4.5 Article

Impact of overall corticosteroid exposure during chemoradiotherapy on lymphopenia and survival of glioblastoma patients

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEURO-ONCOLOGY
卷 143, 期 1, 页码 129-136

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11060-019-03146-7

关键词

Glioblastoma; Corticosteroids; Lymphopenia; Chemoradiotherapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PurposeCorticosteroids are commonly used to alleviate symptoms from cerebral vasogenic edema in glioblastoma (GBM) patients. This study evaluated the impact of overall corticosteroid exposure during chemoradiotherapy (CRT) on acute severe lymphopenia (ASL) and survival outcomes of GBM patients.MethodsGBM patients treated with CRT from 2007 to 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Overall corticosteroid exposure was estimated as the average daily dexamethasone dose during 6weeks of CRT. ASL was defined as grade 3 or higher lymphopenia within 3months of starting CRT. ASL rates, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable analysis (MVA) was performed using logistic and Cox regression to identify independent predictors of ASL and survival outcomes, respectively.ResultsOf the 319 eligible patients, the median daily dexamethasone use was 2mg/day. The high-dose dexamethasone cohort (>2mg/day) had significantly higher ASL and worse OS than the low-dose dexamethasone cohort: 3-month ASL of 43.7% versus 19.8% (p<0.003) and median OS of 12.6months versus 17.9months (p<0.001), respectively. On MVA, higher dexamethasone use was independently associated with higher ASL and worse OS, but not worse PFS. A subset analysis of patients with gross-total resection found that higher dexamethasone use was significantly associated with ASL, but not OS.ConclusionIncreased corticosteroid use among GBM patients during CRT appears to be an independent risk factor for developing subsequent ASL. Its apparent association with worse OS may be influenced by other confounding factors and would need to be validated through prospective investigations.

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