Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38551747›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2024

Hypofractionated re-irradiation with bevacizumab for relapsed chemorefractory glioblastoma after prior high dose radiotherapy: a feasible option for patients with large-volume relapse.

Elissa Tong, Patrick Horsley, Helen Wheeler, Matthew Wong, Venkatesha Venkatesha, Joseph Chan, Marina Kastelan, Michael Back

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elissa TongNorthern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Reserve Rd, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia. elissa.tong@health.nsw.gov.au.
Patrick HorsleyNorthern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Reserve Rd, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia.
Helen WheelerNorthern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Reserve Rd, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia.
Matthew WongCentral Coast Cancer Centre, Gosford Hospital, Gosford, NSW, Australia.
Venkatesha VenkateshaNorthern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Reserve Rd, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia.
Joseph ChanNorthern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Reserve Rd, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia.
Marina KastelanNorthern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Reserve Rd, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia.
Michael BackNorthern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Reserve Rd, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia.
Royal North Shore Hospital · AUGosford Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThere remains no standard of care for patients with recurrent and chemorefractory glioblastoma. Re-irradiation (reRT) provides an additional management option. However, published series predominantly focus on small reRT volumes utilizing stereotactic hypofractionated regimens. Concerns regarding toxicity have limited utilisation of reRT for larger recurrences, however this may be mitigated with use of bevacizumab (BEV). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospective database of patients managed with the EORTC-NCIC (Stupp) protocol 60 Gy chemoradiotherapy protocol for glioblastoma between 2007 and 2021 was reviewed for those patients receiving reRT for chemorefractory relapse. Serial MRI and PET were used to establish true progression and exclude patients with pseudoprogression or radionecrosis from reRT. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) from date of reRT. Prognostic factors were also assessed.

results447 patients managed for glioblastoma under the Stupp protocol were identified, of which 372 had relapsed and were thus eligible for reRT. 71 patients underwent reRT. Median relapse-free survival from diagnosis for the reRT and overall cohorts were similar at 11.6 months (95%CI:9.4-14.2) and 11.8 months (95%CI:9.4-14.2) respectively. 60/71 (85%) reRT patients had received BEV prior to reRT and continued concurrent BEV during reRT. Of the 11 patients not managed with BEV during reRT, 10 required subsequent salvage BEV. ReRT patients were younger (median 53 vs. 59 years, p < 0.001), had better performance status (86% vs. 69% ECOG 0-1, p = 0.002) and more commonly had MGMT promoter-methylated tumours (54% vs. 40%, p = 0.083) compared to non-reRT patients. Median reRT PTV volume was 135cm

conclusionPatients with recurrent glioblastoma who have been previously treated with 60 Gy radiotherapy have a meaningful survival benefit from large volume re-irradiation which is well tolerated. ReRT should not be ignored as a salvage treatment option in patients with chemorefractory progressive disease.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalBevacizumabBrain NeoplasmsGlioblastomaNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRadiation Dose HypofractionationRe-IrradiationAdultAgedChemoradiotherapyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalBevacizumab

Identifiers

PMID38551747
OpenAlexW4393308422

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.