Early pseudoprogression following chemoradiotherapy in glioblastoma patients: The value of RANO evaluation

Journal of Oncology

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages

  Linhares, Paulo ^a,b   Carvalho, Bruno ^a,b   Figueiredo, Rita ^a   Reis, Rui M ^c,d   Vaz, Rui ^a,b  

^a HOSPITAL DE SÃO JOÃO   (Portugal)

^b University of Porto   (Portugal)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MINHO   (Portugal)

^d BARRETOS CANCER HOSPITAL   (Brazil)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

TEMOZOLOMIDE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER SIZE; CANCER SURVIVAL; CHEMORADIOTHERAPY; COHORT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GLIOBLASTOMA; HUMAN; MACDONALD CRITERIAL TO RESPONSE ASSESSMENT IN NEUROONCOLOGY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NAMED INVENTORIES, QUESTIONNAIRES AND RATING SCALES; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

EID: 84884248472     PISSN: 16878450     EISSN: 16878469     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1155/2013/690585     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Stupp R., Mason W. P., Van Den Bent M. J., Weller M., Fisher B., Taphoorn M. J. B., Belanger K., Brandes A. A., Marosi C., Bogdahn U., Curschmann J., Janzer R. C., Ludwin S. K., Gorlia T., Allgeier A., Lacombe D., Cairncross J. G., Eisenhauer E., Mirimanoff R. O., Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. The New England Journal of Medicine 2005 352 10 987 996 2-s2.0-20044366163 10.1056/NEJMoa043330
2. Gahramanov S., Raslan A. M., Muldoon L. L., Hamilton B. E., Rooney W. D., Varallyay C. G., Njus J. M., Haluska M., Neuwelt E. A., Potential for differentiation of pseudoprogression from true tumor progression with dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging using ferumoxytol vs. gadoteridol: a pilot study. International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics 2011 79 2 514 523 2-s2.0-78650824830 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.10.072
3. Hoffman W. F., Levin V. A., Wilson C. B., Evaluation of malignant glioma patients during postirradiation period. Journal of Neurosurgery 1979 50 5 624 628 2-s2.0-0018361109
4. de Wit M. C. Y., de Bruin H. G., Eijkenboom W., Sillevis Smitt P. A. E., van den Bent M. J., Immediate post-radiotherapy changes in malignant glioma can mimic tumor progression. Neurology 2004 63 3 535 537 2-s2.0-3543148964
5. Sanghera P., Perry J., Sahgal A., Symons S., Aviv R., Morrison M., Lam K., Davey P., Tsao M. N., Pseudoprogression following chemoradiotherapy for glioblastoma multiforme. Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences 2010 37 1 36 42 2-s2.0-76649113101
6. Brandsma D., van den Bent M. J., Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse in the treatment of gliomas. Current Opinion in Neurology 2009 22 6 633 638 2-s2.0-74049087788 10.1097/WCO.0b013e328332363e
7. Jensen R. L., Brain tumor hypoxia: tumorigenesis, angiogenesis, imaging, pseudoprogression, and as a therapeutic target. Journal of Neuro-Oncology 2009 92 3 317 335 2-s2.0-65249131228 10.1007/s11060-009-9827-2
8. Roldan G. B., Scott J. N., McIntyre J. B., Population-based study of pseudoprogression after chemoradiotherapy in GBM. Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences 2009 36 5 617 622
9. Hu L. S., Baxter L. C., Smith K. A., Feuerstein B. G., Karis J. P., Eschbacher J. M., Coons S. W., Nakaji P., Yeh R. F., Debbins J., Heiserman J. E., Relative cerebral blood volume values to differentiate high-grade glioma recurrence from posttreatment radiation effect: direct correlation between image-guided tissue histopathology and localized dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging measurements. American Journal of Neuroradiology 2009 30 3 552 558 2-s2.0-64649101485 10.3174/ajnr.A1377
10. Tsien C., Galbán C. J., Chenevert T. L., Johnson T. D., Hamstra D. A., Sundgren P. C., Junck L., Meyer C. R., Rehemtulla A., Lawrence T., Ross B. D., Parametric response map as an imaging biomarker to distinguish progression from pseudoprogression in high-grade glioma. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2010 28 13 2293 2299 2-s2.0-77952294120 10.1200/JCO.2009.25.3971
11. Wen P. Y., Macdonald D. R., Reardon D. A., Cloughesy T. F., Sorensen A. G., Galanis E., DeGroot J., Wick W., Gilbert M. R., Lassman A. B., Tsien C., Mikkelsen T., Wong E. T., Chamberlain M. C., Stupp R., Lamborn K. R., Vogelbaum M. A., Van Den Bent M. J., Chang S. M., Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2010 28 11 1963 1972 2-s2.0-77951625266 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.3541
12. Kang H.-C., Kim C.-Y., Han J. H., Choe G. Y., Kim J. H., Kim J. H., Kim I. A., Pseudoprogression in patients with malignant gliomas treated with concurrent temozolomide and radiotherapy: potential role of p53. Journal of Neuro-Oncology 2011 102 1 157 162 2-s2.0-79952192675 10.1007/s11060-010-0305-7
13. Brandes A. A., Franceschi E., Tosoni A., Blatt V., Pession A., Tallini G., Bertorelle R., Bartolini S., Calbucci F., Andreoli A., Frezza G., Leonardi M., Spagnolli F., Ermani M., MGMT promoter methylation status can predict the incidence and outcome of pseudoprogression after concomitant radiochemotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2008 26 13 2192 2197 2-s2.0-43749094544 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.8163
14. Pouleau H.-B., Sadeghi N., Balériaux D., Mélot C., De Witte O., Lefranc F., High levels of cellular proliferation predict pseudoprogression in glioblastoma patients. International Journal of Oncology 2012 40 4 923 928 2-s2.0-84858648334 10.3892/ijo.2011.1260
15. Motegi H., Kamoshima Y., Terasaka S., IDH1 mutation as a potential novel biomarker for distinguishing pseudoprogression from true progression in patients with glioblastoma treated with temozolomide and radiotherapy. Brain Tumor Pathology 2013 30 2 67 72
16. Hygino da Cruz L. C. Jr., Rodriguez I., Domingues R. C., Gasparetto E. L., Sorensen A. G., Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse: imaging challenges in the assessment of posttreatment glioma. American Journal of Neuroradiology 2011 32 11 1978 1985 2-s2.0-84455185238 10.3174/ajnr.A2397
17. Kong D.-S., Kim S. T., Kim E.-H., Lim D. H., Kim W. S., Suh Y.-L., Lee J.-I., Park K., Kim J. H., Nam D.-H., Diagnostic dilemma of pseudoprogression in the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastomas: the role of assessing relative cerebral blood flow volume and oxygen-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase promoter methylation status. American Journal of Neuroradiology 2011 32 2 382 387 2-s2.0-79951611399 10.3174/ajnr.A2286
18. Macdonald D. R., Cascino T. L., Schold S. C. Jr., Cairncross J. G., Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. Journal of Clinical Oncology 1990 8 7 1277 1280 2-s2.0-0025281789
19. Taal W., Brandsma D., de Bruin H. G., Bromberg J. E., Swaak-Kragten A. T., Sillevis Smitt P. A. E., Van Es C. A., Van Den Bent M. J., Incidence of early pseudo-progression in a cohort of malignant glioma patients treated with chemoirradiation with temozolomide. Cancer 2008 113 2 405 410 2-s2.0-48249112123 10.1002/cncr.23562
20. Chamberlain M. C., Glantz M. J., Chalmers L., van Horn A., Sloan A. E., Early necrosis following concurrent Temodar and radiotherapy in patients with glioblastoma. Journal of Neuro-Oncology 2007 82 1 81 83 2-s2.0-33846955124 10.1007/s11060-006-9241-y
21. Chaskis C., Neyns B., Michotte A., De Ridder M., Everaert H., Pseudoprogression after radiotherapy with concurrent temozolomide for high-grade glioma: clinical observations and working recommendations. Surgical Neurology 2009 72 4 423 428 2-s2.0-69549088562 10.1016/j.surneu.2008.09.023
22. Clarke J. L., Chang S., Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse: challenges in brain tumor imaging. Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports 2009 9 3 241 246 2-s2.0-64649085454 10.1007/s11910-009-0035-4
23. Fabi A., Russillo M., Metro G., Vidiri A., di Giovanni S., Cognetti F., Pseudoprogression and MGMT status in glioblastoma patients: implications in clinical practice. Anticancer Research 2009 29 7 2607 2610 2-s2.0-69249184418
24. Peca C., Pacelli R., Elefante A., Del Basso De Caro M. L., Vergara P., Mariniello G., Giamundo A., Maiuri F., Early clinical and neuroradiological worsening after radiotherapy and concomitant temozolomide in patients with glioblastoma: tumour progression or radionecrosis? Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery 2009 111 4 331 334 2-s2.0-63449141069 10.1016/j.clineuro.2008.11. 003
25. Gerstner E. R., McNamara M. B., Norden A. D., LaFrankie D., Wen P. Y., Effect of adding temozolomide to radiation therapy on the incidence of pseudo-progression. Journal of Neuro-Oncology 2009 94 1 97 101 2-s2.0-67650494394 10.1007/s11060-009-9809-4
26. Yaman E., Buyukberber S., Benekli M., Oner Y., Coskun U., Akmansu M., Ozturk B., Kaya A. O., Uncu D., Yildiz R., Radiation induced early necrosis in patients with malignant gliomas receiving temozolomide. Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery 2010 112 8 662 667 2-s2.0-77956182573 10.1016/j.clineuro.2010.05. 003
27. Gunjur A., Lau E., Taouk Y., Ryan G., Early post-treatment pseudo-progression amongst glioblastoma multiforme patients treated with radiotherapy and temozolomide: a retrospective analysis. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology 2011 55 6 603 610 2-s2.0-82955169614 10.1111/j.1754-9485.2011.02319.x
28. Young R. J., Gupta A., Shah A. D., Graber J. J., Zhang Z., Shi W., Holodny A. I., Omuro A. M. P., Potential utility of conventional MRI signs in diagnosing pseudoprogression in glioblastoma. Neurology 2011 76 22 1918 1924 2-s2.0-79958108803 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31821d74e7
29. Park C.-K., Kim J., Yim S. Y., Lee A. R., Han J. H., Kim C.-Y., Park S.-H., Kim T. M., Lee S.-H., Choi S. H., Kim S.-K., Kim D. G., Jung H.-W., Usefulness of MS-MLPA for detection of MGMT promoter methylation in the evaluation of pseudoprogression in glioblastoma patients. Neuro-Oncology 2011 13 2 195 202 2-s2.0-79951831110 10.1093/neuonc/noq162
30. Topkan E., Topuk S., Oymak E., Parlak C., Pehlivan B., Pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma multiforme after concurrent radiotherapy and temozolomide. American Journal of Clinical Oncology 2012 35 3 284 289 2-s2.0-79952339411 10.1097/COC.0b013e318210f54a
31. Brandsma D., Stalpers L., Taal W., Sminia P., van den Bent M. J., Clinical features, mechanisms, and management of pseudoprogression in malignant gliomas. The Lancet Oncology 2008 9 5 453 461 2-s2.0-42649106522 10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70125-6
32. Farace P., Amelio D., Ricciardi G. K., Early MRI changes in glioblastoma in the period between surgery and adjuvant therapy. Journal of Neuro-Oncology 2013 111 2 177 185
33. Meyzer C., Dhermain F., Ducreux D., Habrand J.-L., Varlet P., Sainte-Rose C., Dufour C., Grill J., A case report of pseudoprogression followed by complete remission after proton-beam irradiation for a low-grade glioma in a teenager: the value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Radiation Oncology 2010 5 1, article 9 2-s2.0-77649206063 10.1186/1748-717X-5-9
34. Khasraw M., Lassman A. B., Advances in the treatment of malignant Gliomas. Current Oncology Reports 2010 12 1 26 33 2-s2.0-76749157903 10.1007/s11912-009-0077-4
35. Pérez-Larraya J. G., Lahutte M., Petrirena G., Reyes-Botero G., González-Aguilar A., Houillier C., Guillevin R., Sanson M., Hoang-Xuan K., Delattre J.-Y., Response assessment in recurrent glioblastoma treated with irinotecan-bevacizumab: comparative analysis of the Macdonald, RECIST, RANO, and RECIST F criteria. Neuro-Oncology 2012 14 5 667 673 2-s2.0-84860378573 10.1093/neuonc/nos070
36. Radbruch A., Lutz K., Wiestler B., Bäumer P., Heiland S., Wick W., Bendszus M., Relevance of T2 signal changes in the assessment of progression of glioblastoma according to the Response Assessment in Neurooncology criteria. Neuro-Oncology 2012 14 2 222 229 2-s2.0-84859531441 10.1093/neuonc/nor200
37. Kruser T. J., Mehta M. P., Robins H. I., Pseudoprogression after glioma therapy: a comprehensive review. Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics 2013 13 4 389 403
38. Mullins M. E., Barest G. D., Schaefer P. W., Hochberg F. H., Gonzalez R. G., Lev M. H., Radiation necrosis versus glioma recurrence: conventional MR imaging clues to diagnosis. American Journal of Neuroradiology 2005 26 8 1967 1972 2-s2.0-32944475186
39. Ozsunar Y., Mullins M. E., Kwong K., Hochberg F. H., Ament C., Schaefer P. W., Gonzalez R. G., Lev M. H., Glioma recurrence versus radiation necrosis? A pilot comparison of arterial spin-labeled, dynamic susceptibility contrast enhanced MRI, and FDG-PET imaging. Academic Radiology 2010 17 3 282 290 2-s2.0-75749121763 10.1016/j.acra.2009.10.024
40. Weybright P., Sundgren P. C., Maly P., Hassan D. G., Nan B., Rohrer S., Junck L., Differentiation between brain tumor recurrence and radiation injury using MR spectroscopy. American Journal of Roentgenology 2005 185 6 1471 1476 2-s2.0-33644828650 10.2214/AJR.04.0933
41. Zeng Q.-S., Li C.-F., Zhang K., Liu H., Kang X.-S., Zhen J.-H., Multivoxel 3D proton MR spectroscopy in the distinction of recurrent glioma from radiation injury. Journal of Neuro-Oncology 2007 84 1 63 69 2-s2.0-34547123582 10.1007/s11060-007-9341-3
42. Van Mieghem E., Wozniak A., Geussens Y., Defining pseudoprogression in glioblastoma multiforme. European Journal of Neurology 2013 10.1111/ene.12192