↓ Skip to main content

Management of patients with recurrence of diffuse low grade glioma

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuro-Oncology, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
Title
Management of patients with recurrence of diffuse low grade glioma
Published in
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11060-015-1910-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian V. Nahed, Navid Redjal, Daniel J. Brat, Andrew S. Chi, Kevin Oh, Tracy T. Batchelor, Timothy C. Ryken, Steven N. Kalkanis, Jeffrey J. Olson

Abstract

These recommendations apply to adult patients with recurrent low-grade glioma (LGG) with initial pathologic diagnosis of a WHO grade II infiltrative glioma (oligodendroglioma, astrocytoma, or oligo-astrocytoma). QUESTION : Do pathologic and molecular characteristics predict outcome/malignant transformation at recurrence? IDH STATUS AND RECURRENCE : (Level III) IDH mutation status should be determined as LGGs with IDH mutations have a shortened time to recurrence. It is unclear whether knowledge of IDH mutation status provides benefit in predicting time to progression or overall survival. TP53 STATUS AND RECURRENCE : (Level III) TP53 mutations occur early in LGG pathogenesis, remain stable, and are not recommended as a marker of predisposition to malignant transformation at recurrence or other measures of prognosis. MGMT STATUS AND RECURRENCE : (Level III) Assessment of MGMT status is recommended as an adjunct to assessing prognosis as LGGs with MGMT promoter methylation are associated with shorter PFS (in the absence of TMZ) and longer post-recurrence survival (in the presence of TMZ), ultimately producing similar overall survival to LGGs without MGMT methylationThe available retrospective reports are conflicting and comparisons between reports are limited CDK2NA STATUS AND RECURRENCE : (Level III) Assessment of CDK2NA status is recommended when possible as the loss of expression of the CDK2NA via either methylation or loss of chromosome 9p is associated with malignant progression of LGGs. PROLIFERATIVE INDEX AND RECURRENCE : (Level III) It is recommended that proliferative indices (MIB-1 or BUdR) be measured in LGGs as higher proliferation indices are associated with increased likelihood of recurrence and shorter progression free and overall survival. 1P/19Q STATUS AND RECURRENCE : There is insufficient evidence to make any recommendations. QUESTION : What role does chemotherapy have in LGG recurrence? TEMOZOLOMIDE AND RECURRENCE : (Level III) Temozolomide is recommended in the therapy of recurrent LGG as it may improve clinical symptoms. Oligodendrogliomas and tumors with 1p/19q co-deletion may derive the most benefit. PCV AND RECURRENCE : (Level III) PCV is recommended in the therapy of LGG at recurrence as it may improve clinical symptoms with the strongest evidence being for oligodendrogliomas. CARBOPLATIN AND RECURRENCE : (Level III) Carboplatin is not recommended as there is no significant benefit from carboplatin as single agent therapy for recurrent LGGs. OTHER TREATMENTS (NITROSUREAS, HYDROXYUREA/IMANITIB, IRINOTECAN, PACLITAXEL) AND RECURRENCE : There is insufficient evidence to make any recommendations. It is recommended that individuals with recurrent LGGs be enrolled in a properly designed clinical trial to assess these chemotherapeutic agents. QUESTION : What role does radiation have in LGG recurrence? RADIATION AT RECURRENCE WITH NO PREVIOUS IRRADIATION : (Level III) Radiation is recommended at recurrence if there was no previous radiation treatment. RE-IRRADIATION AT RECURRENCE : (Level III) It is recommended that re-irradiation be considered in the setting of LGG recurrence as it may provide benefit in disease control. There is insufficient evidence to make any specific recommendations. It is recommended that individuals with recurrent LGGs be enrolled in a properly designed clinical trial to assess the role of surgery at recurrence.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 94 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 14 15%
Student > Postgraduate 11 12%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 10%
Other 24 26%
Unknown 17 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 51%
Neuroscience 9 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Psychology 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 25 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 November 2015.
All research outputs
#18,430,119
of 22,832,057 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#2,236
of 2,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,178
of 285,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#44
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,832,057 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 2,970 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 285,121 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 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.