4.5 Article

Hypertension and proteinuria as clinical biomarkers of response to bevacizumab in glioblastoma patients

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEURO-ONCOLOGY
Volume 147, Issue 1, Pages 109-116

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11060-020-03404-z

Keywords

Glioblastoma; Bevacizumab; Progression-free survival; Hypertension; Proteinuria; Predictors

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction Arterial hypertension and proteinuria are common side effects of antiangiogenic treatment and might represent a biomarker of response in patients with glioblastoma. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of these side effects in predicting therapeutic response to second line chemotherapy with bevacizumab. Methods We evaluated clinical and survival data of glioblastoma patients who underwent treatment with bevacizumab after progression under temozolomide, at CHUSJ between 2010 and 2017. We analysed treatment-related arterial hypertension, proteinuria grade, thrombotic and haemorrhagic events during treatment. Overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) under bevacizumab were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazards method. Results We evaluated 140 patients. Arterial hypertension and proteinuria occurred in 23 (16.3%) and 17 (12.1%) patients, respectively. PFS during treatment with bevacizumab was 12 months (95% CI 7.9-16.1) in the hypertensive group and 4 months (95% CI 3.2-4.8) in the normotensive group (p = 0.005). Patients with proteinuria had a PFS of 10 months (95% CI 4.9-15.0) versus 4 months (95% CI 3.4-4.8) in patients without proteinuria (p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis revealed hypertension and proteinuria as independent prognostic factors of PFS and OS. Conclusion Our data suggest that hypertension and proteinuria can be effective predictors of response to antiangiogenic therapy in recurrent glioblastoma and are associated with longer disease control.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available