Skip to main content

Congress of neurological surgeons systematic review and evidence-based guidelines update on the role of cytoreductive surgery in the management of progressive glioblastoma in adults

Abstract

Question

In patients with previously diagnosed glioblastoma who are suspected of experiencing progression, does repeat cytoreductive surgery improve progression free survival or overall survival compared to alternative interventions?

Target population

These recommendations apply to adults with previously diagnosed glioblastoma who are suspected of experiencing progression of the neoplastic process and are amenable to surgical resection.

Recommendation

Level II: Repeat cytoreductive surgery is recommended in progressive glioblastoma patients to improve overall survival.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Data availability

The studies used to compile the dataset for the current manuscript are available through PubMed. All authors have ensured all data and materials as well as software applications or custom code supports their published claims and comply with field standards.

Abbreviations

CRET:

Complete resection of enhancing tumor

EOR:

Extent of resection

GBM:

Glioblastoma multiforme

KPS:

Karnofsky Performance Status

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

PFS:

Progression free survival

STX:

Stereotactic biopsy

TMZ:

Temozolomide

OS:

Overall survival

References

  1. Archavlis E, Tselis N, Birn G, Ulrich P, Zamboglou N (2014) Salvage therapy for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: a multimodal approach combining fluorescence-guided resurgery, interstitial irradiation, and chemotherapy. Neurol Res 36:1047–1055

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Montemurro N, Perrini P, Blanco MO, Vannozzi R (2016) Second surgery for recurrent glioblastoma: a concise overview of the current literature. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 142:60–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ryken TC, Kalkanis SN, Buatti JM, Olson JJ, Committee ACJG (2014) The role of cytoreductive surgery in the management of progressive glioblastoma : a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline. J Neurooncol 118:479–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Yong RL, Wu T, Mihatov N et al (2014) Residual tumor volume and patient survival following reoperation for recurrent glioblastoma. J Neurosurg 121:802–809

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Suchorska B, Weller M, Tabatabai G et al (2016) Complete resection of contrast-enhancing tumor volume is associated with improved survival in recurrent glioblastoma-results from the DIRECTOR trial. Neuro Oncol 18:549–556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. D’Amico RS, Cloney MB, Sonabend AM et al (2015) The safety of surgery in elderly patients with primary and recurrent glioblastoma. World Neurosurg 84:913–919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hager J, Herrmann E, Kammerer S et al (2018) Impact of resection on overall survival of recurrent Glioblastoma in elderly patients. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 174:21–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Oppenlander ME, Wolf AB, Snyder LA et al (2014) An extent of resection threshold for recurrent glioblastoma and its risk for neurological morbidity. J Neurosurg 120:846–853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Sanai N, Polley MY, McDermott MW, Parsa AT, Berger MS (2011) An extent of resection threshold for newly diagnosed glioblastomas. J Neurosurg 115:3–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bloch O, Han SJ, Cha S et al (2012) Impact of extent of resection for recurrent glioblastoma on overall survival: clinical article. J Neurosurg 117:1032–1038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Stummer W, Pichlmeier U, Meinel T et al (2006) Fluorescence-guided surgery with 5-aminolevulinic acid for resection of malignant glioma: a randomised controlled multicentre phase III trial. Lancet Oncol 7:392–401

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Stummer W, Tonn JC, Mehdorn HM et al (2011) Counterbalancing risks and gains from extended resections in malignant glioma surgery: a supplemental analysis from the randomized 5-aminolevulinic acid glioma resection study. Clinical article. J Neurosurg 114:613–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Nabavi A, Thurm H, Zountsas B et al (2009) Five-aminolevulinic acid for fluorescence-guided resection of recurrent malignant gliomas: a phase II study. Neurosurgery 65:1070–1076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chohan MO, Berger MS (2019) 5-Aminolevulinic acid fluorescence guided surgery for recurrent high-grade gliomas. J Neurooncol 141(3):517–522

  15. Hansen RW, Pedersen CB, Halle B et al (2019) Comparison of 5-aminolevulinic acid and sodium fluorescein for intraoperative tumor visualization in patients with high-grade gliomas: a single-center retrospective study. J Neurosurg. https://doi.org/10.3171/2019.6.JNS191531:1-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hohne J, Schebesch KM, de Laurentis C et al (2019) Fluorescein sodium in the surgical treatment of recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. World Neurosurg 125:e158–e164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Quick-Weller J, Lescher S, Forster MT, Konczalla J, Seifert V, Senft C (2016) Combination of 5-ALA and iMRI in re-resection of recurrent glioblastoma. Br J Neurosurg 30:313–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ringel F, Pape H, Sabel M et al (2016) Clinical benefit from resection of recurrent glioblastomas: results of a multicenter study including 503 patients with recurrent glioblastomas undergoing surgical resection. Neuro Oncol 18:96–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Park JK, Hodges T, Arko L et al (2010) Scale to predict survival after surgery for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. J Clin Oncol 28:3838–3843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Park CK, Kim JH, Nam DH et al (2013) A practical scoring system to determine whether to proceed with surgical resection in recurrent glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol 15:1096–1101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Pala A, Schmitz AL, Knoll A et al (2018) Is MGMT promoter methylation to be considered in the decision making for recurrent surgery in glioblastoma patients? Clin Neurol Neurosurg 167:6–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Dejaegher J, De Vleeschouwer S (2017) Recurring glioblastoma: a case for reoperation? In: De Vleeschouwer S, (ed) Glioblastoma, Brisbane (AU)

  23. Cramer SW, Chen CC (2019) Photodynamic therapy for the treatment of Glioblastoma. Front Surg 6:81

  24. Munoz-Casabella A et al (2021) Laser Interstitial thermal therapy for recurrent Glioblastoma: Pooled analyses of available Literature. World Neurosurg 153:91–97 e91

  25. Zhao YH, Wang ZF, Pan ZY et al (2019) A meta-analysis of survival outcomes following reoperation in recurrent glioblastoma: time to consider the timing of reoperation. Front Neurol 10:286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Brandes AA, Bartolotti M, Tosoni A et al (2016) Patient outcomes following second surgery for recurrent glioblastoma. Future Oncol 12:1039–1044

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The guidelines task force would like to acknowledge the Congress of Neurological Surgeons Guidelines Committee for their contributions throughout the development of the guideline, and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons Joint Guidelines Review Committee for their review, comments, and suggestions throughout peer review, as well as the contributions of Trish Rehring, MPH, CHES, Senior Manager of Clinical Practice Guidelines for the CNS, and Mary Bodach, MLIS, from the Congress of Neurological Surgeons Guidelines Office for organizational assistance and reference librarian services, respectively as well as Jeremy Kupsco, PhD, Informationist, Emory University, for their valuable input as Medical Research Librarians. Throughout the review process, the reviewers and authors were blinded from one another. At this time the guidelines task force would like to acknowledge the following individual peer reviewers for their contributions: John O’Toole, MD, Brian Howard, MD, Jamie Van Gompel, MD, Howard Silberstein, MD, Navid Redjal, MD and Shawn Hervey-Jumper, MD.

Disclaimer of liability

This clinical systematic review and evidence-based guideline was developed by a physician volunteer task force as an educational tool that reflects the current state of knowledge at the time of completion. The presentations are designed to provide an accurate review of the subject matter covered. This guideline is disseminated with the understanding that the recommendations by the authors and consultants who have collaborated in its development are not meant to replace the individualized care and treatment advice from a patient's physician(s). If medical advice or assistance is required, the services of a physician should be sought. The proposals contained in this guideline may not be suitable for use in all circumstances. The choice to implement any particular recommendation contained in this guideline must be made by a managing physician in light of the situation in each particular patient and on the basis of existing resources.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

All authors listed on this publication agree with the content included and give explicit consent to the submission of this publication. The authors obtained consent from the responsible authorities at the institute/organization where the work has been carried out, before the work was submitted. All authors whose names appear on the submission: (1) made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; or the creation of new software used in the work; (2) drafted the work or revised it critically for important intellectual content; (3) approved the version to be published; and (4) agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hayes H. Patrick.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All Guideline Task Force members were required to disclose all potential COIs prior to beginning work on the guideline, using the COI disclosure form of the AANS/CNS Joint Guidelines Review Committee. The CNS Guidelines Committee and Guideline Task Force Chair reviewed the disclosures and either approved or disapproved the nomination and participation on the task force. The CNS Guidelines Committee and Guideline Task Force Chair may approve nominations of task force members with possible conflicts and restrict the writing, reviewing, and/or voting privileges of that person to topics that are unrelated to the possible COIs. The authors have no personal, financial, or institutional interest in any of the drugs, materials, or devices described in this series of articles.

Disclosures

These guidelines were funded exclusively by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) and the Joint Section on Tumors, which received no funding from outside commercial sources to support the development of this document.

Ethical approval

All authors involved in this review have no personal, financial, or institutional interest in any of the drugs, materials, or devices described in this series of articles. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Informed consent was not necessary for obtaining data for this review.

Research involving human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Sponsors: Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) and the Section on Tumors.

Endorsement: Reviewed for evidence-based integrity and endorsed by the American Association of Neurological Surgeons and Congress of Neurological Surgeons.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Patrick, H.H., Sherman, J.H., Elder, J.B. et al. Congress of neurological surgeons systematic review and evidence-based guidelines update on the role of cytoreductive surgery in the management of progressive glioblastoma in adults. J Neurooncol 158, 167–177 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-021-03881-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-021-03881-w

Keywords

  • Glioblastoma
  • Recurrent
  • Cytoreductive surgery