Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Language
- English (5)
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (5)
Keywords
- Direct oral anticoagulation (1)
- Glioblastoma survival (1)
- Low-molecular-weight heparin (1)
- Oncology (1)
- Pulmonary embolism (1)
- Signs and symptoms (1)
- TTFields (1)
- Therapeutic anticoagulation (1)
- brain cancer (1)
- corticosteroids (1)
Institute
- Medizin (5)
Due to anticipated postoperative neuropsychological sequelae, patients with gliomas infiltrating the corpus callosum rarely undergo tumor resection and mostly present in a poor neurological state. We aimed at investigating the benefit of glioma resection in the corpus callosum, hypothesizing neuropsychological deficits were mainly caused by tumor presence. Between 01/2017 and 1/2020, 21 patients who underwent glioma resection in the corpus callosum were prospectively enrolled into this study. Neuropsychological function was assessed preoperatively, before discharge and after 6 months. Gross total tumor resection was possible in 15 patients, and in 6 patients subtotal tumor resection with a tumor reduction of 97.7% could be achieved. During a median observation time of 12.6 months 9 patients died from glioblastoma after a median of 17 months. Preoperatively, all cognitive domains were affected in up to two thirds of patients, who presented a median KPS of 100% (range 60–100%). After surgery, the proportion of impaired patients increased in all neurocognitive domains. Most interestingly, after 6 months, significantly fewer patients showed impairments in attention, executive functioning, memory and depression, which are domains considered crucial for everyday functionality. Thus, the results of our study strongly support our hypothesis that in patients with gliomas infiltrating the corpus callosum the benefit of tumor resection might outweigh morbidity.
Purpose: Dexamethasone (Dex) is the most common corticosteroid to treat edema in glioblastoma (GBM) patients. Recent studies identified the addition of Dex to radiation therapy (RT) to be associated with poor survival. Independently, Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) provides a novel anti-cancer modality for patients with primary and recurrent GBM. Whether Dex influences the efficacy of TTFields, however, remains elusive. Methods: Human GBM cell lines MZ54 and U251 were treated with RT or TTFields in combination with Dex and the effects on cell counts and cell death were determined via flow cytometry. We further performed a retrospective analysis of GBM patients with TTFields treatment +/- concomitant Dex and analysed its impact on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: The addition of Dex significantly reduced the efficacy of RT in U251, but not in MZ54 cells. TTFields (200 kHz/250 kHz) induced massive cell death in both cell lines. Concomitant treatment of TTFields and Dex did not reduce the overall efficacy of TTFields. Further, in our retrospective clinical analysis, we found that the addition of Dex to TTFields therapy did not influence PFS nor OS. Conclusion: Our translational investigation indicates that the efficacy of TTFields therapy in patients with GBM and GBM cell lines is not affected by the addition of Dex.
Background: Dexamethasone (Dex) is the most common corticosteroid to treat edema in glioblastoma (GBM) patients. Recent studies identified the addition of Dex to radiation therapy (RT) to be associated with poor survival. Independently, Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) provides a novel anti-cancer modality for patients with primary and recurrent GBM. Whether Dex influences the efficacy of TTFields, however, remains elusive.
Methods: Human GBM cell lines MZ54 and U251 were treated with RT or TTFields in combination with Dex and the effects on cell counts and cell death were determined via flow cytometry. We further performed a retrospective analysis of GBM patients with TTFields treatment +/- concomitant Dex and analysed its impact on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS).
Results: The addition of Dex significantly reduced the efficacy of RT in U251 and MZ54 cells. TTFields (200 kHz/250 kHz) induced massive cell death in both cell lines. Concomitant treatment of TTFields and Dex did not reduce the overall efficacy of TTFields. Further, in our retrospective clinical analysis, we found that the addition of Dex to TTFields therapy did not influence PFS nor OS.
Conclusion: Our translational investigation indicates that the efficacy of TTFields therapy in patients with GBM and primary GBM cell lines is not affected by the addition of Dex.
Glioblastoma (GBM) is a cancer type with high thrombogenic potential and GBM patients are therefore at a particularly high risk for thrombotic events. To date, only limited data on anticoagulation management after pulmonary embolism (PE) in GBM is available and the sporadic use of DOACs remains off-label. A retrospective cohort analysis of patients with GBM and postoperative, thoracic CT scan confirmed PE was performed. Clinical course, follow-up at 6 and 12 months and the overall survival (OS) were evaluated using medical charts and neuroradiological data. Out of 584 GBM patients, 8% suffered from postoperative PE. Out of these, 30% received direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and 70% low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for therapeutic anticoagulation. There was no significant difference in major intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), re-thrombosis, or re-embolism between the two cohorts. Although statistically non-significant, a tendency to reduced mRS at 6 and 12 months was observed in the LMWH cohort. Furthermore, patients receiving DOACs had a statistical benefit in OS. In our analysis, DOACs showed a satisfactory safety profile in terms of major ICH, re-thrombosis, and re-embolism compared to LMWH in GBM patients with postoperative PE. Prospective, randomized trials are urgent to evaluate DOACs for therapeutic anticoagulation in GBM patients with PE.
Background: Glioblastoma (GBM) is a cancer type with high thrombogenic potential and GBM patients are therefore at a particularly high risk for thrombotic events. To date only limited data on anticoagulation management after pulmonary embolism (PE) in GBM is available and the sporadic use of DOACs remains off-label.
Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of patients with GBM and postoperative, thoracic CT-scan confirmed, PE was performed. Clinical course, follow-up at 6 and 12 months and the overall survival (OS) were evaluated using medical charts and neuroradiological data.
Results: Out of 584 GBM patients, 8% suffered from postoperative PE. Out of theses, 30% received direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and 70% low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for therapeutic anticoagulation. There was no significant difference in major intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), re-thrombosis or re-embolism between the two cohorts. Although statistically non-significant, a tendency to reduced mRS at 6- and 12 months was observed in the LMWH cohort. Furthermore, patients receiving DOACs had a statistical benefit in OS.
Conclusion: In our analysis DOACs showed a satisfactory safety profile in terms of major ICH, re-thrombosis and re-embolism compared to LMWH in GBM patients with postoperative PE. Prospective, randomized trials are urgent to evaluate DOACs for therapeutic anticoagulation in GBM patients with PE.