» Articles » PMID: 38222046

Incidence and Outcome of Pseudoprogression After Radiation Therapy in Glioblastoma Patients: A Cohort Study

Abstract

Background: Differentiating post-radiation MRI changes from progressive disease (PD) in glioblastoma (GBM) patients represents a major challenge. The clinical problem is two-sided; avoid termination of effective therapy in case of pseudoprogression (PsP) and continuation of ineffective therapy in case of PD. We retrospectively assessed the incidence, management, and prognostic impact of PsP and analyzed factors associated with PsP in a GBM patient cohort.

Methods: Consecutive GBM patients diagnosed in the South-Eastern Norway Health Region from 2015 to 2018 who had received RT and follow-up MRI were included. Tumor, patient, and treatment characteristics were analyzed in relationship to re-evaluated MRI examinations at 3 and 6 months post-radiation using Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria.

Results: A total of 284 patients were included in the study. PsP incidence 3 and 6 months post-radiation was 19.4% and 7.0%, respectively. In adjusted analyses, methylated - () promoter and the absence of neurological deterioration were associated with PsP at both 3 ( < .001 and = .029, respectively) and 6 months ( = .045 and = .034, respectively) post-radiation. For patients retrospectively assessed as PD 3 months post-radiation, there was no survival benefit of treatment change ( = .838).

Conclusions: PsP incidence was similar to previous reports. In addition to the previously described correlation of methylated promoter with PsP, we also found that absence of neurological deterioration significantly correlated with PsP. Continuation of temozolomide courses did not seem to compromise survival for patients with PD at 3 months post-radiation; therefore, we recommend continuing adjuvant temozolomide courses in case of inconclusive MRI findings.

Citing Articles

Modernizing Neuro-Oncology: The Impact of Imaging, Liquid Biopsies, and AI on Diagnosis and Treatment.

Rafanan J, Ghani N, Kazemeini S, Nadeem-Tariq A, Shih R, Vida T Int J Mol Sci. 2025; 26(3).

PMID: 39940686 PMC: 11817476. DOI: 10.3390/ijms26030917.


Diagnosing pseudoprogression in glioblastoma: A challenging clinical issue.

Galldiks N Neurooncol Pract. 2024; 11(1):1-2.

PMID: 38222056 PMC: 10785576. DOI: 10.1093/nop/npad078.

References
1.
Brandsma D, Stalpers L, Taal W, Sminia P, van den Bent M . Clinical features, mechanisms, and management of pseudoprogression in malignant gliomas. Lancet Oncol. 2008; 9(5):453-61. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70125-6. View

2.
Ruben J, Dally M, Bailey M, Smith R, McLean C, Fedele P . Cerebral radiation necrosis: incidence, outcomes, and risk factors with emphasis on radiation parameters and chemotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 65(2):499-508. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.12.002. View

3.
Gittleman H, Lim D, Kattan M, Chakravarti A, Gilbert M, Lassman A . An independently validated nomogram for individualized estimation of survival among patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: NRG Oncology RTOG 0525 and 0825. Neuro Oncol. 2017; 19(5):669-677. PMC: 5464437. DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/now208. View

4.
Taal W, Brandsma D, de Bruin H, Bromberg J, Swaak-Kragten A, Sillevis Smitt P . Incidence of early pseudo-progression in a cohort of malignant glioma patients treated with chemoirradiation with temozolomide. Cancer. 2008; 113(2):405-10. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23562. View

5.
Louis D, Ohgaki H, Wiestler O, Cavenee W, Burger P, Jouvet A . The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta Neuropathol. 2007; 114(2):97-109. PMC: 1929165. DOI: 10.1007/s00401-007-0243-4. View