Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Progression pattern and adverse events with bevacizumab in glioblastoma.
Mamo, A; Baig, A; Azam, M; Rho, Y S; Sahebjam, S; Muanza, T; Owen, S; Petrecca, K; Guiot, M C; Al-Shami, J; Sharma, R; Kavan, P.
Affiliation
  • Mamo A; Segal Cancer Centre, Jew ish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC.
  • Baig A; Segal Cancer Centre, Jew ish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC.
  • Azam M; Segal Cancer Centre, Jew ish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC.
  • Rho YS; Segal Cancer Centre, Jew ish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC.
  • Sahebjam S; Segal Cancer Centre, Jew ish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC.
  • Muanza T; Radiation Oncology, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC.
  • Owen S; Department of Oncology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC.
  • Petrecca K; Neurosurgery, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC.
  • Guiot MC; Pathology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC.
  • Al-Shami J; Clinical Research, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC.
  • Sharma R; Clinical Research, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC.
  • Kavan P; Segal Cancer Centre, Jew ish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC.
Curr Oncol ; 23(5): e468-e471, 2016 Oct.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27803607
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The use of bevacizumab in the management of glioblastoma multiforme (gbm) remains controversial. In Canada, bevacizumab is approved for the treatment of recurrent gbm. We describe a pattern of progression across treatment lines in gbm.

METHODS:

During 2008-2014, 64 patients diagnosed with gbm were treated with bevacizumab at McGill University hospitals. Of those patients, 30 (46.9%) received bevacizumab in the first line (B1L), and 34 (53.1%) received it in the second line and beyond (B2L+). The average length of treatment with bevacizumab was 24.4 weeks (range 0-232.7 weeks). The patterns of progression were categorized as local, distant, diffuse, multifocal, or multi-pattern.

RESULTS:

Local progression was seen in 46.7% of B1L patients and 26.5% of B2L+ patients, distant in 3.3% and 2.9%, diffuse in 20% and 47%, multifocal in 10% and 8.8%, and multi-pattern in 3.3% and 11.8%. No differences between the groups were observed for the distant (p = 0.3) or diffuse (p = 0.4) patterns. Grades 3 and 4 adverse events in the B1L and B2L+ groups were fatigue (33.3% vs. 17.6% respectively), hypertension (26.7% vs. 5.9%), thrombocytopenia (26.7% vs. 11.8%), neutropenia (26.7% vs. 11.8%), anemia (23.3% vs. 11.8%), leucopenia (20% vs. 8.8%), deep vein thrombosis (23.3% vs. 5.9%), seizure (16.7% vs. 8.8%), brain hemorrhage (6.7% vs. <1%), and delayed wound healing (6.7% vs. 2.9%). More total grades 3 and 4 adverse events occurred in the B1L group (p = 0.000519).

CONCLUSIONS:

In our cohort, patterns of progression were not different in B1L and B2L+ patients. Moreover, both groups experienced similar adverse events, although more grades 3 and 4 events occurred in the B1L group, implying that severe adverse events in B1L patients could negatively affect survival outcomes.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Curr Oncol Year: 2016 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Curr Oncol Year: 2016 Document type: Article