Ortega Alicia, Nuño Miriam, Walia Sartaaj, Mukherjee Debraj, Black Keith L, Patil Chirag G
Center for Neurosurgical Outcomes Research, Maxine Dunitz Neurosurgical Institute, Department of Neurosurgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Advanced Health Sciences Pavilion, 127 S. San Vicente Boulevard, Suite A6600, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA.
Center for Neurosurgical Outcomes Research, Maxine Dunitz Neurosurgical Institute, Department of Neurosurgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Advanced Health Sciences Pavilion, 127 S. San Vicente Boulevard, Suite A6600, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA.
J Clin Neurosci. 2014 Oct;21(10):1709-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2014.05.003. Epub 2014 Jun 26.
It is unclear whether the survival difference observed between glioblastoma (GBM), giant cell glioblastoma (gcGBM), and gliosarcoma (GSM) patients is due to differences in tumor histology, patient demographics, and/or treatment regimens. The USA National Cancer Database was utilized to evaluate patients diagnosed with GBM, gcGBM, and GSM between 1998 and 2011. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to estimate overall survival. A cohort of 69,935 patients was analyzed; 67,509 (96.5%) of these patients had GBM, 592 (0.9%) gcGBM, and 1834 (2.6%) GSM. The median age for GBM and GSM patients was 61 versus 56 years for gcGBM (p<0.0001). Higher extent of resection (p<0.0001) and radiation (p=0.001) were observed in gcGBM patients compared to other histologies. Multivariate analysis showed that gcGBM patients had a 20% reduction in the hazards of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.93) compared to GBM, while GSM patients trended towards higher hazards of mortality (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.96-1.12) than the GBM cohort. Previous studies have suggested a disparity in the survival of patients with GBM tumors and their histological variants. Using a large cohort of patients treated at hospitals nationwide, this study found a 20% reduction in the hazards of mortality in gcGBM patients compared to GBM. Similarly, gcGBM patients had a 24% reduction in the hazards of mortality compared to the GSM cohort. GSM patients had a 3% increase in the hazards of mortality compared to GBM.
目前尚不清楚胶质母细胞瘤(GBM)、巨细胞胶质母细胞瘤(gcGBM)和胶质肉瘤(GSM)患者之间观察到的生存差异是由于肿瘤组织学、患者人口统计学和/或治疗方案的差异。利用美国国家癌症数据库评估1998年至2011年间诊断为GBM、gcGBM和GSM的患者。采用Kaplan-Meier生存估计和Cox比例风险模型来估计总生存期。分析了一组69935例患者;其中67509例(96.5%)为GBM患者,592例(0.9%)为gcGBM患者,1834例(2.6%)为GSM患者。GBM和GSM患者的中位年龄为61岁,而gcGBM患者为56岁(p<0.0001)。与其他组织学类型相比,gcGBM患者的切除范围更大(p<0.0001)且接受放疗的比例更高(p=0.001)。多变量分析显示,与GBM相比,gcGBM患者的死亡风险降低了20%(风险比[HR]0.80,95%置信区间[CI]0.69-0.93),而GSM患者的死亡风险比GBM队列有升高趋势(HR 1.04,95%CI 0.96-1.12)。先前的研究表明GBM肿瘤及其组织学变体患者的生存存在差异。本研究使用了全国范围内医院治疗的大量患者队列,发现与GBM相比,gcGBM患者的死亡风险降低了20%。同样,与GSM队列相比,gcGBM患者的死亡风险降低了24%。与GBM相比,GSM患者的死亡风险增加了3%。