Patterns of Tumor Progression Following BNCT of Glioblastoma Multiforme

  • Aidnag Z. Diaz
  • Arjun D. Chanana
  • Jacek Capala
  • Ruimei Ma

Abstract

The recurrence patterns after conventional adjuvant treatment of glioblastoma multiforme has been analyzed in the past. The most consistent pattern seen in these studies is the predominance of local recurrence.1,2,3 Hochberg and Pruitt were the first investigators to discover that the gross and microscopic tumors were within 2 cm of the contrast-enhancing tumor margin on pre-terminal CT scans in 83% of the patients.3 This became the basis for target volume definition in radiotherapy. In the first several BNCT protocols, this target definition was adopted. However, there has been considerable consternation over the significance of peritumoral edema when planning radiation fields. Biopsy and autopsy studies from the Mayo Clinic and Duke University have shown infiltrating cells in edematous regions.1,2 If so, peritumoral hypodense regions may be at risk for tumor recurrence and should be included in the treatment volume. However, this observation is still in dispute because the malignant nature of the infiltrating cells has not been proven. In the studies by Wallner et al. from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, no tendency for tumor recurrence in edematous areas was shown.4 The present paper reports on the recurrence patterns seen on our BNCT trial, in particular, with relation to regions of peritumoral edema.

Keywords

Creatinine Boron Oncol Peri Astrocytoma 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    P.C. Burger, E.R. Heinz, T. Shibata, et al., Topographic anatomy and CT correlations in the untreated glioblastoma multiforme, J Neurosurg 68:698-704, 1988.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    P.J. Kelly, C. Daumas-Duport, D.B. Kispert, et al., Imaging-based stereotactic serial biopsies in untreated intracranial glial neoplasms, J Neurosurg 66:865-874, 1987.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    F.H. Hochberg, and A. Pruitt, Assumptions in the radiotherapy of glioblastoma. Neurology 30:907-911, 1980.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    K.E. Wallner, J.H. Galicich, G. Krol, et al., Patterns of failure following treatment for glioblastoma multiforme and anaplastic astrocytoma, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 16:1405-1409, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    J.S. Nelson, Y. Tsukada, D. Schoenfeld, K. Fulling, J. Lamarche, and N. Peress, Necrosis as a prognostic criterion in malignant supratentorial, astrocytic gliomas, Cancer 52:550-554, 1983.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aidnag Z. Diaz
    • 1
    • 2
  • Arjun D. Chanana
    • 1
  • Jacek Capala
    • 1
  • Ruimei Ma
    • 1
  1. 1.Medical DepartmentBrookhaven National LaboratoryUptonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Radiation OncologyMontefiore Medical CenterBronxUSA

Personalised recommendations