Display options
Cite
Urbschat S, Sippl C, Engelhardt J, et al. Importance of biomarkers in glioblastomas patients receiving local BCNU wafer chemotherapy. Mol Cytogenet. 2017;10:16doi: 10.1186/s13039-017-0317-5.
Urbschat, S., Sippl, C., Engelhardt, J., Kammers, K., Oertel, J., & Ketter, R. (2017). Importance of biomarkers in glioblastomas patients receiving local BCNU wafer chemotherapy. Molecular cytogenetics, 1016. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13039-017-0317-5
Urbschat, Steffi, et al. "Importance of biomarkers in glioblastomas patients receiving local BCNU wafer chemotherapy." Molecular cytogenetics vol. 10 (2017): 16. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13039-017-0317-5
Urbschat S, Sippl C, Engelhardt J, Kammers K, Oertel J, Ketter R. Importance of biomarkers in glioblastomas patients receiving local BCNU wafer chemotherapy. Mol Cytogenet. 2017 May 04;10:16. doi: 10.1186/s13039-017-0317-5. eCollection 2017. PMID: 28484518; PMCID: PMC5418867.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Mol Cytogenet. 2017 May 04;10:16. doi: 10.1186/s13039-017-0317-5. eCollection 2017.

Importance of biomarkers in glioblastomas patients receiving local BCNU wafer chemotherapy.

Molecular cytogenetics

Steffi Urbschat, Christoph Sippl, Jana Engelhardt, Kai Kammers, Joachim Oertel, Ralf Ketter

Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Saarland University, 66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany.
  2. Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD USA.

PMID: 28484518 PMCID: PMC5418867 DOI: 10.1186/s13039-017-0317-5

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To assess the influence of molecular markers with potential prognostic value to groups of patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients were examined: group A with 36 patients (surgical resection plus standard combined chemoradiotherapy) and group B with 36 patients (surgical resection, standard combined chemoradiotherapy plus carmustine wafer implantation). Our aim was to determine chromosomal alterations, methylation status of MGMT, p15, and p16 (CDKN2A) in order to analyse the influence on patient survival time as well as radio- and chemotherapy responses. Promoter hypermethylation of MGMT, p16, and p15 genes were determined by MS-PCR. Comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH) analyses were performed with isolated, labelled DNA of each tumor to detect genetic alterations.

RESULTS: Age of onset of the disease showed a significant effect on overall survival (OS) (

CONCLUSION: A clinical benefit for the widespread use of additional carmustine wafer implantation could not be found. However, carmustine wafer implantation shows a significantly improved overall survival if parts of chromosome 10 or chromosome 13 are deleted. In cases of 4q12 amplification and in cases of a methylated p15 promotor, the use of carmustine wafers is especially not recommended. The MGMT promoter methylation is a strong prognostic Biomarker for benefit from temozolomide and BCNU chemotherapy.

Keywords: CGH; Carmustin wafer; Glioblastoma; Prognostic factors; Standard combined radiochemotherapy

References

  1. Br J Cancer. 2003 Apr 7;88(7):1004-11 - PubMed
  2. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Jun;20(6):2065-72 - PubMed
  3. Curr Med Res Opin. 2009 Jan;25(1):149-60 - PubMed
  4. J Clin Oncol. 2008 Sep 1;26(25):4189-99 - PubMed
  5. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2012 Aug;154(8):1371-8 - PubMed
  6. J Neurooncol. 2008 Jul;88(3):353-7 - PubMed
  7. J Biomed Mater Res. 1994 Mar;28(3):387-95 - PubMed
  8. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Sep 3;93(18):9821-6 - PubMed
  9. Arch Neurol. 2010 Mar;67(3):279-83 - PubMed
  10. Cancer Res. 1994 Dec 15;54(24):6321-4 - PubMed
  11. Clin Cancer Res. 2000 Sep;6(9):3516-21 - PubMed
  12. Br J Neurosurg. 2015;29(4):524-31 - PubMed
  13. Hum Genet. 1993 Sep;92(2):169-74 - PubMed
  14. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Jul;17 (7):1740-6 - PubMed
  15. Nat Rev Neurol. 2010 Jan;6(1):39-51 - PubMed
  16. Int J Oncol. 2009 Jun;34(6):1743-8 - PubMed
  17. Int J Oncol. 2006 Feb;28(2):353-60 - PubMed
  18. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2010 Jun 1;48(11):852-5 - PubMed
  19. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 1999 Sep;58(9):993-9 - PubMed
  20. Acta Neuropathol. 2012 Oct;124(4):547-60 - PubMed
  21. Neuro Oncol. 2015 Dec;17 (12 ):1609-19 - PubMed
  22. Cancer. 2009 Aug 1;115(15):3501-11 - PubMed
  23. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Dec 10;27(35):5881-6 - PubMed
  24. Neuro Oncol. 2012 Nov;14 Suppl 5:v1-49 - PubMed
  25. N Engl J Med. 2008 Jul 31;359(5):492-507 - PubMed
  26. Neuro Oncol. 2003 Apr;5(2):79-88 - PubMed
  27. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998 Oct 7;90(19):1473-9 - PubMed
  28. Neurology. 2013 Oct 22;81(17):1515-22 - PubMed
  29. Acta Neuropathol. 1999 Nov;98(5):444-52 - PubMed
  30. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2006 Sep;7(9):667-77 - PubMed
  31. Neuro Oncol. 2015 Mar;17 Suppl 2:ii9-ii23 - PubMed
  32. J Neurosurg. 2001 Oct;95(4):651-9 - PubMed
  33. Annu Rev Pathol. 2006;1:97-117 - PubMed
  34. Cancer. 2002 May 15;94(10):2688-97 - PubMed
  35. Genomics. 1996 Jun 1;34(2):250-4 - PubMed
  36. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Dec 10;27(35):5874-80 - PubMed
  37. Neurosurg Rev. 2010 Oct;33(4):441-9 - PubMed
  38. J Neurosurg. 2009 Mar;110(3):583-8 - PubMed
  39. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Feb 1;82(2):749-55 - PubMed
  40. Neuro Oncol. 2005 Jan;7(1):84-9 - PubMed
  41. N Engl J Med. 2005 Mar 10;352(10 ):997-1003 - PubMed
  42. Neoplasia. 2005 Oct;7(10 ):883-93 - PubMed
  43. Cancer Lett. 2006 Feb 8;232(2):139-47 - PubMed
  44. J Surg Oncol. 2004 Apr 1;86(1):34-40 - PubMed
  45. N Engl J Med. 2005 Mar 10;352(10 ):987-96 - PubMed
  46. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2012 Nov;114(9):1222-5 - PubMed
  47. Neuro Oncol. 2012 Jun;14 (6):712-9 - PubMed
  48. Cancer Res. 1994 Dec 15;54(24):6353-8 - PubMed
  49. J Neurosurg. 2002 May;96(5):815-22 - PubMed

Publication Types