活检与手术切除用于低级别胶质瘤的治疗比较

Biopsy versus resection for the management of low-grade gliomas.

作者信息

Jiang Bowen, Chaichana Kaisorn, Veeravagu Anand, Chang Steven D, Black Keith L, Patil Chirag G

机构信息

Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins Hospital, 1800 Orleans Street, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, 21287.

Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford School of Medicine, 679 Oxford Ave, Palo Alto, CA, USA, 94306.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 27;4(4):CD009319. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009319.pub3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in 2013, Issue 4.Low-grade gliomas (LGG) constitute a class of slow-growing primary brain neoplasms. Patients with clinically and radiographically suspected LGG have two initial surgical options, biopsy or resection. Biopsy can provide a histological diagnosis with minimal risk but does not offer a direct treatment. Resection may have additional benefits such as increasing survival and delaying recurrence, but is associated with a higher risk for surgical morbidity. There remains controversy about the role of biopsy versus resection and the relative clinical outcomes for the management of LGG.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness of biopsy compared to surgical resection in patients with a new lesion suspected to be a LGG.

SEARCH METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched in 2012 for the first version of the review: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2012, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1950 to November week 3 2012), Embase (1980 to Week 46 2012). For this updated version, the following electronic databases were searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2016, Issue 5), MEDLINE (Nov 2012 to June week 3 2016), Embase (Nov 2012 to 2016 week 26). All relevant articles were identified on PubMed and by using the 'related articles' feature. We also searched unpublished and grey literature including ISRCTN-metaRegister of Controled Trials, Physicians Data Query and ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include patients of any age with a suspected intracranial LGG receiving biopsy or resection within a randomized clinical trial (RCT) or controlled clinical trial (CCT). Patients with prior resections, radiation therapy, or chemotherapy for LGG were excluded. Outcome measures included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), functionally independent survival (FIS), adverse events, symptom control, and quality of life (QoL).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A total of 1375 updated citations were searched and critically analyzed for relevance. This was undertaken independently by two review authors. The original electronic database searches yielded a total of 2764 citations. In total, 4139 citations have been critically analyzed for this updated review.

MAIN RESULTS

No new RCTs of biopsy or resection for LGG were identified. No additional ineligible non-randomized studies (NRS) were included in this updated review. Twenty other ineligible studies were previously retrieved for further analysis despite not meeting the pre-specified criteria. Ten studies were retrospective or were literature reviews. Three studies were prospective, however they were limited to tumor recurrence and volumetric analysis and extent of resection. One study was a population-based parallel cohort in Norway, but not an RCT. Four studies were RCTs, however patients were randomized with respect to varying radiotherapy regimens to assess timing and dose of radiation. One RCT was on high-grade gliomas (HGGs) and not LGG. Finally, one RCT evaluated diffusion tensor imaging (DTI)-based neuro-navigation for surgical resection.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since the last version of this review, no new studies have been identified for inclusion and currently there are no RCTs or CCTs available on which to base definitive clinical decisions. Therefore, physicians must approach each case individually and weigh the risks and benefits of each intervention until further evidence is available. Some retrospective studies and non-randomized prospective studies do seem to suggest improved OS and seizure control correlating to higher extent of resection. Future research could focus on RCTs to determine outcomes benefits for biopsy versus resection.

摘要

背景

这是2013年第4期发表的原始Cochrane综述的更新版本。低级别胶质瘤(LGG)是一类生长缓慢的原发性脑肿瘤。临床和影像学怀疑为LGG的患者有两种初始手术选择,活检或切除。活检可在风险最小的情况下提供组织学诊断,但不能提供直接治疗。切除可能有额外的益处,如延长生存期和延迟复发,但手术并发症风险较高。关于活检与切除的作用以及LGG治疗的相对临床结果仍存在争议。

目的

评估活检与手术切除相比对疑似LGG新病变患者的临床疗效。

检索方法

2012年检索了以下电子数据库以获取该综述的第一版:Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(2012年第11期)、MEDLINE(1950年至2012年11月第3周)、Embase(1980年至2012年第46周)。对于此更新版本,检索了以下电子数据库:Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(2016年第5期)、MEDLINE(2012年11月至2016年6月第3周)、Embase(2012年11月至2016年第26周)。通过PubMed并使用“相关文章”功能识别了所有相关文章。我们还检索了未发表的文献和灰色文献,包括ISRCTN对照试验元注册库、医师数据查询库和ClinicalTrials.gov上的正在进行的试验。

入选标准

我们计划纳入在随机临床试验(RCT)或对照临床试验(CCT)中接受活检或切除的任何年龄的疑似颅内LGG患者。既往接受过LGG切除、放疗或化疗的患者被排除。结局指标包括总生存期(OS)、无进展生存期(PFS)、功能独立生存期(FIS)(^1)、不良事件、症状控制和生活质量(QoL)。

数据收集与分析

共检索并严格分析了1375条更新的文献以确定其相关性。这由两位综述作者独立进行。最初的电子数据库检索共产生了2764条文献。本更新综述总共严格分析了4139条文献。

主要结果

未发现新的关于LGG活检或切除的RCT。本更新综述未纳入其他不符合条件的非随机研究(NRS)。尽管另外20项研究不符合预先设定的标准,但之前已检索出来进行进一步分析。10项研究为回顾性研究或文献综述。3项研究为前瞻性研究,但仅限于肿瘤复发、体积分析和切除范围。1项研究是挪威的一项基于人群的平行队列研究,但不是RCT。4项研究是RCT,但患者是就不同的放疗方案进行随机分组以评估放疗的时机和剂量。1项RCT是关于高级别胶质瘤(HGG)而非LGG。最后,1项RCT评估了基于扩散张量成像(DTI)(^2)的神经导航用于手术切除。

作者结论

自本综述的上一版本以来,未发现可纳入的新研究,目前也没有RCT或CCT可作为明确临床决策的依据。因此,在有更多证据之前,医生必须对每个病例进行个体化处理,权衡每种干预措施的风险和益处。一些回顾性研究和非随机前瞻性研究似乎确实表明,切除范围越大,OS改善和癫痫控制效果越好。未来的研究可侧重于RCT,以确定活检与切除的结局获益情况。

注释

(^1) “功能独立生存期(Functionally Independent Survival)”在医学领域可能有特定含义,具体需结合上下文和专业知识理解,这里直接保留英文缩写。

(^2) “扩散张量成像(Diffusion Tensor Imaging)”是医学影像学中的专业术语,直接保留英文缩写。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索