages":"E3"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgical focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2025.5.FOCUS25331","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Reoperation for recurrent glioblastoma (GBM) remains controversial but is commonly offered to maximize patient quality of life (QOL) and functional status. While there is mixed evidence that waiting for surgery in primary GBM does not affect survival, this has not been studied in the context of recurrent disease, which is more aggressive. The aim of this study was to assess how recurrent tumor kinetics (i.e., tumor growth relative to the time to resection) affect survival and QOL, as measured by time toxicity, after repeat resection in patients with recurrent GBM.

Methods: A prospectively collected database was queried for patients with first-time recurrent IDH-wildtype GBM, with progression confirmed by the modified Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria, from 2012 to 2022. Only patients who were recommended surgery as the first-line treatment for disease progression were included. Recursive partitioning analysis was used to automatically detect growth rate and time to repeat resection (TTRR) thresholds that affected repeat resection survival (RRS). Time toxicity was the percentage of days of medical contact for the TTRR and RRS.

Results: Seventy-three patients were included in the analysis. The median TTRR of the overall cohort was 27.2 days (range 1-90 days), with a mean TTRR time toxicity of 25.2% (SD 29.2%). The median RRS was 270 days (range 23-1495 days), with a mean RRS time toxicity of 19.3% (SD 17.7%). Patients with tumor growth of 0.08 cm3 per day or faster (faster-growth group) had significantly worse RRS (p = 0.004) and time toxicity (p = 0.016). Patients who underwent repeat resection ≥ 43 days (longer TTRR group) after confirmed progression had significantly worse survival (p = 0.015) and the time toxicity increased after surgery (11.6% to 25.1%, p = 0.014). While there was no significant survival difference between the faster tumor growth and longer TTRR group compared with the faster growth and shorter TTRR group (p = 0.20), the group with faster tumor growth but shorter TTRR had better survival (median 179 days vs 81 days).

Conclusions: Faster-growing GBM recurrence was associated with worse survival and time toxicity. Patients with a shorter time to surgery had improved survival compared with those with longer wait times, and this effect partially attenuated the poor risk of fast tumor growth. Therefore, tumor kinetics in recurrent GBM appear to be an important consideration for patient prognosis and QOL after surgery.

肿瘤生长动力学对复发性胶质母细胞瘤切除术后生存和时间毒性的影响。
目的:复发性胶质母细胞瘤(GBM)的再手术仍有争议,但通常是为了最大限度地提高患者的生活质量(QOL)和功能状态。虽然有不同的证据表明原发性GBM患者等待手术不影响生存,但尚未在复发性疾病的背景下进行研究,复发性疾病更具侵袭性。本研究的目的是评估复发性GBM患者重复切除后,复发肿瘤动力学(即肿瘤生长相对于切除时间)如何影响生存和生活质量(以时间毒性衡量)。方法:前瞻性收集2012年至2022年首次复发的idh -野生型GBM患者的数据库,并通过神经肿瘤学标准的改进反应评估证实其进展。仅包括被推荐手术作为疾病进展一线治疗的患者。采用递归划分分析自动检测影响重复切除生存率(RRS)的生长速率和重复切除时间(TTRR)阈值。时间毒性是指TTRR和RRS医疗接触天数的百分比。结果:73例患者纳入分析。整个队列的中位TTRR为27.2天(范围1-90天),平均TTRR时间毒性为25.2% (SD为29.2%)。中位RRS为270天(范围23-1495天),平均RRS时间毒性为19.3% (SD 17.7%)。肿瘤生长速度为每天0.08 cm3或更快的患者(较快生长组)的RRS (p = 0.004)和时间毒性(p = 0.016)明显较差。确认进展后重复切除≥43天的患者(TTRR较长的组)生存期明显较差(p = 0.015),术后毒性时间增加(11.6% ~ 25.1%,p = 0.014)。肿瘤生长较快TTRR较长组与肿瘤生长较快TTRR较短组相比,生存期无显著差异(p = 0.20),但肿瘤生长较快TTRR较短组的生存期更好(中位179天vs 81天)。结论:快速生长的GBM复发与较差的生存和时间毒性相关。与等待时间较长的患者相比,手术时间较短的患者生存率更高,这种效果部分降低了肿瘤快速生长的低风险。因此,复发性GBM的肿瘤动力学似乎是患者预后和术后生活质量的重要考虑因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurosurgical focus
Neurosurgical focus CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
261
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信