Surgical management and outcome of newly diagnosed glioblastoma without contrast enhancement (low-grade appearance): a report of the RANO resect group.

BACKGROUND: Resection of the contrast-enhancing (CE) tumor represents the standard of care in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. However, some tumors ultimately diagnosed as glioblastoma lack contrast enhancement and have a 'low-grade appearance' on imaging (non-CE glioblastoma). We aimed to (a) volumetrically define the value of non-CE tumor resection in the absence of contrast enhancement, and to (b) delineate outcome differences between glioblastoma patients with and without contrast enhancement. METHODS: The RANO resect group retrospectively compiled a global, eight-center cohort of patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma per WHO 2021 classification. The associations between postoperative tumor volumes and outcome were analyzed. Propensity score-matched analyses were constructed to compare glioblastomas with and without contrast enhancement. RESULTS: Among 1323 newly diagnosed IDH-wildtype glioblastomas, we identified 98 patients (7.4%) without contrast enhancement. In such patients, smaller postoperative tumor volumes were associated with more favorable outcome. There was an exponential increase in risk for death with larger residual non-CE tumor. Accordingly, extensive resection was associated with improved survival compared to lesion biopsy. These findings were retained on a multivariable analysis adjusting for demographic and clinical markers. Compared to CE glioblastoma, patients with non-CE glioblastoma had a more favorable clinical profile and superior outcome as confirmed in propensity score analyses by matching the patients with non-CE glioblastoma to patients with CE glioblastoma using a large set of clinical variables. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of contrast enhancement characterizes a less aggressive clinical phenotype of IDH-wildtype glioblastomas. Maximal resection of non-CE tumors has prognostic implications and translates into favorable outcome.

Prognostic evaluation of re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma using the novel RANO classification for extent of resection: A report of the RANO resect group.

BACKGROUND: The value of re-resection in recurrent glioblastoma remains controversial as a randomized trial that specifies intentional incomplete resection cannot be justified ethically. Here, we aimed to (1) explore the prognostic role of extent of re-resection using the previously proposed Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) classification (based upon residual contrast-enhancing (CE) and non-CE tumor), and to (2) define factors consolidating the surgical effects on outcome. METHODS: The RANO resect group retrospectively compiled an 8-center cohort of patients with first recurrence from previously resected glioblastomas. The associations of re-resection and other clinical factors with outcome were analyzed. Propensity score-matched analyses were constructed to minimize confounding effects when comparing the different RANO classes. RESULTS: We studied 681 patients with first recurrence of Isocitrate Dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type glioblastomas, including 310 patients who underwent re-resection. Re-resection was associated with prolonged survival even when stratifying for molecular and clinical confounders on multivariate analysis; ≤1 cm3 residual CE tumor was associated with longer survival than non-surgical management. Accordingly, "maximal resection" (class 2) had superior survival compared to "submaximal resection" (class 3). Administration of (radio-)chemotherapy in the absence of postoperative deficits augmented the survival associations of smaller residual CE tumors. Conversely, "supramaximal resection" of non-CE tumor (class 1) was not associated with prolonged survival but was frequently accompanied by postoperative deficits. The prognostic role of residual CE tumor was confirmed in propensity score analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The RANO resect classification serves to stratify patients with re-resection of glioblastoma. Complete resection according to RANO resect classes 1 and 2 is prognostic.

Prognostic validation of a new classification system for extent of resection in glioblastoma: A report of the RANO resect group.

BACKGROUND: Terminology to describe extent of resection in glioblastoma is inconsistent across clinical trials. A surgical classification system was previously proposed based upon residual contrast-enhancing (CE) tumor. We aimed to (1) explore the prognostic utility of the classification system and (2) define how much removed non-CE tumor translates into a survival benefit. METHODS: The international RANO resect group retrospectively searched previously compiled databases from 7 neuro-oncological centers in the USA and Europe for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma per WHO 2021 classification. Clinical and volumetric information from pre- and postoperative MRI were collected. RESULTS: We collected 1,008 patients with newly diagnosed IDHwt glioblastoma. 744 IDHwt glioblastomas were treated with radiochemotherapy per EORTC-26981/22981 (TMZ/RT→TMZ) following surgery. Among these homogenously treated patients, lower absolute residual tumor volumes (in cm3) were favorably associated with outcome: patients with "maximal CE resection" (class 2) had superior outcome compared to patients with "submaximal CE resection" (class 3) or "biopsy" (class 4). Extensive resection of non-CE tumor (≤5 cm3 residual non-CE tumor) was associated with better survival among patients with complete CE resection, thus defining class 1 ("supramaximal CE resection"). The prognostic value of the resection classes was retained on multivariate analysis when adjusting for molecular and clinical markers. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed "RANO categories for extent of resection in glioblastoma" are highly prognostic and may serve for stratification within clinical trials. Removal of non-CE tumor beyond the CE tumor borders may translate into additional survival benefit, providing a rationale to explicitly denominate such "supramaximal CE resection."