4.5 Review

Congress of neurological surgeons systematic review and evidence-based guidelines update on the role of targeted therapies and immunotherapies in the management of progressive glioblastoma

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEURO-ONCOLOGY
卷 158, 期 2, 页码 265-321

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11060-021-03876-7

关键词

Progressive glioblastoma; Guidelines update; Targeted therapy; Immunotherapy

资金

  1. Congress of Neurological Surgery
  2. American Association of Neurological Surgeons
  3. Congress of Neurological Surgeons

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The recommendations provided apply to adults with progressive GBM who have undergone standard primary treatment, suggesting the use of bevacizumab for improved disease control. There is insufficient evidence to support the benefit or harm of combining bevacizumab with cytotoxic or targeted therapies in progressive glioblastoma.
The following questions and recommendations are pertinent to the following: Target population These recommendations apply to adults with progressive GBM who have undergone standard primary treatment with surgery and/or chemoradiation. Question 1 In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of bevacizumab as monotherapy superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival? Recommendation Level III: Treatment with bevacizumab is suggested in the treatment of progressive GBM, as it provides improved disease control compared to historical controls as measured by best imaging response and progression free survival at 6 months, while not providing evidence for improvement in overall survival. Question 2 In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of bevacizumab as combination therapy with cytotoxic agents superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival? Recommendation Level III: There is insufficient evidence to show benefit or harm of bevacizumab in combination with cytotoxic therapies in progressive glioblastoma due to a lack of evidence supporting a clearly defined benefit without significant toxicity. Question 3 In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of bevacizumab as a combination therapy with targeted agents superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival? Recommendation There is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation regarding this question. Question 4 In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of targeted agents as monotherapy superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival? Recommendation There is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation regarding this question. Question 5 In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of targeted agents in combination with cytotoxic therapies superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival? Recommendation There is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation regarding this question. Question 6 In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of immunotherapy monotherapy superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival? Recommendation There is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation regarding this question. Question 7 In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of immunotherapy in combination with targeted agents superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival? Recommendation There is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation regarding this question. Question 8 In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of immunotherapy in combination with bevacizumab superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival? Recommendation There is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation regarding this question.

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