Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
In Vivo
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
In Vivo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit iiar on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies

Clinical Prognostic Factors for Local Control and Survival After Irradiation of Grade II Gliomas

JASPAR WITTELER, STEVEN E. SCHILD and DIRK RADES
In Vivo November 2020, 34 (6) 3719-3722; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12220
JASPAR WITTELER
1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
STEVEN E. SCHILD
2Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, U.S.A.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DIRK RADES
1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: dirk.rades{at}uksh.de
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: Personalized treatment for low-grade gliomas likely improves patient outcomes. This study aimed to identify predictors of local control and survival. Patients and Methods: Twenty-five patients irradiated for grade II gliomas were retrospectively analyzed. Irradiation was performed after biopsy (n=6) or incomplete resection (n=19). Nineteen patients received additional chemotherapy. Eight factors were analyzed, namely the number of glioma sites, cumulative maximum diameter, radiotherapy technique, Karnofsky performance score (KPS), gender, age, resection and chemotherapy. Results: On univariate analysis, trends for associations with local control were found for cumulative maximum diameter ≤43 mm (p=0.087) and age ≤45 years (p=0.065). In the Cox regression analysis, cumulative maximum diameter maintained significance (p=0.046). On univariate analysis, KPS 90-100 (p=0.039) and female gender (p=0.022) were significantly associated with better survival. In the Cox regression analysis, both KPS (p=0.039) and gender (p=0.016) were significant. Conclusion: Independent predictors of local control and survival were identified that can contribute to better treatment personalization.

  • Grade II gliomas
  • radiotherapy
  • local control
  • survival
  • prognostic factors

Gliomas account for 30-40% of primary brain tumors (1, 2). According to the classification of the World Health organization (WHO), gliomas are divided into four grades (I to IV), of which grade IV gliomas are the most aggressive and have the worst prognosis (1-3). Gliomas are also categorized as low-grade (WHO I-II) or high-grade (WHO III-IV) tumors.

Low-grade gliomas account for approximately 15% of all primary brain tumors (4, 5). This group includes grade I and grade II tumors (3). Of the histopathological criteria indicating a more aggressive tumor, namely anaplasia, cytological atypia, microvascular proliferation, mitotic activity and necrosis, none occur in grade I tumors (1, 3). Grade II tumors are characterized by cytological atypia only (1, 3). The optimal treatment for low-grade gliomas is controversial (5). Outcomes may be improved by personalization of the treatment considering the individual situation of each patient. Such personalization can be supported by the application of independent prognostic factors for the different treatment outcomes.

The present study aimed to identify independent predictors of local control of the treated glioma and survival. Since the treatment for grade I gliomas is considerably different from the management of grade II gliomas (5), the present study focused on one WHO grade, i.e. WHO grade II glioma.

Patients and Methods

Twenty-five patients treated with radiotherapy for a WHO grade II glioma were included in this retrospective study, which was approved by the local Ethics Committee (University of Lübeck, reference number 15-355A).

Irradiation was performed after biopsy (n=6) or macroscopically incomplete resection (n=14) or microscopically incomplete resection (corresponding to gross tumor resection, n=5) with a linear accelerator (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA). The median total dose was 54.0 Gy (range=52.2-60.0 Gy), and median dose per fraction was 1.8 Gy (range=1.7-2.0 Gy). In 19 patients (76%) radiotherapy was supplemented by chemotherapy, with 3-12 courses (median 6 courses) of temozolomide alone (n=7), 2-6 courses (median 4 courses) of procarbazine/lomustine (PC) alone (n=6), 4 courses of nimustine alone (n=1) or sequential treatment including temozolomide and PC.

In these patients, a total of eight factors were analyzed for associations with local control of the glioma and survival. These factors were the number of glioma sites (unifocal, multifocal), the cumulative maximum diameter of the tumor(s) (median=42.5 mm; ≤43 mm, >43 mm), radiotherapy technique (3D-conformal irradiation, volume-modulated arc therapy), Karnofsky performance score (KPS ≤80, KPS 90-100), gender (female, male), age at start of irradiation (median=45 years; ≤45 years, >45 years), resection prior to radiotherapy (no=biopsy only, yes), and additional chemotherapy (no, yes) (Table I).

Time to local progression and time to death were calculated from the last day of radiotherapy. For univariate analyses of local control and survival, we used the Kaplan–Meier method and the log-rank test. p-Values of less than 0.05 were considered significant, and those under 0.10 were regarded as indicating a trend. Factors with a p<0.10 were additionally analyzed for independence (p<0.05) in a multivariate Cox regression model.

Results

Data with respect to local control of the glioma were available for 20 patients. Median time to local failure was 30 months. On univariate analysis of these patients, a trend for a positive association with local control was found for cumulative maximum diameter of the glioma ≤43 mm (p=0.087) and age at start of radiotherapy ≤45 years (p=0.065) (Table II). Both factors were included in the Cox regression model, where the cumulative maximum diameter was significant (p=0.046) but age did not achieve significance (p=0.19).

Survival data were available for all 25 patients. The median survival time was 83 months. On univariate analysis, a KPS of 90-100 (p=0.039) and female gender (p=0.022) were significantly associated with better survival (Table III). In the Cox regression analysis, both KPS (p=0.039) and gender (p=0.016) maintained significance.

Discussion

Eight years ago, there were about 20,000 new glioma cases in the United States, representing 30% of all primary brain tumors in adults (1). Ongoing research is being carried out to improve the prognoses of patients with glioma (6-10). About 50% of the gliomas are low-grade tumors, i.e. WHO grade I or II gliomas (3-6). The present study focused on patients with WHO grade II gliomas receiving radiotherapy. A comparably novel approach aiming to improve the outcomes of patients with a malignant disease is the personalization of their treatment. For optimal personalization of a therapy protocol for a patient with glioma, the application of independent prognostic factors is helpful. In this context, survival should always be considered. Since gliomas do not metastasize, and progression of treated or new cerebral lesions that cannot be successfully treated is the main malignancy-related life-limiting factor, prognostic factors for local control of the treated glioma are also very important. Therefore, this study aimed to identify independent prognostic factors for both survival and local control.

In the corresponding multi-variate analyses, the cumulative maximum diameter of the glioma(s) was an independent predictor of local control, and KPS and gender were independent predictors of survival. In addition, younger age (≤45 years) showed a trend for a positive association with local control on univariate analysis. Some of these prognostic factors have already been reported for low-grade glioma. In 1995, Nicolato et al. presented a retrospective study of 76 surgically treated patients (11). KPS >70 and age ≤50 years were associated with better survival. Gross tumor resection was performed in 22% of the patients, which was similar to the 20% in the current study. However, in the study of Nicolato et al., 24% of the patients did not receive immediate postoperative irradiation. In 1997, Leighton et al. presented the data of 167 patients who received radiotherapy, either as immediate adjuvant treatment (48%) or as delayed treatment in the case of cerebral progression (52%) (12). Residual tumor was reported to be minimal in 49% and bulky in 51% of the patients, respectively. Younger age (≤40 years) was associated with better local control and survival, and a higher KPS (≥70) with better survival. In 2002, the data of two randomized trials of the European Organization for Research and treatment of Cancer (EORTC) were re-evaluated (13). One trial (EORTC 22844) compared two postoperative radiotherapy regimens (45 Gy in 5 weeks and 59.4 Gy in 6.6 weeks), and the other (EORTC 22845) compared postoperative radiotherapy with 54.0 Gy in 6 weeks to no immediate post-operative irradiation. Gross tumor resection was achieved in 24% (EORTC 22844) and 45% (EORTC 22845) of the patients, respectively. In the additional study presented in 2002, better survival was associated with age <40 years, maximum glioma diameter <60 mm and absence of neurological deficits, which likely would have meant a worse performance status. Similar associations were reported in 2013 for both survival and local control in another analysis of the EORTC 22844 and EORTC 22845 trials that considered only the 339 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of a grade II glioma by central pathology review (14). In 2008, the data of 281 patients with low-grade glioma were reported from the University of California (15). In that cohort, 33% of the patients underwent gross tumor resection, and only 40% of the patients received postoperative radiotherapy. However, similarly to our study, a KPS of 90-100, younger age (≤50 years) and a smaller maximum diameter of glioma (≤40 mm) were associated with improved outcomes. Despite the similarities regarding prognostic factors for treatment outcomes between our study and previous studies, the differences with respect to proportions of patients receiving immediate postoperative irradiation and those undergoing gross tumor resection should be considered. In addition to previously reported prognostic factors such as KPS, glioma diameter and age, we identified another independent predictor of survival, gender. Although the prognostic role of gender has not been defined for patients receiving radiotherapy for a low-grade glioma, female gender was associated with better treatment outcomes in studies of other primary tumor types including head-and-neck cancer, small-cell lung cancer, cancer of the urinary bladder and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (16-21). When using the data of the present study, its limitations, including the retrospective design and the small sample size, should be kept in mind.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Factors analyzed for local control and survival.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Associations between investigated factors and local control of the glioma (n=20).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table III.

Associations between investigated factors and survival (n=25).

In summary, this study identified independent prognostic factors for local control and survival in patients irradiated for WHO grade II gliomas. These factors can contribute to better treatment personalization and may also be important stratification factors in future randomized trials.

Footnotes

  • Authors' Contributions

    D.R., J.W. and S.E.S. participated in the design of the study. J.W. collected the data that were analyzed by all Authors. D.R. and S.E.S. drafted the article, which was reviewed and approved in its final form by all Authors.

  • This article is freely accessible online.

  • Conflicts of Interest

    The Authors state that there are no conflicts of interest regarding this study.

  • Received August 18, 2020.
  • Revision received September 6, 2020.
  • Accepted September 7, 2020.
  • Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by the International Institute of Anticancer Research.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Forst DA,
    2. Nahed BV,
    3. Loeffler JS,
    4. Batchelor TT
    : Low-grade gliomas. Oncologist 19: 403-413, 2014. PMID: 24664484. DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2013-0345
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Grier JT,
    2. Batchelor T
    : Low-grade gliomas in adults. Oncologist 11: 681-693, 2006. PMID: 16794247. DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.11-6-681
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Louis DN,
    2. Perry A,
    3. Reifenberger G,
    4. von Deimling A,
    5. Figarella-Branger D,
    6. Cavenee WK,
    7. Ohgaki H,
    8. Wiestler OD,
    9. Kleihues P,
    10. Ellison DW
    : The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: A summary. Acta Neuropathol 131: 803-820, 2016. PMID: 27157931. DOI: 10.1007/s00401-016-1545-1
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Sanai N,
    2. Chang S,
    3. Berger MS
    : Low-grade gliomas in adults. J Neurosurg 115: 948-965, 2011. PMID: 22043865. DOI: 10.3171/2011.7.JNS101238
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Pouratian N,
    2. Schiff D
    : Management of low-grade glioma. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 10: 224-231, 2010. PMID: 20425038. DOI: 10.1007/s11910-010-0105-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Jairam V,
    2. Kann BH,
    3. Park HS,
    4. Miccio JA,
    5. Beckta JM,
    6. Yu JB,
    7. Prabhu RS,
    8. Gao SJ,
    9. Mehta MP,
    10. Curran WJ,
    11. Bindra RS,
    12. Contessa JN,
    13. Patel KR
    : Defining an intermediate-risk group for low-grade glioma: A National Cancer Database Analysis. Anticancer Res 39: 2911-2918, 2019. PMID: 31177129. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.13420
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Tamrakar S,
    2. Yashiro M,
    3. Kawashima T,
    4. Uda T,
    5. Terakawa Y,
    6. Kuwae Y,
    7. Ohsawa M,
    8. Ohata K
    : Clinicopathological significance of autophagy-related proteins and its association with genetic alterations in gliomas. Anticancer Res 39: 1233-1242, 2019. PMID: 30842153. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.13233
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Stegmann S,
    2. Werner JM,
    3. Kuhl S,
    4. Röhn G,
    5. Krischek B,
    6. Stavrinou P,
    7. Goldbrunner R,
    8. Timmer M
    : Death receptor 6 (DR6) Is overexpressed in astrocytomas. Anticancer Res 39: 2299-2306, 2019. PMID: 31092421. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.13346
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Palombi L,
    2. Marchetti P,
    3. Salvati M,
    4. Osti MF,
    5. Frati L,
    6. Frati A
    : Interventions to reduce neurological symptoms in patients with GBM receiving radiotherapy: From theory to clinical practice. Anticancer Res 38: 2423-2427, 2018. PMID: 29599372. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.12494
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Witteler J,
    2. Kjaer TW,
    3. Tvilsted S,
    4. Schild SE,
    5. Rades D
    : Seizures prior to radiotherapy of gliomas: Prevalence, risk factors and survival prognosis. Anticancer Res 40: 3961-3965, 2020. PMID: 32620638. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.14388
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Nicolato A,
    2. Gerosa MA,
    3. Fina P,
    4. Iuzzolino P,
    5. Giorgiutti F,
    6. Bricolo A
    : Prognostic factors in low-grade supratentorial astrocytomas: A uni-multivariate statistical analysis in 76 surgically treated adult patients. Surg Neurol 44: 208-221, 1995. PMID: 8545771. DOI: 10.1016/0090-3019(95)00184-0
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Leighton C,
    2. Fisher B,
    3. Bauman G,
    4. Depiero S,
    5. Stitt L,
    6. MacDonald D,
    7. Cairncross G
    : Supratentorial low-grade glioma in adults: An analysis of prognostic factors and timing of radiation. J Clin Oncol 15: 1294-1301, 1997. PMID: 9193320. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1997.15.4.1294
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Pignatti F,
    2. van den Bent M,
    3. Curran D,
    4. Debruyne C,
    5. Sylvester R,
    6. Therasse P,
    7. Afra D,
    8. Cornu P,
    9. Bolla M,
    10. Vecht C,
    11. Karim AB,
    12. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumor Cooperative Group,
    13. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Radiotherapy Cooperative Group
    : Prognostic factors for survival in adult patients with cerebral low-grade glioma. J Clin Oncol 20: 2076-2084, 2002. PMID: 11956268. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2002.08.121
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    1. Gorlia T,
    2. Wu W,
    3. Wang M,
    4. Baumert BG,
    5. Mehta M,
    6. Buckner JC,
    7. Shaw E,
    8. Brown P,
    9. Stupp R,
    10. Galanis E,
    11. Lacombe D,
    12. van den Bent MJ
    : New validated prognostic models and prognostic calculators in patients with low-grade gliomas diagnosed by central pathology review: A pooled analysis of EORTC/RTOG/NCCTG phase III clinical trials. Neuro Oncol 15: 1568-1579, 2013. PMID: 24049111. DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/not117
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Chang EF,
    2. Smith JS,
    3. Chang SM,
    4. Lamborn KR,
    5. Prados MD,
    6. Butowski N,
    7. Barbaro NM,
    8. Parsa AT,
    9. Berger MS,
    10. McDermott MM
    : Preoperative prognostic classification system for hemispheric low-grade gliomas in adults. J Neurosurg 109: 817-824, 2008. PMID: 18976070. DOI: 10.3171/JNS/2008/109/11/0817
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Rades D,
    2. Stoehr M,
    3. Meyners T,
    4. Bohlen G,
    5. Nadrowitz R,
    6. Dunst J,
    7. Schild SE,
    8. Wroblewski J,
    9. Albers D,
    10. Schmidt R,
    11. Alberti W,
    12. Tribius S
    : Evaluation of prognostic factors and two radiation techniques in patients treated with surgery followed by radio(chemo)therapy or definitive radio(chemo)therapy for locally advanced head-and-neck cancer. Strahlenther Onkol 184: 198-205, 2008. PMID: 18398584. DOI: 10.1007/s00066-008-1825-3
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Rades D,
    2. Dziggel L,
    3. Segedin B,
    4. Oblak I,
    5. Nagy V,
    6. Marita A,
    7. Schild SE,
    8. Trang NT,
    9. Khoa MT
    : A new survival score for patients with brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer. Strahlenther Onkol 189: 777-781, 2013. PMID: 23740156. DOI: 10.1007/s00066-013-0362-x
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Seidl D,
    2. Janssen S,
    3. Strojan P,
    4. Bajrovic A,
    5. Schild SE,
    6. Rades D
    : Prognostic factors after definitive radio(chemo)therapy of locally advanced head and neck cancer. Anticancer Res 36: 2523-2526, 2016. PMID: 27127167.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Manig L,
    2. Janssen S,
    3. Schild SE,
    4. Rades D
    : A new prognostic tool for patients undergoing radiotherapy plus upfront transurethral resection for bladder cancer. In Vivo 31: 745-748, 2017. PMID: 28652451. DOI: 10.21873/invivo.11125
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Janssen S,
    2. Manig L,
    3. Schild SE,
    4. Rades D
    : Radiotherapy of primary or recurrent bladder cancer in the very elderly. Anticancer Res 37: 3287-3290, 2017. PMID: 28551678. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.11694
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Käsmann L,
    2. Abdo R,
    3. Eze C,
    4. Dantes M,
    5. Taugner J,
    6. Gennen K,
    7. Roengvoraphoj O,
    8. Rades D,
    9. Belka C,
    10. Manapov F
    : External validation of a survival score for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer patients treated with chemoradiotherapy. Lung 198: 201-206, 2020. PMID: 31897594. DOI: 10.1007/s00408-019-00312-6
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

In Vivo
Vol. 34, Issue 6
November-December 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on In Vivo.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Clinical Prognostic Factors for Local Control and Survival After Irradiation of Grade II Gliomas
(Your Name) has sent you a message from In Vivo
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the In Vivo web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1 + 2 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Clinical Prognostic Factors for Local Control and Survival After Irradiation of Grade II Gliomas
JASPAR WITTELER, STEVEN E. SCHILD, DIRK RADES
In Vivo Nov 2020, 34 (6) 3719-3722; DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12220

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Clinical Prognostic Factors for Local Control and Survival After Irradiation of Grade II Gliomas
JASPAR WITTELER, STEVEN E. SCHILD, DIRK RADES
In Vivo Nov 2020, 34 (6) 3719-3722; DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12220
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

  • Pre-treatment Emotional Distress in Patients Irradiated for Malignant Glioma
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Association Between Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor Use and Acute Kidney Injury in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: A Disproportionality Analysis Based on the FAERS
  • Expression Patterns of T-cell immunoreceptor With Ig and ITIM domains (TIGIT) in Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma: A Clinicopathological Study
  • Older Age and Outcomes of Intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guérin for Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer
Show more Clinical Studies

Keywords

  • Grade II gliomas
  • radiotherapy
  • local control
  • survival
  • prognostic factors
In Vivo

© 2026 In Vivo

Powered by HighWire