Your browser does not fully support modern features. Please upgrade for a smoother experience.
Submitted Successfully!
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic. For video creation, please contact our Academic Video Service.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 Maria Chiara Lo Greco -- 3432 2022-04-19 18:05:46 |
2 format change Peter Tang -34 word(s) 3398 2022-04-20 03:47:50 |

Video Upload Options

We provide professional Academic Video Service to translate complex research into visually appealing presentations. Would you like to try it?
No, upload directly Yes
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Lo Greco, M.C.; Milazzotto, R.; , .; La Rocca, M.; Altieri, R.; Barbagallo, G.; Antonio, B.; Foti, P.V.; Palmucci, S.; Pergolizzi, S.; et al. Radiotherapy Treatment Options in Management of Relapsing Glioblastoma. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21959 (accessed on 29 June 2026).
Lo Greco MC, Milazzotto R,  , La Rocca M, Altieri R, Barbagallo G, et al. Radiotherapy Treatment Options in Management of Relapsing Glioblastoma. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21959. Accessed June 29, 2026.
Lo Greco, Maria Chiara, Roberto Milazzotto,  , Madalina La Rocca, Roberto Altieri, Giuseppe Barbagallo, Basile Antonio, Pietro Valerio Foti, Stefano Palmucci, Stefano Pergolizzi, et al. "Radiotherapy Treatment Options in Management of Relapsing Glioblastoma" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21959 (accessed June 29, 2026).
Lo Greco, M.C., Milazzotto, R., , ., La Rocca, M., Altieri, R., Barbagallo, G., Antonio, B., Foti, P.V., Palmucci, S., Pergolizzi, S., Pontoriero, A., & Spatola, C. (2022, April 19). Radiotherapy Treatment Options in Management of Relapsing Glioblastoma. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21959
Lo Greco, Maria Chiara, et al. "Radiotherapy Treatment Options in Management of Relapsing Glioblastoma." Encyclopedia. Web. 19 April, 2022.
Radiotherapy Treatment Options in Management of Relapsing Glioblastoma
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/brainsci12040416

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common and aggressive brain tumor in adults, with a median survival of about 15 months. After the prior treatment, GBM tends to relapse within the high dose radiation field, defined as the peritumoral brain zone (PTZ), needing a second treatment. 

glioblastoma peritumoral zone reirradiation radiotherapy stereotactic radiosurgery proton therapy altered fractionations charged particle therapy radiosensitizers radiomics

1. Introduction

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common brain tumor in adults; it represents 54% of all gliomas and 16% of all primary brain tumors. Moreover, it is the most aggressive glioma; in fact, despite the development of a multidisciplinary approach, the outcome for the last four decades has remained stable, with a median survival of about 15 months.
The current standard of care for newly diagnosed glioblastoma is based on cytoreductive surgery, followed by concurrent adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy (CCRT) [1][2][3].
Combined therapy consists of total dose radiotherapy of 60 Gy, delivered in 2 Gy per fraction, over a period of 6 weeks daily along with TMZ 75 mg/m2, followed by a maintenance phase with TMZ 150–200 mg/m2, 5 days a week every 28 days for six cycles [4][5][6].
Despite the use of all just mentioned multidisciplinary treatments, after a relatively short period of time, almost all GBMs relapse within the high dose radiation field, defined as peritumoral brain zone (PTZ), requiring re-surgery, re-irradiation and or systemic therapies, even if given with palliative intent.
PTZ is defined as a specific parenchyma region containing tumor and stromal cells that promote GBM growth and invasion; moreover, it is characterized by an intratumoral heterogeneity that may influence tumor aggressiveness or response to chemotherapies such as temozolomide. A study published in 1989 pointed out the tendency of glioblastoma multiforme to recur near the initial pre-surgical tumor bed: in detail, it showed that 28% of unifocal tumors recur within 2.0 cm of the pre-surgical initial lesion margin, 56% of tumors recurs within 1.0 cm of the initial lesion margin. This recurrence tendency carries important implications in the planning of external beam irradiation, most importantly supporting the rationale for post-operative treatment with partial brain irradiation rather than whole-brain irradiation [7].

2. Non-RT Therapeutic Options for Recurrent GBM

For patients affected by recurrent GBM, no standard of care exists, and the median overall survival is less than a year.
Even if in a large cohort study, re-operation demonstrated to not affect survival, for patients in good performance status, with tumor recurrence in non-eloquent areas, a second surgery is currently considered a feasible local approach [8]. In particular, a review published in 2021 strongly suggests re-operation, based on data that total or subtotal resection (extent > 80%) is associated with longer survival [9].
Historically, before temozolomide introduction, the standard treatment for recurrent high-grade gliomas was nitrosourea-based chemotherapy. Perry et al. then conducted a multicenter phase II study to assess the efficacy and safety of continuous dose-intense TMZ for recurrent GBM, concluding that rechallenge with continuous dose-intense TMZ 50 mg/m2/d can be considered as a valuable therapeutic option for patients with recurrent GBM, even if it merely provided a 6-month progression-free survival of 24% [10]. In summary, at the current time, TMZ is preferred in the first place because it is well-tolerated, it has good oral bioavailability, and it is convenient to administer as an outpatient regimen. Secondly, nitrosourea-based therapy can be considered as a reasonable alternative, even if the median progression-free survival is usually only 2–3 months and is associated with a 50% grade 3+ hematological toxicities. At the current time, lomustine is used as a second course of alkylating agent to treat most recurrent GBM patients who are eligible for salvage therapy.
After the introduction of TMZ in 2005, despite the development of many preclinical studies and clinical trials, only two new agents have been approved by U.S. Food and Drug Administration: bevacizumab (Avastin), initially approved through the accelerated approval program, and Tumor-Treating Fields (TTFs). In detail, bevacizumab is a humanized monoclonal VEGF-targeting antibody that was shown to improve patient outcomes in combination with chemotherapy (most commonly irinotecan) in recurrent GBM. Moreover, since vascular damage is followed by vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) expression at high levels, inhibiting VEGF and acting on vascular tissue around the brain necrosis area, bevacizumab can alleviate brain edema symptoms caused by radiation brain necrosis. Currently, in Italy, this agent has still not been approved, but it is used in Canada, the United States and many other countries outside the European Union for recurrent glioblastoma that has progressed following prior therapy, while in patients with rapidly progressing disease, a combination of bevacizumab and lomustine can be considered [11].
Regarding TTFs, in 2015, a randomized clinical trial investigated their potential as a promising cancer treatment. TTFs therapy involves the continuous delivery of low-intensity electric fields alternating at an intermediate frequency, and this is applicated to the shaved head through a transducer connected to a portable device. This modality was shown to improve both progression-free and overall survival in GBM, and even though it was firstly approved for the treatment of recurrent GBM, this device was subsequently approved by U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) even as adjuvant therapy for newly diagnosed supratentorial GBM (due to low cost/benefit ratio, it has not been approved by most European countries) [12].
Another agent that aroused researchers’ interest is regorafenib, an oral multikinase inhibitor of angiogenic, stromal and oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases, currently approved by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) for recurrent GBM. In 2009, Lombardi et al. published a randomized phase II trial (REGOMA) comparing regorafenib to lomustine in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. This trial showed an encouraging overall survival benefit concluding that this drug might be a new potential treatment for these patients; however, further investigation and adequately powered phase 3 study are needed. Regarding other molecular targeted therapies, both clinically and pre-clinically trials were conducted, but currently, these regimens have still not impacted the disease course [13].

3. Re-Irradiation

Even though the damage of normal brain tissue previously RT-treated is a reason for concern, re-irradiation currently represents a feasible local approach to use as an alternative or in addition to surgery. In detail, the available evidence, mostly level III, suggests that re-irradiation provides encouraging disease control and survival rates, and in some cases (for example, radiosurgery vs. open surgery at recurrence), is related to a significantly reduced risk of death.
In order to have a relatively good outcome and avoid severe toxicity, it is strongly recommended in the daily clinical routine to tailor the treatment to every single patient in terms of fractionation, dose and constraints.

3.1. Stereotactic Techniques, Altered Fractionation and Brachytherapy Treatments

The modalities mostly used are conventionally fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy, hypofractionated stereotactic radiation therapy, stereotactic radiosurgery or brachytherapy techniques, characterized by the different total number of fractions and different total dose per fraction.
At the time of recurrence, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) can be considered a valid alternative rather than open surgery in selected patients with small tumor volume (<10 mL), identified by contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences. Even though it has a narrower therapeutic window between effective tumor control and radiation necrosis, many studies suggest that SRS is effective mainly for GBMs, more so than other gliomas. In detail, in a prospective study published in 2008, SRS was shown to prolong survival (23 months vs. 12 months; p < 0.0001) and to be a safe and effective salvage treatment with acceptable morbidity for selected patients with recurrent small-sized GBMs [14]. Regarding gamma knife surgery (GKS), the first retrospective study that compared surgery and GKS for GBM recurrences in terms of survival outcomes was published in 2012, showing a significantly lower complication rate for GKS and a possible survival benefit for small GBMs, since the median time from the second intervention to tumor progression was longer after GKS than after resection [15].
Even though the median survival in patients with recurrent malignant gliomas following single-fraction SRS is encouraging, the potential toxicity of single fractional treatment is a reason for concern for larger tumors or tumors located close to eloquent structures such as the optic pathway, basal ganglia, motor or speech area. In these cases, it is suggested to exploit the radiobiological advantages of fractionation to improve the therapeutic ratio.
In this regard, a conventionally fractionated stereotactic technique (CFTR) can be used. It is generally based on fractionation schemes of 1.8 Gy × 33 fx or 2 Gy × 30 fx, and despite the longer treatment course, CFRT is indicated for lesions with larger volumes.
Even though the literature data support this technique for its feasibility and the acceptable side effect rates, in the last two decades, CFRT has been superseded in clinical practice by hypofractionated schedules because of its higher degree of precise patient positioning, accurate dose delivery and reduced treatment duration.
In particular, hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HFRT) was experienced in different studies using fraction sizes ranging from 3 to 7 Gy and a number of fractions from 5 to 10 in the attempt to reduce treatment time. A systematic review published in 2019 concluded that in terms of efficacy and safety, CFRT and HFRT are similar (even though HFRT might result in better survival outcomes in patients aged >70 years), but HFRT has the advantage the treatment being completed in a shorter time, improving the quality of life in patients with poorer prognosis. Moreover, since almost 90% of local recurrences are located within the irradiation field, suggesting that failure to respond to radiotherapy may be attributable to radioresistance, it is reasonable that dose escalation might have some potential benefits in surmounting local recurrence [16].
In the wake of finding the best fractionation schedule optimization (FSO) to delay GBM recurrence, over the years, different strategies have been investigated. In particular, a study published in 2021 tested the efficacy of a super hyperfractionated approach, causing the increase in treatment duration to one year. The variable time intervals between dose fractions used in this study corresponded to the total number of fractions equivalent to weekly, bi-weekly and monthly deliveries (n = 53, 27, 13). The recurrence time points were found to be significantly delayed compared with the recurrence time of conventional fractionation; a further recurrence delay was shown to be obtained with a dose escalation to BEDnormal of 150 Gy. Despite the promising results of this novel treatment delivery method, to date, this technique is not used in clinical practice, and more preclinical and clinical studies are needed to validate its efficacy [17].

3.2. Safety and Tolerance of Reirradiation

For brain parenchyma radiation-induced toxicity, the major complication is radionecrosis, which can be radiologically diagnosed, histologically proven or associated with symptoms. Since the relapse typically occurs in-field or marginal to the field of the first-course treatment (peritumoral zone), the risk of severe side effects increases due to the overlapping of the target volume with the volume previously treated.
In 2008, Mayer et al. published a review about radiation tolerance of the human brain, concluding that the normal brain tissue necrosis is related to the cumulative equivalent dose in 2 Gy (EQD2) per fraction: >100 Gy for patients treated with conventional external beam RT, >105 for fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy and >135 for radiosurgery. In other words, patients with GBM who had received prior radiotherapy with a total dose of 60 Gy in 2 Gy fractions could receive reirradiation for an additional EQD2 of 40 Gy, 45 Gy and 75 Gy with conventional external beam radiotherapy, fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy and radiosurgery, respectively. The authors commented that the applied reirradiation dose and EQD2 cumulative were found to increase with a change in the irradiation technique from a conventional to a conformal technique, such as FSRT to radiosurgery retreatment, without increasing the risk of normal brain necrosis [18].
A review published in 2018 showed that the volume of the target influences the risk of toxicity and, consequently, the choice of fractionation: radiosurgery with EQD2 < 65 Gy may be a choice for small lesions (target volume < 12.5 mL), hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy with EQD2 < 50 Gy is feasible for medium lesions (target volume up to 35 mL), whereas conventionally fractionated treatment with EQD2 < 36 Gy may be used for reirradiation of large lesions (target volume up to 50 mL).
For the brainstem and the optic pathways, it is necessary to meet the classical constraints and tolerance dose reported by the QUANTEC review, even if it is likely that they had already received doses near to the constraints during the first radiation course. For the entire brainstem, the tolerated dose is 54 Gy in 1.8/2 Gy fractions, while a volume of 1–10 mL can tolerate a total dose of 59 Gy in 1.8/2 Gy. For radiation-induced optic neuropathy, the incidence is 3–7% for doses of 55–60 Gy, and it increases for doses >60 Gy up to 7–20% [19][20].

3.3. Charged Particle Therapy

Recent developments in radiotherapy technology have led to the availability of new beam qualities: radiotherapy with carbon ions (CIRT) or protons (PBRT). The interest in these techniques is related to their peculiar dosimetric advantage, compared to photon beam radiotherapy, and the possible ability to overcome GBM radioresistance, influencing OS and PFS rates.
In detail, carbon ions characteristics are the inverted dose profile and high local dose deposition within the Bragg peak, which lead to a precise dose application and consequently to spare as much normal tissue as possible. Moreover, in comparison to photons, carbon ions offer an increased relative biological effectiveness (RBE), which can be calculated between 2 and 5.
The first study that evaluated carbon ion radiotherapy for recurrent gliomas is the CINDERELLA trial, published in 2010, which tried to define the optimal recommended dose of carbon ion radiotherapy for re-irradiation, and then demonstrate the superiority in survival compared to FSRT. Then, a study published in 2021 investigated overall survival in recurrent glioblastoma treated with either carbon ion reirradiation or photon reirradiation. This study demonstrated CIRT to be a feasible treatment option for recurrent glioblastoma mainly thanks to its better dosimetry which allows safe irradiation of a large median PTV with high doses (45 Gy carbon ions, 15 fractions, EQD2 = 48.8 Gy, α/β = 10 Gy for tumoral tissue; EQD2 = 56.3 Gy, α/β = 2 Gy for OARs) sparing, at the same time, the surrounding organs at risks [21][22][23].
For proton beams radiotherapy (PBRT), its dosimetry advantage is related to the specificities of linear energy transfer, called Bragg peak: in particular, this technique is characterized by a low incoming dose and the majority energy deposition to a single point, usually, the target, beyond which the energy declines sharply. Since GBM generally relapse within the high dose radiation field (PTZ), the Bragg peak, together with the possibility to not use coplanar beams, including vertex beams, allow a minimized reirradiation of previously irradiated brain tissue and a spared cumulative radiation dose to critical OARs, allowing to increase the total dose [24][25].
In 2020, Saeed et al. analyzed treatment patterns, toxicities and clinical outcomes of patients who underwent PBT reirradiation, collecting the largest analyses about PBT reirradiation of patients with recurrent GBM to date. In this study, it was confirmed that PBRT is well tolerated and offers efficacy rates comparable with previously reported photon reirradiation. In the same year, Scartoni et al. affirmed that PBRT is also able to preserve the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) until the time of disease progression in addition to being a safe and effective treatment [26][27][28][29].

4. Predictive Factor of Response to Re-Irradiation and Combination with Systemic Therapies

For years, a clinical practice documented that not all patients respond to adjuvant therapies in a similar way.
Specifically, some patients are very susceptible to recurrence due to insensitivity to adjuvant therapy, while other patients demonstrated to be more sensitive, recording significantly longer progression-free survival and overall survival. This heterogeneity in therapeutic response seems to be related to both cell-intrinsic molecular factors, such as genetic variations, and micro-environmental factors.

4.1. Role of IDH1 and MGMT

Regarding genetic variations of GBM, in 2008, Parsons et al. published an integrated genomic analysis of human glioblastoma multiforme revealing an Isocitrate Dehydrogenase 1 mutation (IDH1), located at codon R132, which is characteristic of all subtypes of glioma, excepting for primary GBM [30]. Evidence suggested that GBM with IDH1 mutation represents a distinct disease entity characterized by a different clinical behavior: it emerges in the frontal lobe in young individuals and has a significantly longer PSF and OS [31].
The mechanism behind the improved survival in the subset of a patient with IDH1 mutation seems to be related to cells’ increased susceptibility to oxidative damage and consequently to the increased sensitivity to radiotherapy (but not to temozolomide) [32][33][34].
Currently, three Isocitrate Dehydrogenase enzymes have been identified (IDH1, IDH2 and IDH3), but only IDH1 and IDH2 enzymes were shown to be mutated in GBM.
Other than IDH mutations, during past decades, another prognostic factor of equal importance has been identified: the O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation, a genomic modification able to define patients who are most likely to benefit from the addition of temozolomide chemotherapy and to foresee the recurrence pattern (in the field (PTZ) or distant to the primary radiation field). Although the factors underlying this phenomenon are not clear, it is possible that MGMT methylation status can alter the motility and migration pattern of GBM cells and that the combined chemoradiation approach can enhance local GBM cell eradication thanks to the synergic effect on MGMT methylated cells. These hypotheses are supported by a study published in 2009, which demonstrated that the time to recurrence was prolonged in patients with MGMT methylated status, as was the time to distant recurrence. Furthermore, the recurrence pattern was significantly influenced by MGMT methylation status: recurrences happened outside the RT field in 15% and 42% of patients with MGMT unmethylated and MGMT methylated status, respectively [35][36]. Moreover, a recent study suggested that dual alkylator therapy with temozolomide and lomustine might improve survival compared with standard temozolomide therapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with an MGMT-methylated promoter [37].

5. The Role of Radiomics and PET/MRI Advanced Imaging in the Management of Relapsing GBM

Reirradiation of high-grade gliomas represents a difficult challenge for the radiation oncologist because GBMs tend to relapse within the high-dose radiation field, defined as the peritumoral brain zone. Therefore it is necessary to re-irradiate an already treated issue (approximately 4–6 months before) to prevent further neurological, motor and cognitive toxicity.
In detail, PTZ is a specific parenchyma region containing tumor and stromal cells able to promote GBM growth and invasion. This zone has been studied for years to identify PTZ characteristics and to define the best therapeutic approach. It was first shown that tumor cell infiltration could be detected in areas considered normal both on standard MRI and by the neurosurgeon under an operating microscope. Secondly, it is provided with selected tumor clones and stromal cells with tumorigenic and angiogenic properties that increase GBM aggressivity [38][39][40].
Furthermore, in recent years, there has been a rapid implementation of radiotherapy techniques with the use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and stereotaxic brain treatments (SBRT), which allow delivering a high dose of radiation to smaller volumes with more precision, while sparing the surrounding healthy tissues. In parallel, the researchers assisted the implementation of advanced radiodiagnoses, such as radiomics, MRI and PET images, which demonstrated to be fundamentals to achieve better precision in the radiation treatment of the primitive and relapse [41][42].

5.1. Radiomics

Radiomics is a process that consists in the transformation of PET/CT/MRI images to mineable data; it implies image acquisition, segmentation and labeling of the tumor/normal tissues, extraction of quantitative features (shape, texture, intensity), followed by machine learning and statistical modeling. This technology can be used in the pre-surgical, radiation or post-treatment phase; moreover, it may play a role both in the staging and grading phase. In 2021, Russo et al. exploited machine learning on 11[C]-MET PET/CT scan images of fifty-six patients affected by a primary brain tumor to create a predictive model capable of discriminating low- and high-grade CNS, demonstrating a percentage of sensitivity of 72–86.7%, and specificity and accuracy greater than 80% [43].
Radiomics also play a role in differentiating post-treatment effects such as pseudoprogression (PsP) from true progression worthy of re-RT, which is one of the major problems for the multidisciplinary neuro-oncology team. In detail, PsP is defined as a transient magnetic resonance imaging pattern that use to mimic tumor progression. It generally occurs during the first 3 months after radiation therapy and improves within a few weeks or months; this phenomenon is more frequent in patients treated with concomitant temozolomide than in those receiving radiation therapy alone, and it is particularly frequent in patients MGMT promoter methylation. In this regard, current studies support the potential clinical applications of radiomics to predict pseudoprogression. For example, in 2021, Baine et al. made published a retrospective review that analyzed radiomic data of the pre-RT MR images of 72 patients, mostly treated with 60 Gy in 30 fractions with concomitant temozolomide: of these patients identified for the study, 35 were able to be assessed for pseudoprogression, and 8 (22.9%) had pseudoprogression [44].

References

  1. Ostrom, Q.T.; Gittleman, H.; Farah, P.; Ondracek, A.; Chen, Y.; Wolinsky, Y.; Stroup, N.E.; Kruchko, C.; Barnholtz-Sloan, J.S. CBTRUS statistical report: Primary brain and central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2006–2010. Neuro-Oncology 2013, 15 (Suppl. 2), ii1–ii56.
  2. Koshy, M.; Villano, J.L.; Dolecek, T.A.; Howard, A.; Mahmood, U.; Chmura, S.J.; Weichselbaum, R.R.; McCarthy, B.J. Improved survival time trends for glioblastoma using the SEER 17 population-based registries. J. Neuro-Oncol. 2012, 107, 207–212.
  3. Manrique-Guzmán, S.; Herrada-Pineda, T.; Revilla-Pacheco, F. Surgical Management of Glioblastoma; De Vleeschouwer, S., Ed.; Codon Publications: Brisbane, Australia, 2017; Chapter 12.
  4. Stupp, R.; Mason, W.P.; van den Bent, M.J.; Weller, M.; Fisher, B.; Taphoorn, M.J.; Belanger, K.; Brandes, A.A.; Marosi, C.; Bogdahn, U.; et al. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumor and Radiotherapy Groups, National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 2005, 352, 987–996.
  5. Stupp, R.; Hegi, M.E.; Mason, W.P.; van den Bent, M.J.; Taphoorn, M.J.; Janzer, R.C.; Ludwin, S.K.; Allgeier, A.; Fisher, B.; Belanger, K.; et al. Effects of radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide versus radiotherapy alone on survival in glioblastoma in a randomised phase III study: 5-year analysis of the EORTC-NCIC trial. Lancet Oncol. 2009, 10, 459–466.
  6. Kim, B.S.; Seol, H.J.; Nam, D.H.; Park, C.K.; Kim, I.H.; Kim, T.M.; Kim, J.H.; Cho, Y.H.; Yoon, S.M.; Chang, J.H.; et al. Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy with Temozolomide Followed by Adjuvant Temozolomide for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Patients: A Retrospective Multicenter Observation Study in Korea. Cancer Res. Treat. 2017, 49, 193–203.
  7. Wallner, K.E.; Galicich, J.H.; Krol, G.; Arbit, E.; Malkin, M.G. Patterns of failure following treatment for glioblastoma multiforme and anaplastic astrocytoma. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1989, 16, 1405–1409.
  8. Nava, F.; Tramacere, I.; Fittipaldo, A.; Bruzzone, M.G.; Dimeco, F.; Fariselli, L.; Finocchiaro, G.; Pollo, B.; Salmaggi, A.; Silvani, A.; et al. Survival effect of first- and second-line treatments for patients with primary glioblastoma: A cohort study from a prospective registry, 1997–2010. Neuro-Oncology 2014, 16, 719–727.
  9. Minniti, G.; Niyazi, M.; Alongi, F.; Navarria, P.; Belka, C. Current status and recent advances in reirradiation of glioblastoma. Radiat. Oncol. 2021, 16, 36.
  10. Reardon, D.A.; Desjardins, A.; Peters, K.; Gururangan, S.; Sampson, J.; Rich, J.N.; McLendon, R.; Herndon, J.E.; 2nd Marcello, J.; Threatt, S.; et al. Phase II study of metronomic chemotherapy with bevacizumab for recurrent glioblastoma after progression on bevacizumab therapy. J. Neuro-Oncol. 2011, 103, 371–379.
  11. Diaz, R.J.; Ali, S.; Qadir, M.G.; De La Fuente, M.I.; Ivan, M.E.; Komotar, R.J. The role of bevacizumab in the treatment of glioblastoma. J. Neurooncol. 2017, 133, 455–467.
  12. Martínez-Garcia, M.; Álvarez-Linera, J.; Carrato, C.; Ley, L.; Luque, R.; Maldonado, X.; Martínez-Aguillo, M.; Navarro, L.M.; Vaz-Salgado, M.A.; Gil-Gil, M. SEOM clinical guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of glioblastoma (2017). Clin. Transl. Oncol. 2018, 20, 22–28.
  13. Lombardi, G.; De Salvo, G.L.; Brandes, A.A.; Eoli, M.; Rudà, R.; Faedi, M.; Lolli, I.; Pace, A.; Daniele, B.; Pasqualetti, F.; et al. Regorafenibcompared with lomustine in patients with relapsed glioblastoma (REGOMA): A multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019, 20, 110–119.
  14. Kong, D.S.; Lee, J.I.; Park, K.; Kim, J.H.; Lim, D.H.; Nam, D.H. Efficacy of stereotactic radiosurgery as a salvage treatment for recurrent malignant gliomas. Cancer 2008, 112, 2046–2051.
  15. Skeie, B.S.; Enger, P.Ø.; Brøgger, J.; Ganz, J.C.; Thorsen, F.; Heggdal, J.I.; Pedersen, P.H. γ knife surgery versus reoperation for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. World Neurosurg. 2012, 78, 658–669.
  16. Liao, G.; Zhao, Z.; Yang, H.; Li, X. Efficacy and Safety of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for the Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Multiforme: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front. Oncol. 2019, 9, 1017.
  17. Yu, V.Y.; Nguyen, D.; O’Connor, D.; Ruan, D.; Kaprealian, T.; Chin, R.; Sheng, K. Treating Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM) with super hyperfractionated radiation therapy: Implication of temporal dose fractionation optimization including cancer stem cell dynamics. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0245676.
  18. Mayer, R.; Sminia, P. Reirradiation tolerance of the human brain. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2008, 70, 1350–1360.
  19. Scoccianti, S.; Francolini, G.; Carta, G.A.; Greto, D.; Detti, B.; Simontacchi, G.; Visani, L.; Baki, M.; Poggesi, L.; Bonomo, P.; et al. Re-irradiationassalvage treatment in recurrent glioblastoma: A comprehensive literature review to providepracticalanswers to frequentlyaskedquestions. Oncol./Hematol. 2018, 126, 80–91.
  20. Mayo, C.; Yorke, E.; Merchant, T.E. Radiation associated brainstem injury. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2010, 76 (Suppl. 3), S36–S41.
  21. Lautenschlaeger, F.S.; Dumke, R.; Schymalla, M.; Hauswald, H.; Carl, B.; Stein, M.; Keber, U.; Jensen, A.; Engenhart-Cabillic, R.; Eberle, F. Comparison of carbon ion and photon reirradiation for recurrent glioblastoma. Strahlenther. Onkol. Organ. Der Dtsch. 2021. advance online publication.
  22. Combs, S.E.; Zipp, L.; Rieken, S.; Habermehl, D.; Brons, S.; Winter, M.; Haberer, T.; Debus, J.; Weber, K.J. In vitro evaluation of photon and carbon ion radiotherapy in combination with chemotherapy in glioblastoma cells. Radiat. Oncol. 2012, 7, 9.
  23. Combs, S.E.; Burkholder, I.; Edler, L.; Rieken, S.; Habermehl, D.; Jäkel, O.; Haberer, T.; Haselmann, R.; Unterberg, A.; Wick, W.; et al. Randomised phase I/II study to evaluate carbon ion radiotherapy versus fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy in patients with recurrent or progressive gliomas: The CINDERELLA trial. BMC Cancer 2010, 10, 533.
  24. Galle, J.O.; McDonald, M.W.; Simoneaux, V.; Buchsbaum, J.C. Reirradiation with Proton Therapy for Recurrent Gliomas. Int. J. Part Ther. 2015, 2, 11–18.
  25. Gulidov, I.; Gordon, K.; Semenov, A.; Gogolin, D.; Lepilina, O.; Golovanova, O.; Dujenko, S.; Medvedeva, K.; Koryakin, S.; Ivanov, S.; et al. Proton re-irradiation of unresectable recurrent brain gliomas: Clinical outcomes and toxicity. J. BU ON Off. J. Balk. Union Oncol. 2021, 26, 970–976.
  26. Saeed, A.M.; Khairnar, R.; Sharma, A.M.; Larson, G.L.; Tsai, H.K.; Wang, C.J.; Halasz, L.M.; Chinnaiyan, P.; Vargas, C.E.; Mishra, M.V. Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma Treated with Proton Beam Therapy Reirradiation: Analysis of the Multi-Institutional Proton Collaborative Group Registry. Adv. Radiat. Oncol. 2020, 5, 978–983.
  27. Scartoni, D.; Amelio, D.; Palumbo, P.; Giacomelli, I.; Amichetti, M. Proton therapy re-irradiation preserves health-related quality of life in large recurrent glioblastoma. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 2020, 146, 1615–1622.
  28. Milazzotto, R.; Liardo, R.; Privitera, G.; Raffaele, L.; Salamone, V.; Arena, F.; Spatola, C. Proton beam radiotherapy of locally advanced or recurrent conjunctival squamous cell carcinoma: Experience of the CATANA Centre. J. Radiother. Pract. 2020, 21, 97–104.
  29. Spatola, C.; Liardo, R.L.E.; Milazzotto, R.; Raffaele, L.; Salamone, V.; Basile, A.; Foti, P.V.; Palmucci, S.; Cirrone, G.A.P.; Cuttone, G.; et al. Radiotherapy of Conjunctival Melanoma: Role and Challenges of Brachytherapy, Photon-Beam and Protontherapy. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 9071.
  30. Parsons, D.W.; Jones, S.; Zhang, X.; Lin, J.C.; Leary, R.J.; Angenendt, P.; Mankoo, P.; Carter, H.; Siu, I.M.; Gallia, G.L.; et al. An integrated genomic analysis of human glioblastoma multiforme. Science 2008, 321, 1807–1812.
  31. Tran, A.N.; Lai, A.; Li, S.; Pope, W.B.; Teixeira, S.; Harris, R.J.; Woodworth, D.C.; Nghiemphu, P.L.; Cloughesy, T.F.; Ellingson, B.M. Increased sensitivity to radiochemotherapy in IDH1 mutant glioblastoma as demonstrated by serial quantitative MR volumetry. Neuro-Oncology 2014, 16, 414–420.
  32. Zhao, S.; Lin, Y.; Xu, W.; Jiang, W.; Zha, Z.; Wang, P.; Yu, W.; Li, Z.; Gong, L.; Peng, Y.; et al. Glioma-derived mutations in IDH1 dominantly inhibit IDH1 catalytic activity and induce HIF-1alpha. Science 2009, 324, 261–265.
  33. Dang, L.; White, D.W.; Gross, S.; Bennett, B.D.; Bittinger, M.A.; Driggers, E.M.; Fantin, V.R.; Jang, H.G.; Jin, S.; Keenan, M.C.; et al. Cancer-associated IDH1 mutations produce 2-hydroxyglutarate. Nature 2009, 462, 739–744.
  34. Li, S.; Chou, A.P.; Chen, W.; Chen, R.; Deng, Y.; Phillips, H.S.; Selfridge, J.; Zurayk, M.; Lou, J.J.; Everson, R.G.; et al. Overexpression of isocitrate dehydrogenase mutant proteins renders glioma cells more sensitive to radiation. Neuro-Oncology 2013, 15, 57–68.
  35. Yu, W.; Zhang, L.; Wei, Q.; Shao, A. O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase (MGMT): Challenges and New Opportunities in Glioma Chemotherapy. Front. Oncol. 2020, 9, 1547.
  36. Brandes, A.A.; Tosoni, A.; Franceschi, E.; Sotti, G.; Frezza, G.; Amistà, P.; Morandi, L.; Spagnolli, F.; Ermani, M. Recurrence pattern after temozolomide concomitant with and adjuvant to radiotherapy in newly diagnosed patients with glioblastoma: Correlation With MGMT promoter methylation status. J. Clin. Oncol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 2009, 27, 1275–1279.
  37. Herrlinger, U.; Tzaridis, T.; Mack, F.; Steinbach, J.P.; Schlegel, U.; Sabel, M.; Hau, P.; Kortmann, R.D.; Krex, D.; Grauer, O.; et al. Lomustine-temozolomide combination therapy versus standard temozolomide therapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter (CeTeG/NOA-09): A randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet 2019, 393, 678–688.
  38. Barbagallo, G.; Certo, F.; Di Gregorio, S.; Maione, M.; Garozzo, M.; Peschillo, S.; Altieri, R. Recurrent high-grade glioma surgery: A multimodal intraoperative protocol to safely increase extent of tumor resection and analysis of its impact on patient outcome. Neurosurg. Focus 2021, 50, E20.
  39. Altieri, R.; Barbagallo, D.; Certo, F.; Broggi, G.; Ragusa, M.; Di Pietro, C.; Caltabiano, R.; Magro, G.; Peschillo, S.; Purrello, M.; et al. Peritumoral Microenvironment in High-Grade Gliomas: From FLAIRectomy to Microglia-Glioma Cross-Talk. Brain Sci. 2021, 11, 200.
  40. Certo, F.; Altieri, R.; Maione, M.; Schonauer, C.; Sortino, G.; Fiumanò, G.; Tirrò, E.; Massimino, M.; Broggi, G.; Vigneri, P.; et al. FLAIRectomy in Supramarginal Resection of Glioblastoma Correlates With Clinical Outcome and Survival Analysis: A Prospective, Single Institution, Case Series. Oper. Neurosurg. 2021, 20, 151–163.
  41. Lambin, P.; Leijenaar, R.; Deist, T.M.; Peerlings, J.; de Jong, E.; van Timmeren, J.; Sanduleanu, S.; Larue, R.; Even, A.; Jochems, A.; et al. Radiomics: The bridge between medical imaging and personalized medicine. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2017, 14, 749–762.
  42. Spatola, C.; Milazzotto, R.; Tocco, A.; Raffaele, L.; La Monaca, V.; Salamone, V.; Privitera, G. Metachronous NSCLC in previously irradiated patients: Is re-irradiation with SBRT a good option as definitive treatment? J. Radiother. Pract. 2020, 19, 215–218.
  43. Russo, G.; Stefano, A.; Alongi, P.; Comelli, A.; Catalfamo, B.; Mantarro, C.; Longo, C.; Altieri, R.; Certo, F.; Cosentino, S.; et al. Feasibility on the Use of Radiomics Features of 11-MET PET/CT in Central Nervous System Tumours: Preliminary Results on Potential Grading Discrimination Using a Machine Learning Model. Curr. Oncol. 2021, 28, 5318–5331.
  44. Baine, M.; Burr, J.; Du, Q.; Zhang, C.; Liang, X.; Krajewski, L.; Zima, L.; Rux, G.; Zhang, C.; Zheng, D. The potential use of radiomics with pre-radiation therapy mr imaging in predicting risk of pseudoprogression in glioblastoma patients. J. Imaging 2021, 7, 17.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Neurosciences
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register : Maria Chiara Lo Greco , Roberto Milazzotto ,
, Madalina La Rocca , Roberto Altieri , Giuseppe Barbagallo , Basile Antonio , Pietro Valerio Foti , Stefano Palmucci , Stefano Pergolizzi , Antonio Pontoriero , Corrado Spatola
View Times: 742
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 20 Apr 2022
Table of Contents
    Notice
    You are not a member of the advisory board for this topic. If you want to update advisory board member profile, please contact office@encyclopedia.pub.
    OK
    Confirm
    Only members of the Encyclopedia advisory board for this topic are allowed to note entries. Would you like to become an advisory board member of the Encyclopedia?
    Yes
    No
    ${ textCharacter }/${ maxCharacter }
    Submit
    Cancel
    There is no comment~
    ${ textCharacter }/${ maxCharacter }
    Submit
    Cancel
    ${ selectedItem.replyTextCharacter }/${ selectedItem.replyMaxCharacter }
    Submit
    Cancel
    Confirm
    Are you sure to Delete?
    Yes No
    Academic Video Service
    Feedback