| Title |
Prognostic implication of progression pattern after anti-VEGF bevacizumab treatment for recurrent malignant gliomas
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11060-015-1808-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Byung Sup Kim, Sung Kwon Kim, Seung Hong Choi, Se-Hoon Lee, Ho Jun Seol, Do-Hyun Nam, Jung-Il Lee, Chul-Kee Park, Doo-Sik Kong |
| Abstract |
Malignant glioma treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) bevacizumab show progression patterns that vary with different mechanisms of resistance. We evaluated the clinico-radiological data of 71 patients with progressive malignant glioma treated with bevacizumab to determine the prognostic value of the differential outcome of each progression pattern. Progression patterns were categorized as three types based on the initial response to bevacizumab and serious changes of MR images i.e., non-enhancing infiltration, flare-up of contrast enhancement (CE) and primary non-responder progression. We analyzed the clinical outcome in each type of progression using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Analysis of progression patterns showed that incidence of non-enhancing infiltration progression (28.1 %) was less common than flare-up of CE or primary non-responder pattern. The time from initiation of bevacizumab to development of non-enhancing infiltration or flare-up of CE progression was longer than for progression in primary non-responders. There was no significant difference of overall survival, progression-free survival from start of bevacizumab therapy, survival after bevacizumab failure between non-enhancing infiltration and flare-up of CE patterns. However, in the non-enhancing infiltration pattern, early appearance of enhancement was observed after bevacizumab was discontinued, resulting in poor survival, as compared to flare-up of CE pattern (P = 0.01). Although the appearance of non-enhancing infiltration after bevacizumab does not imply a worse prognosis, discontinuation of therapy can aggravate the clinical course. |
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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 14 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 20% |
| Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 40% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 7% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 7% |
| Engineering | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 40% |
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 31 May 2015.
All research outputs
#18,411,569
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#2,235
of 2,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,047
of 267,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#28
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,968 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 267,398 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.