Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora.
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Illinois at Chicago School of Medicine, Chicago3Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
JAMA Neurol. 2016 Jul 1;73(7):821-8. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2016.0839.
The optimal management for elderly patients with glioblastoma (GBM) is controversial. Following maximal safe resection or biopsy, accepted treatment paradigms for elderly patients with GBM include combined-modality therapy (CMT) with both radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CT), RT alone, and CT alone.
To evaluate the overall survival (OS) outcomes associated with RT, CT, and CMT for elderly patients with GBM in the modern temozolomide era.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained, multi-institutional national cancer registry, the National Cancer Database was queried for elderly patients (≥65 years) with newly diagnosed GBM from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2011, with complete data sets for RT, CT, tumor resection, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores, age, sex, and year of diagnosis. Data analysis was performed from October 2015 through December 2015.
Combined-modality therapy, RT, CT.
Survival by treatment cohort was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and analyzed using the log rank test, univariate and multivariate Cox models, and propensity score-matched analyses.
A total of 16 717 patients (median [range] age, 73 [65-≥90 y]; 8870 [53%] male) were identified. The median OS by treatment was 9.0 (95% CI, 8.8-9.3) months with CMT (8435 patients), 4.7 (95% CI, 4.5-5.0) months with RT alone (1693 patients), 4.3 (95% CI, 4.0-4.7) months with CT alone (1018 patients), and 2.8 (95% CI, 2.8-2.9) months with no therapy (5571 patients) (P < .001). On multivariate analysis, CMT was superior to both CT alone (hazard ratio, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.40-1.60]; P < .001) and RT alone (hazard ratio, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.39-1.55]; P < .001), whereas no differences were observed between CT alone vs RT alone (P = .60). Propensity score-matched analyses redemonstrated improved OS with CMT over CT alone (P = .002) and RT alone (P < .001); no differences were observed between CT alone vs RT alone (P = .44). On subgroup analyses, a consistent OS advantage was observed with CMT over both CT alone and RT alone across each age stratification (65-69, 70-74, 75-79, and ≥80 years) and among patients treated with or without tumor resection (all P < .001).
In this analysis of multimodality therapy for elderly patients with GBM, OS was superior with CMT compared with CT alone and RT alone. Survival was similar between CT alone and RT alone, and both CT alone and RT alone were superior to no therapy. This analysis supports the use of CMT for suitable elderly candidates.
对于老年胶质母细胞瘤(GBM)患者,最佳治疗方案存在争议。在最大程度安全切除或活检后,老年 GBM 患者的标准治疗方案包括联合治疗(CMT),包括放疗(RT)和化疗(CT)、单纯 RT 和单纯 CT。
评估在现代替莫唑胺时代,老年 GBM 患者接受 RT、CT 和 CMT 的总生存(OS)结局。
设计、地点和参与者:在这项从国家癌症数据库进行的回顾性队列研究中,该数据库是一个前瞻性维护的多机构国家癌症登记处,2005 年 1 月 1 日至 2011 年 12 月 31 日期间,对年龄≥65 岁的新诊断 GBM 老年患者进行了检索,其数据完整,包括 RT、CT、肿瘤切除术、Charlson-Deyo 合并症评分、年龄、性别和诊断年份。数据分析于 2015 年 10 月至 2015 年 12 月进行。
CMT、RT、CT。
通过 Kaplan-Meier 方法估计各治疗组的生存情况,并通过对数秩检验、单变量和多变量 Cox 模型以及倾向评分匹配分析进行分析。
共纳入 16717 例患者(中位数[范围]年龄,73[65-≥90 岁];8870 例[53%]为男性)。CMT 组(8435 例患者)中位 OS 为 9.0(95%CI,8.8-9.3)个月,RT 单药组(1693 例患者)为 4.7(95%CI,4.5-5.0)个月,CT 单药组(1018 例患者)为 4.3(95%CI,4.0-4.7)个月,无治疗组(5571 例患者)为 2.8(95%CI,2.8-2.9)个月(P<0.001)。多变量分析显示,CMT 优于 CT 单药(危险比,1.50[95%CI,1.40-1.60];P<0.001)和 RT 单药(危险比,1.47[95%CI,1.39-1.55];P<0.001),而 CT 单药与 RT 单药之间无差异(P=0.60)。倾向评分匹配分析再次显示,CMT 与 CT 单药(P=0.002)和 RT 单药(P<0.001)相比,OS 得到改善;而 CT 单药与 RT 单药之间无差异(P=0.44)。亚组分析显示,CMT 在每个年龄分层(65-69、70-74、75-79 和≥80 岁)和接受肿瘤切除术与未接受肿瘤切除术的患者中均与 CT 单药和 RT 单药相比,OS 具有优势(均 P<0.001)。
在这项老年 GBM 多模式治疗的分析中,与 CT 单药和 RT 单药相比,CMT 的 OS 更优。CT 单药与 RT 单药的生存情况相似,而 CT 单药和 RT 单药均优于无治疗。该分析支持对合适的老年患者使用 CMT。