PL03.1.A Surgery for glioblastomas in the elderly: an ANOCEF trial (CSA)

Résumé fourni par la source

Abstract BACKGROUND The role of surgery for the treatment of malignant gliomas in patients 70 years of age or older is unsettled. We conducted a randomized trial that compared surgical resection of the tumor and biopsy only, both followed by standard therapy, in such patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients aged 70 years and older, with a KPS of at least 50, presenting with a radiological suspicion of an operable glioblastoma (GBM) were randomly assigned between tumor resection and biopsy. Subsequently, they underwent standard radiotherapy during the first years of the trial (2008–2017), with the adjunction of concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide when this regimen became standard (2017–2019). The primary end point was survival; secondary endpoints were progression free survival (PFS), cognitive status (MMS), autonomy (KPS), quality of life (EORTC QLQ C30 and BN20), and perioperative morbidity/ mortality. RESULTS From 2008 to 2019, 107 patients from 9 centers were enrolled in the study, of whom 101 were evaluable for analysis because the diagnosis of GBM was histologically confirmed (50 patients in the “surgery” arm and 51 patients in the “biopsy” arm). There was no statistically significant difference of median survival between the “surgery” arm (9.37 mo) and the “biopsy” arms (8.96 mo, p=0.36). However, the surgery group had increased PFS (5.06 mo vs 4.02 mo; p=0.034; p=0.002 on multivariate analysis) and better QOL (e.g. physical and cognitive functioning, motor dysfunction, fatigue) and KPS score evolution as compared to the “biopsy” group. Surgery was not associated with increased mortality or morbidity. CONCLUSION This study suggests that optimal debulking surgery does not provide a significant survival benefit in elderly patients suffering from newly diagnosed malignant glioma, but resection improves QOL and autonomy with a significant though modest improvement of PFS.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.