Júlio Leonardo B. PereiraPhone: (+1) 424-2301706Linkedin:http://www.linkedin.com/in/juliommais Site: www.neurocirurgiabr.com
Júlio Leonardo B. PereiraPhone: (+1) 424-2301706Linkedin:http://www.linkedin.com/in/juliommais Site: www.neurocirurgiabr.com
Published online before print December 28, 2012, doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A3467
AJNR 2013 34: E10-E11
A. Guptaa
aDepartment of Radiology
Weill Cornell Medical College/New-York Presbyterian Hospital
New York, New York
A. Pragerb and R.J. Youngb
bDepartment of Radiology
W. Shic
cDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics
A.M.P. Omurod
dDepartment of Neurology
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
New York, New York
J.J. Grabere
eDepartment of Neurology
Montefiore Medical Center
New York, New York
Methylation of the DNA repair enzyme O6-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) has been well described as one the most significant biomarkers of glioblastoma (GBM) patient prognosis and response to standard first-line chemotherapy treatment with temozolomide.1 As such, we read with great interest the recent study published in AJNR in May 2011 entitled "Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Histogram Analysis Stratifies Progression-Free Survival in Newly Diagnosed Bevacizumab-Treated Glioblastoma" by Dr. Pope and colleagues.2
A significant conclusion of this study was that "lower ADC is associated with tumor MGMT promoter methylation." This is a finding of significant interest to radiologists and oncologists alike as it suggests that ADC measures can potentially function as both a prognostic and predictive imaging biomarker and thereby act as a surrogate for the reference standard pathologic determination of MGMT methylation status. The authors arrived at this conclusion based on a pixel-by-pixel ADC histogram analysis with bi-modal curve fitting of enhancing tumor in 89 patients with GBM with pathologically confirmed methylation status. This analysis showed a mean ADC of 1071 × 10−6mm2/s for 36 methylated tumors versus 1183 × 10−6mm2/s for 53 unmethylated tumors, with a P value of .01 between the groups.
To assess the applicability of these findings to our own patients, we retrospectively performed blinded quantitative ADC measurements in 105 treatment naïve, preoperative patients with GBM with pathologically confirmed MGMT promoter methylation status determined through real-time methylation specific polymerase chain reaction. Our goal was to build on the work of Pope et al2 by using an ADC quantification technique readily available from a popular vendor and applicable to daily clinical practice. We performed region of interest analysis by using an off-line commercially available workstation (Advantage; GE Healthcare, Milwaukee, Wisconsin) and software (FuncTools 9.04b; GE Healthcare) to calculate quantititative ADC metrics. We drew ROIs around the contrast enhancing tumor and derived ADCmean, ADCmin, and ADCmax values. In addition, by using a validated and commonly used standardized technique,3,4 we manually placed 4 small circular ROIs (30–50 mm2) in the enhancing tumor to select the region of maximal ADC hypointensity and recorded this minimum value as ADCregion of interest. We also obtained ADCratios by dividing ADCregion of interest by ADCnormal with a region of interest placed in normal contralateral brain. Results after Wilcoxon rank-sum tests are summarized in the Table.
In this window In a new window
Unlike Pope et al, 2 in our slightly larger series (n = 105 versus n = 89) by using more widely available postprocessing tools (ADC region of interest analysis on commercially available software versus ADC histogram analysis), we were not able to find a correlation between ADC values and MGMT promoter status (P values >.12). Although our divergent conclusions may in part be related to differences in methods, we suggest that the role of DWI and ADC quantification to predict glioblastoma prognosis and MGMT promoter status requires more investigation and validation before wide adoption into routine clinical practice.
The authors gratefully thank Drs. Akash D. Shah, Andrew D. Schweitzer, Jason Huse, and Zhigang Zhang for their contributions to this project.
W. Popea
aDepartment of Radiological Sciences
David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA
Los Angeles, California
We agree that the differences in technique (2-curve histogram modeling versus minimum ADC region-of-interest analysis) may account for the discrepant conclusions, meriting further investigation in larger datasets.
In this phase II trial, we investigated the efficacy of a metronomic temozolomide schedule in the treatment of recurrent malignant gliomas (MGs).
MethodsEligible patients received daily temozolomide (50 mg/m2) continuously until progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival rate at 6 months in the glioblastoma cohort (N = 37). In an exploratory analysis, 10 additional recurrent grade III MG patients were enrolled. Correlative studies included evaluation of 76 frequent mutations in glioblastoma (iPLEX assay, Sequenom) aiming at establishing the frequency of potentially "drugable" mutations in patients entering recurrent MG clinical trials.
ResultsAmong glioblastoma patients, median age was 56 y; median Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS) was 80; 62% of patients had been treated for ≥2 recurrences, including 49% of patients having failed bevacizumab. Treatment was well tolerated; clinical benefit (complete response + partial response + stable disease) was seen in 10 (36%) patients. Progression-free survival rate at 6 months was 19% and median overall survival was 7 months. Patients with previous bevacizumab exposure survived significantly less than bevacizumab-naive patients (median overall survival: 4.3 mo vs 13 mo; hazard ratio = 3.2; P = .001), but those patients had lower KPS (P = .04) and higher number of recurrences (P < .0001). Mutations were found in 13 of the 38 MGs tested, including mutations of EGFR (N = 10), IDH1 (N = 5), and ERBB2 (N = 1).
ConclusionsIn spite of a heavily pretreated population, including nearly half of patients having failed bevacizumab, the primary endpoint was met, suggesting that this regimen deserves further investigation. Results in bevacizumab-naive patients seemed particularly favorable, while results in bevacizumab-failing patients highlight the need to develop further treatment strategies for advanced MG.
Clinical trials.gov identifierNCT00498927 (available at http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00498927)
Cancer patients and their oncologists often report differing perceptions of consultation discussions and discordant expectations regarding treatment outcomes. CONNECT, a computer-based communication aid, was developed to improve communication between patients and oncologists.
CONNECT includes assessment of patient values, goals, and communication preferences; patient communication skills training; and a preconsultation physician summary report. CONNECT was tested in a 3-arm, prospective, randomized clinical trial. Prior to the initial medical oncology consultation, adult patients with advanced cancer were randomized to the following arms: 1) control; 2) CONNECT with physician summary; or 3) CONNECT without physician summary. Outcomes were assessed with postconsultation surveys.
Of 743 patients randomized, 629 completed postconsultation surveys. Patients in the intervention arms (versus control) felt that the CONNECT program made treatment decisions easier to reach (P = .003) and helped them to be more satisfied with these decisions (P < .001). In addition, patients in the intervention arms reported higher levels of satisfaction with physician communication format (P = .026) and discussion regarding support services (P = .029) and quality of life concerns (P = .042). The physician summary did not impact outcomes. Patients with higher levels of education and poorer physical functioning experienced greater benefit from CONNECT.
This prospective randomized clinical trial demonstrates that computer-based communication skills training can positively affect patient satisfaction with communication and decision-making. Measurable patient characteristics may be used to identify subgroups most likely to benefit from an intervention such as CONNECT. Cancer 2013. © 2013 American Cancer Society.