Long-Term Experience With World Health Organization Grade III (Malignant) Meningiomas at a Single Institution

Rosenberg, L.A.; Prayson, Richard A.; Lee, Joung; Reddy, Chandana A.; Chao, Samuel T.; Barnett, Gene H.; Vogelbaum, Michael A.; Suh, John H.

doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.08.018

Cited by 108 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…11,16 Interpretation of the data on EBRT must be taken with some caution because the majority of dose-response studies were performed prior to the WHO 2000/2007 classification. Nonetheless, together with modern studies, 1,13,21,61,68,76 evidence supports the use of radiotherapy for Grade III meningiomas (EBM Level 3, Grade 1C recommendation).…”

Section: Radiotherapymentioning

confidence: 88%

“…These studies highlighted the much higher recurrence of AMs and MMs compared with Grade I tumors. Since the WHO 2000/2007 grading system was implemented, the literature on Grade III meningiomas has been sparse (Table 6), 1,21,23,61,68,76,87 and therefore management decisions must rely on research using both pre-2000 and 2000/2007 WHO grading.…”

Section: Treatment Algorithm For Amsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An evidence-based treatment algorithm for the management of WHO Grade II and III meningiomas

Sun¹,

Hawasli²,

Huang

et al. 2015

FOC

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The management of WHO Grade II “atypical” meningiomas (AMs) and Grade III “malignant” meningiomas (MMs) remains controversial and under-investigated in prospective studies. The roles of surgery, radiation therapy, radiosurgery, and chemotherapy have been incompletely delineated. This has left physicians to decipher how they should treat patients on a case-by-case basis. In this study, the authors review the English-language literature on the management and clinical outcomes associated with AMs and MMs diagnosed using the WHO 2000/2007 grading criteria. Twenty-two studies for AMs and 7 studies for MMs were examined in detail. The authors examined clinical decision points using the literature and concepts from evidence-based medicine. Acknowledging the retrospective nature of the studies concerning AM and MM, the authors did find evidence for the following clinical strategies: 1) maximal safe resection of AM and MM; 2) active surveillance after gross-total resection of AM; 3) adjuvant radiation therapy after subtotal resection of AM, especially in the absence of putative radioresistant features; and 4) adjuvant radiation therapy after resection of MM.

show abstract

Section: Radiotherapymentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Treatment Algorithm For Amsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An evidence-based treatment algorithm for the management of WHO Grade II and III meningiomas

Sun¹,

Hawasli²,

Huang

et al. 2015

FOC

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1) are usually characterized by 5yr actuarial tumor control rates (87%-96%) much higher than those with atypic (49%-77%) or anaplastic (0%-19%) lesions (21,24,37,49,63,73,77). As shown in (TABLE 4), the still limited number of reports with a mean follow up period of 7-10 years have consistently confirmed these differential LTC levels (3,15,41,63,70) Table 4.…”

Section: Gamma Knife Radiosurgerymentioning

confidence: 69%

Radiosurgical Treatment of Intracranial Meningiomas: Update 2011

Gerosa¹,

Foroni²,

Longhi³

et al. 2011

Gamma Knife Radiosurgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Another study on 13 patients with grade III meningiomas (as defined by WHO 2007 classification), evaluated their outcomes (Rosenberg et al, 2009). A total of 24 surgeries were performed, including 13 primary, 7 salvage and 4 second salvage.…”

Section: Prognosismentioning

confidence: 99%