Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30284233›Full record

ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2019

Re-irradiation of recurrent glioblastoma as part of a sequential multimodality treatment concept.

E Bräutigam, C Lampl, C Track, C Nieder, J Pichler, J Hammer, H Geinitz

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Reirradiation with radiosurgery or stereotactic fractionated radiotherapy in association with regorafenib in recurrent glioblastoma.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2024
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

E BräutigamDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ordensklinikum Barmherzige Schwestern Linz, Seilerstätte 4, 4010, Linz, Austria. elisabeth.braeutigam@ordensklinikum.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7652-4220
C LamplDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, Ordensklinikum Barmherzige Schwestern Linz, Linz, Austria.
C TrackDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ordensklinikum Barmherzige Schwestern Linz, Seilerstätte 4, 4010, Linz, Austria.
C NiederDepartment of Oncology and Palliative Medicine, Nordland Hospital Trust, 8092, Bodø, Norway.
J PichlerNeurooncology, Neuromedcampus Linz, Linz, Austria.
J HammerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ordensklinikum Barmherzige Schwestern Linz, Seilerstätte 4, 4010, Linz, Austria.
H GeinitzDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ordensklinikum Barmherzige Schwestern Linz, Seilerstätte 4, 4010, Linz, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate survival outcomes in well-performing, mainly, young patients receiving a sequence of all available therapeutic options for relapsed glioblastoma, including re-irradiation.

methodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of 27 patients irradiated twice for glioblastoma between 2008 and 2016. In the first line, all had surgical treatment of the tumor followed by radiotherapy with a total dose of 60 Gy and temozolomide. All re-irradiated patients were treated with a total dose of 36 Gy in 12 fractions. The endpoints were death from glioblastoma or any cause, and toxicity after re-irradiation.

resultsThe median follow-up of survivors was 35.6 months. At the time of analysis, 25 patients had died. The median time between first and second radiotherapy was 18.9 months (6.1-58.4). Re-irradiation was performed at different time points of first, second and third progression. The median overall survival after first diagnosis was 39.2 months. Five years after first surgery, nearly 20% of the patients were alive.

conclusionCarefully planned re-irradiation of the brain is a safe therapy for recurrent glioblastoma. Younger and well-performing patients benefit from all available therapy options. Every patient should be discussed in a multidisciplinary setting at each time point of tumor progression. Further prospective studies are needed to define the optimal time, dose and volume of re-irradiation.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBrain NeoplasmsCombined Modality TherapyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGlioblastomaHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPrognosisRe-IrradiationRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateGlioblastoma multiformeMultidisciplinary settingRadiotherapyRe-irradiation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.