Treatment and survival of glioblastoma patients in Denmark: The Danish Neuro-Oncology Registry 2009–2014

Hansen, Steinbjørn; Rasmussen, Birthe Krogh; Laursen, René Johannes; Kosteljanetz, Michael; Schultz, Henrik; Nørgård, Bente Mertz; Guldberg, Rikke; Gradel, Kim Oren

doi:10.1007/s11060-018-2892-7

Cited by 45 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These data must be considered with caution since those patients are not subject to randomization. Although more patients had resections !95% after the introduction of 5-ALA, the changes in postoperative performance status in our series was comparable to other studies [20,31].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Reports on population-based results over longer time periods are sparse but important since it more accurate reflects the group of patients that we meet on a daily basis [3,4,20,21]. The aim of the present study was to evaluate how the scientific progress in GBM treatment has been translated into clinical reality for the whole population of patients treated at a single Swedish university hospital from 1995 to 2015 and to what extent it may have influenced survival.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Improved treatment of glioblastoma – changes in survival over two decades at a single regional Centre

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Glioblastoma (GBM) is an aggressive brain tumor with a short overall survival (OS) in general. The treatment of GBM has evolved over the last decades and is today multimodal including surgical resection followed by radiochemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy for patients in good performance status. The aim of this study was to evaluate the development of treatment and the outcome for GBM patients at a single regional center. Patients and methods: Survival was studied for 571 patients in our region diagnosed with GBM between 1995 and 2015. Samples from 244 patients out of those treated 2005-2015 have been included in a tissue/blood bank and a clinical database has been set up with basic patient characteristics and details on surgery and non-surgical treatment. Results: The median OS for all patients from 1995 to 2015 was 9.3 months. There was a stepwise improvement from 6.9 to 10.3 months for patients diagnosed 1995-1996 and 2010-2015, respectively (p < .05). The 2-year survival for the same time periods improved from 7% to 18% (p < .01). After introduction of postoperative radiochemotherapy for patients in good performance status in 2005 an increased OS was noted and following implementation of intraoperative 5-aminolevulinic acid the number of tumor resection !95% did increase from 33% to 54% (p < .001). Positive prognostic factors for survival were young age, good performance status, absence of inflammatory disease, absence of diabetes or metabolic disease, tumor resection !95%, and completion of postoperative radiochemotherapy. Discussion: The results of this study are consistent with earlier results regarding survival and prognostic factors and confirm results from randomized controlled trials in a clinical setting. Despite the improvements made, the prognosis is still dismal and the need for further research on GBM treatment is great.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improved treatment of glioblastoma – changes in survival over two decades at a single regional Centre

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our study, the crude incidence rate was 3.3/100,000 person-years and is in good accordance with the literature [ 1 ]. OS was 11.2 months, similar to the values obtained in population-based studies in the post-temozolomide era [ 28 – 30 ]. Survival rates were similar to US results [ 2 ], and intermediate between those of the RT-only arm and those of the RT–temozolomide arm in the EORTC–NCIC clinical trial [ 31 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Association of patterns of care, prognostic factors, and use of radiotherapy–temozolomide therapy with survival in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a French national population-based study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Glioblastoma is the most frequent primary malignant brain tumor. In daily practice and at whole country level, oncological care management for glioblastoma patients is not completely known. Objectives To describe oncological patterns of care, prognostic factors, and survival for all patients in France with newly-diagnosed and histologically confirmed glioblastoma, and evaluate the impact of extended temozolomide use at the population level. Methods Nationwide population-based cohort study including all patients with newly-diagnosed and histologically confirmed glioblastoma in France in 2008 and followed until 2015. Results Data from 2053 glioblastoma patients were analyzed (male/female ratio 1.5, median age 64 years). Median overall survival (OS) was 11.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) 10.7–11.9] months. The first-line therapy and corresponding median survival (MS, in months) were: 13% did not receive any oncological treatment (biopsy only) (MS = 1.8, 95% CI 1.6–2.1), 27% received treatment without the combination of radiotherapy (RT)–temozolomide (MS = 5.9, 95% CI 5.5–6.6), 60% received treatment including the initiation of the concomitant phase of RT–temozolomide (MS = 16.4, 95% CI 15.2–17.4) whom 44% of patients initiated the temozolomide adjuvant phase (MS = 18.9, 95% CI 18.0–19.8). Only 22% patients received 6 cycles or more of adjuvant temozolomide (MS = 25.5, 95% CI 24.0–28.3). The multivariate analysis showed that the risk of mortality was significantly higher for the non-progressive patients who stopped at 6 cycles (standard protocol) than those who continued the treatment, hazard ratio = 1.5 (95% CI 1.2–1.9). Conclusion In non-progressive patients, prolonging the adjuvant temozolomide beyond 6 cycles may improve OS. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s11060-018-03065-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Thus, the survival times in the high-volume and medium-volume hospitals match those of other Nordic countries, while the survival time was slightly shorter in the low-volume hospital. For example, a Norwegian study (time period: 2004-2007, median age = 64 years) found a median survival time of 10.1 months [25] and a Danish study (time period: 2009-2014, median age = 66 years) found a median survival time of 11.2 months [26]. Moreover, studies from the U.S. (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program [SEER]) have found median survival times of 15 and 9.7 months [27,28].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disparities in glioblastoma survival by case volume: a nationwide observational study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction High hospital case volumes are associated with improved treatment outcomes for numerous diseases. We assessed the association between academic non-profit hospital case volume and survival of adult glioblastoma patients. Methods From the nationwide Finnish Cancer Registry, we identified all adult (≥ 18 years) patients with histopathological diagnoses of glioblastoma from 2000 to 2013. Five university hospitals (treating all glioblastoma patients in Finland) were classified as high-volume (one hospital), middle-volume (one hospital), and low-volume (three hospitals) based on their annual numbers of cases. We estimated one-year survival rates, estimated median overall survival times, and compared relative excess risk (RER) of death between high, middle, and low-volume hospitals. Results A total of 2,045 patients were included. The mean numbers of annually treated patients were 54, 40, and 17 in the high, middle, and low-volume hospitals, respectively. One-year survival rates and median survival times were higher and longer in the high-volume (39%, 9.3 months) and medium-volume (38%, 8.9 months) hospitals than in the low-volume (32%, 7.8 months) hospitals. RER of death was higher in the low-volume hospitals than in the high-volume hospital (RER = 1.19, 95% CI 1.07-1.32, p = 0.002). There was no difference in RER of death between the high-volume and medium-volume hospitals (p = 0.690). Conclusion Higher glioblastoma case volumes were associated with improved survival. Future studies should assess whether this association is due to differences in patient-specific factors or treatment quality.

show abstract

Treatment and survival of glioblastoma patients in Denmark: The Danish Neuro-Oncology Registry 2009–2014

Cited by 45 publications

References 27 publications

Improved treatment of glioblastoma – changes in survival over two decades at a single regional Centre

Improved treatment of glioblastoma – changes in survival over two decades at a single regional Centre

Association of patterns of care, prognostic factors, and use of radiotherapy–temozolomide therapy with survival in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a French national population-based study

Disparities in glioblastoma survival by case volume: a nationwide observational study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About