Human Pathology
Volume 37, Issue 3 , Pages 272-282 , March 2006

Prognostic value of detecting recurrent glioblastoma multiforme in surgical specimens from patients after radiotherapy: should pathology evaluation alter treatment decisions?

  • Tarik Tihan, MD, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pathology, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-0511, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Department of Pathology, University of California at San Francisco Medical Center, San Francisco, CA 94143-0511, USA.
    • ,
  • Justine Barletta, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pathology, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-0511, USA
    • ,
  • Ian Parney, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-0511, USA
    • ,
  • Kathleen Lamborn, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-0511, USA
    • ,
  • Penny K. Sneed, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-0511, USA
    • ,
  • Susan Chang, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-0511, USA

Received 12 September 2005 ,Revised 16 November 2005 ,Accepted 18 November 2005.

References 

  1. Walker MD, Green SB, Byar DP, et al. Randomized comparisons of radiotherapy and nitrosoureas for the treatment of malignant glioma after surgery. N Engl J Med. 1980;303:1323–1329
  2. Paszat L, Laperriere N, Groome P, Schulze K, Mackillop W, Holowaty E. A population-based study of glioblastoma multiforme. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;51:100–107
  3. Levin VA, Wara WM, Davis RL, et al. Northern California Oncology Group protocol 6G91: response to treatment with radiation therapy and seven-drug chemotherapy in patients with glioblastoma multiforme. Cancer Treat Rep. 1986;70:739–743
  4. Burger PC, Dubois PJ, Schold SC, et al. Computerized tomographic and pathologic studies of the untreated, quiescent, and recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. J Neurosurg. 1983;58:159–169
  5. Zamorano L, Katanick D, Dujovny M, Yakar D, Malik G, Ausman JI. Tumour recurrence vs radionecrosis: an indication for multitrajectory serial stereotactic biopsies. Acta Neurochir Suppl (Wien). 1989;46:90–93
  6. Forsyth PA, Kelly PJ, Cascino TL, et al. Radiation necrosis or glioma recurrence: is computer-assisted stereotactic biopsy useful?. J Neurosurg. 1995;82:436–444
  7. McGirt MJ, Bulsara KR, Cummings TJ, et al. Prognostic value of magnetic resonance imaging–guided stereotactic biopsy in the evaluation of recurrent malignant astrocytoma compared with a lesion due to radiation effect. J Neurosurg. 2003;98:14–20
  8. Valk PE, Dillon WP. Radiation injury of the brain. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1991;12:45–62
  9. Dooms GC, Hecht S, Brant-Zawadzki M, Berthiaume Y, Norman D, Newton TH. Brain radiation lesions: MR imaging. Radiology. 1986;158:149–155
  10. Valk PE, Budinger TF, Levin VA, Silver P, Gutin PH, Doyle WK. PET of malignant cerebral tumors after interstitial brachytherapy. Demonstration of metabolic activity and correlation with clinical outcome. J Neurosurg. 1988;69:830–838
  11. Glantz MJ, Hoffman JM, Coleman RE, et al. Identification of early recurrence of primary central nervous system tumors by [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Ann Neurol. 1991;29:347–355
  12. Langleben DD, Segall GM. PET in differentiation of recurrent brain tumor from radiation injury. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1861–1867
  13. Chao ST, Suh JH, Raja S, Lee SY, Barnett G. The sensitivity and specificity of FDG PET in distinguishing recurrent brain tumor from radionecrosis in patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery. Int J Cancer. 2001;96:191–197
  14. Dowling C, Bollen AW, Noworolski SM, et al. Preoperative proton MR spectroscopic imaging of brain tumors: correlation with histopathologic analysis of resection specimens. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2001;22:604–612
  15. Rock JP, Hearshen D, Scarpace L, et al. Correlations between magnetic resonance spectroscopy and image-guided histopathology, with special attention to radiation necrosis. Neurosurgery. 2002;51:912–919[discussion 919-20]
  16. Burger PC, Mahley MS, Dudka L, Vogel FS. The morphologic effects of radiation administered therapeutically for intracranial gliomas: a postmortem study of 25 cases. Cancer. 1979;44:1256–1272
  17. Jeremic B, Grujicic D, Antunovic V, Djuric L, Stojanovic M, Shibamoto Y. Influence of extent of surgery and tumor location on treatment outcome of patients with glioblastoma multiforme treated with combined modality approach. J Neurooncol. 1994;21:177–185
  18. Barker FG, Prados MD, Chang SM, et al. Radiation response and survival time in patients with glioblastoma multiforme. J Neurosurg. 1996;84:442–448
  19. Lacroix M, Abi-Said D, Fourney DR, et al. A multivariate analysis of 416 patients with glioblastoma multiforme: prognosis, extent of resection, and survival. J Neurosurg. 2001;95:190–198
  20. Scott JN, Rewcastle NB, Brasher PM, et al. Which glioblastoma multiforme patient will become a long-term survivor? A population-based study. Ann Neurol. 1999;46:183–188
  21. Ammirati M, Galicich JH, Arbit E, Liao Y. Reoperation in the treatment of recurrent intracranial malignant gliomas. Neurosurgery. 1987;21:607–614
  22. Smith JS, Cha S, Mayo MC, et al. Serial diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in cases of glioma: distinguishing tumor recurrence from postresection injury. J Neurosurg. 2005;103:428–438

PII: S0046-8177(05)00657-X

doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2005.11.010

Human Pathology
Volume 37, Issue 3 , Pages 272-282 , March 2006

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution