Scholarlink

Purpose <p>The prognosis for patients with glioblastoma after failure of first-line therapy is poor. Despite this, the standard of care for patients with recurrent disease is not well-defined. Here we report on the use of salvage therapies in glioblastoma using real-world data.</p> Methods <p>Data were extracted from the BRAIN Registry for patients diagnosed with glioblastoma (Grade 4, IDH wild-type) between 09/2019 and 01/2024. Only patients who received salvage therapies following a documented date of recurrence/progression were included. Relevant descriptive and intergroup statistics were used, with survival calculated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression used for multivariate analyses.</p> Results <p>275 patients were identified. Median age was 61 (range:23–88) years, with 56% being ECOG 0–1 at recurrence. Median time to progression was 7.6 months with 65% recurring/progressing during first-line therapy. Systemic therapy (85%) was most utilised with 67% receiving single-agent bevacizumab. Outcomes in this subgroup were similar to clinical trial data. 29% patients underwent re-resection with 58% of these then receiving systemic treatment. Compared with no surgery, patients who underwent re-resection were younger (<i>p</i> = 0.02), of better performance status (<i>p</i> = 0.006) and more likely to have recurred post completing first-line therapy (<i>p</i> = 0.001). Few patients (<i>n</i> = 9) received re-irradiation with median of 15 months between radiation events. Median post-progression survival (PPS) was 9.5 months. After adjustment for confounders, there was no difference in PPS for patients who underwent re-resection versus systemic therapy alone (<i>p</i> = 0.242). The survival differences observed between treatment modalities likely reflect patient factors influencing treatment selection and were impacted by small subgroup sizes.</p> Conclusion <p>Systemic therapy is most utilised in the salvage setting, predominantly bevacizumab. Certain patient characteristics were associated with re-resection. Re-irradiation was rarely used.</p> Clinical trial number <p>ACTRN12618001959268.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Salvage therapies for recurrent grade 4 IDH-wildtype glioma: a BRAIN Registry analysis of real-world treatment patterns

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月23日

查看全文
  • Emma Sanderson,
  • Katharine Drummond,
  • Anthony Dowling,
  • Iwan Bennett,
  • Ronnie Freilich,
  • Claire Phillips,
  • Elizabeth Ahern,
  • David Campbell,
  • Robert Campbell,
  • Rosemary Harrup,
  • Simone Reeves,
  • Ian Collins,
  • Ross Jennens,
  • Sachin Joshi,
  • Hui Gan,
  • Michael Fay,
  • James Lynam,
  • Lisi Elizabeth Lim,
  • Mark Rosenthal,
  • Megan Dumas,
  • Peter Gibbs,
  • Lucy Gately

摘要

Purpose

The prognosis for patients with glioblastoma after failure of first-line therapy is poor. Despite this, the standard of care for patients with recurrent disease is not well-defined. Here we report on the use of salvage therapies in glioblastoma using real-world data.

Methods

Data were extracted from the BRAIN Registry for patients diagnosed with glioblastoma (Grade 4, IDH wild-type) between 09/2019 and 01/2024. Only patients who received salvage therapies following a documented date of recurrence/progression were included. Relevant descriptive and intergroup statistics were used, with survival calculated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression used for multivariate analyses.

Results

275 patients were identified. Median age was 61 (range:23–88) years, with 56% being ECOG 0–1 at recurrence. Median time to progression was 7.6 months with 65% recurring/progressing during first-line therapy. Systemic therapy (85%) was most utilised with 67% receiving single-agent bevacizumab. Outcomes in this subgroup were similar to clinical trial data. 29% patients underwent re-resection with 58% of these then receiving systemic treatment. Compared with no surgery, patients who underwent re-resection were younger (p = 0.02), of better performance status (p = 0.006) and more likely to have recurred post completing first-line therapy (p = 0.001). Few patients (n = 9) received re-irradiation with median of 15 months between radiation events. Median post-progression survival (PPS) was 9.5 months. After adjustment for confounders, there was no difference in PPS for patients who underwent re-resection versus systemic therapy alone (p = 0.242). The survival differences observed between treatment modalities likely reflect patient factors influencing treatment selection and were impacted by small subgroup sizes.

Conclusion

Systemic therapy is most utilised in the salvage setting, predominantly bevacizumab. Certain patient characteristics were associated with re-resection. Re-irradiation was rarely used.

Clinical trial number

ACTRN12618001959268.