| Title |
Benefit of re-operation and salvage therapies for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: results from a single institution
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11060-017-2383-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. Azoulay, F. Santos, G. Shenouda, K. Petrecca, A. Oweida, M. C. Guiot, S. Owen, V. Panet-Raymond, L. Souhami, Bassam S. Abdulkarim |
| Abstract |
The optimal management of recurrent glioblastoma (GBM) has yet to be determined. We aim to assess the benefits of re-operation and salvage therapies (chemotherapy and/or re-irradiation) for recurrent GBM and to identify prognostic factors associated with better survival. All patients who underwent surgery for GBM between January 2005 and December 2012 followed by adjuvant radiotherapy, and who developed GBM recurrence on imaging were included in this retrospective study. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed using Cox models in order to identify factors associated with overall survival (OS). One hundred and eighty patients treated to a dose of 60 Gy were diagnosed with recurrent GBM. At a median follow-up time of 6.2 months, the median survival (MS) from time of recurrence was 6.6 months. Sixty-nine patients underwent repeat surgery for recurrence based on imaging. To establish the benefits of repeat surgery and salvage therapies, 68 patients who underwent repeat surgery were matched to patients who did not based on extent of initial resection and presence of subventricular zone involvement at recurrence. MS for patients who underwent re-operation was 9.6 months, compared to 5.3 months for patients who did not have repeat surgery (p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis in the matched pairs confirmed that repeat surgery with the addition of other salvage treatment can significantly affect patient outcome (HR 0.53). Re-operation with additional salvage therapies for recurrent GBM provides survival prolongation at the time of progression. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 57 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 16% |
| Researcher | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 20 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 39% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 25 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 April 2018.
All research outputs
#20,438,227
of 22,992,311 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#2,587
of 2,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,262
of 308,954 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#51
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,992,311 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,987 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,954 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.