Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30446903›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2019

Histopathologic quantification of viable tumor versus treatment effect in surgically resected recurrent glioblastoma.

Stephen J Bagley, Robert D Schwab, Ernest Nelson, Angela N Viaene, Zev A Binder, Robert A Lustig, Donald M O'Rourke, Steven Brem, Arati S Desai, MacLean P Nasrallah

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Neuro-oncology practice · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
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

10 authors.

Stephen J Bagley *Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Stephen.Bagley@uphs.upenn.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7117-0539
Robert D Schwab *Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Ernest NelsonDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Angela N ViaeneDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Zev A BinderDepartment of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Robert A LustigAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Donald M O'RourkeAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Steven BremAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Arati S DesaiAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
MacLean P NasrallahDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe prognostic impact of the histopathologic features of recurrent glioblastoma surgical specimens is unknown. We sought to determine whether key histopathologic characteristics in glioblastoma tumors resected after chemoradiotherapy are associated with overall survival (OS).

methodsThe following characteristics were quantified in recurrent glioblastoma specimens at our institution: extent of viable tumor (accounting for % of specimen comprised of tumor and tumor cellularity), mitoses per 10 high-power fields (0, 1-10, > 10), Ki-67 proliferative index (0-100%), hyalinization (0-6; none to extensive), rarefaction (0-6), hemosiderin (0-6), and % of specimen comprised of geographic necrosis (0-100%; converted to 0-6 scale). Variables associated with OS in univariate analysis, as well as age, eastern cooperative oncology group performance status (ECOG PS), extent of repeat resection, time from initial diagnosis to repeat surgery, and O

results37 specimens were assessed. In a multivariate model, high Ki-67 proliferative index was the only histopathologic characteristic associated with worse OS following repeat surgery for glioblastoma (hazard ratio (HR) 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5, p = 0.003). Shorter time interval from initial diagnosis to repeat surgery (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.21, p = 0.016) and ECOG PS ≥ 2 (HR 4.19, 95% CI 1.72-10.21, p = 0.002) were also independently associated with inferior OS.

conclusionIn patients with glioblastoma undergoing repeat resection following chemoradiotherapy, high Ki-67 index in the recurrent specimen, short time to recurrence, and poor PS are independently associated with worse OS. Histopathologic quantification of viable tumor versus therapy-related changes has limited prognostic influence.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorBrain NeoplasmsDisease ProgressionDNA MethylationFemaleGlioblastomaHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeBiomarkers, TumorGlioblastomaKi-67NeuropathologyRadiation effectsRadiation therapySurvival

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.