4.5 Article

Irinotecan and bevacizumab in progressive primary brain tumors, an evaluation of efficacy and safety

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEURO-ONCOLOGY
卷 89, 期 1, 页码 113-118

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11060-008-9599-0

关键词

brain tumors; bevacizumab; intracranial hemorrhage; irinotecan; progressive glioma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recurrent high-grade gliomas are resistant to chemotherapy and have poor prognosis. The combination of irinotecan and bevacizumab has been reported to be an active regimen in the treatment of this disease. Herein we report our experience with this regimen with the objective of evaluating its efficacy and examining its safety profile. We performed a retrospective review of 27 patients with recurrent or progressive high-grade gliomas treated at the Cleveland Clinic Brain Tumor and Neuro-Oncology Center from 7/2005 through 10/2006. Patients with at least one prior chemotherapy regimen were included. Patients with prior irinotecan or bevacizumab were excluded. Outcomes were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis and estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. The median age of the group was 46 years and the median number of prior therapies was two. Eighteen of 27 patients have progressed, and 11 patients have died at time of analysis. Progression-free survival at 6 months is 46% and overall survival at 6 months is 84% with a median overall survival of 12.6 months. Of 12 patients with pretreatment radiographic evidence of intracranial hemorrhage, only one developed symptomatic progression of hemorrhage that required termination of therapy. Our experience suggests that the combination of irinotecan and bevacizumab improves the outcome in progressive high-grade gliomas when compared to historical results. While the rate of severe toxicities is consistent with prior reports and mandates careful selection of patients, asymptomatic, stable intracranial blood products or hemorrhage is likely not an absolute contraindication to therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据