Evolving management of low grade glioma: no consensus amongst treating clinicians

Field, K. M., Rosenthal, M. A., Khasraw, M., Sawkins, K. and Nowak, A. K. 2016, Evolving management of low grade glioma: no consensus amongst treating clinicians, Journal of clinical neuroscience, vol. 23, pp. 81-87, doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2015.05.038.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Evolving management of low grade glioma: no consensus amongst treating clinicians
Author(s) Field, K. M.
Rosenthal, M. A.
Khasraw, M.ORCID iD for Khasraw, M. orcid.org/0000-0003-3249-9849
Sawkins, K.
Nowak, A. K.
Journal name Journal of clinical neuroscience
Volume number 23
Start page 81
End page 87
Total pages 7
Publisher Elsevier
Place of publication Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Publication date 2016-01
ISSN 0967-5868
Summary Following the widely publicized presentation of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9802 data, we sought to understand how these data had been translated to the management of low grade gliomas (LGG) by Australian neuro-oncology clinicians. The de novo management of LGG is transitioning to include postoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy after the RTOG 9802 study results demonstrated a survival benefit in this setting. In 2014, neurosurgeons, radiation oncologists and neuro-oncologists who were members of the Australian Cooperative Trials Group for Neuro-oncology (COGNO), as well as additional attendants of the COGNO annual scientific meeting, were surveyed. The survey presented six LGG clinical scenarios and asked respondents to select their preferred management strategy. Some additional questions included the respondents’ approach to 1p/19q testing and chemotherapy preferences. The response rate was 30.2% (61/202), with the majority (77%) working in tertiary referral neuro-oncology centers. There was no consensus regarding the management approach for each scenario, with postsurgery observation alone remaining a popular strategy. Only 25% of respondents reported that their institution routinely tests for 1p/19q status in LGG, although 69% were of the opinion that all LGG patients should be tested. The majority (81%) preferred to use temozolomide rather than the procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine combination as the first line chemotherapy for LGG, but only 44% would actually use it in this setting. Up front chemotherapy, prior to radiotherapy, would be considered by 52% of respondents for certain LGG patients. This survey assessed the management strategies for LGG since the updated RTOG 9802 data were presented. It demonstrates no consensus in the postoperative treatment approaches for LGG.
Language eng
DOI 10.1016/j.jocn.2015.05.038
Field of Research 111204 Cancer Therapy (excl Chemotherapy and Radiation Therapy)
1103 Clinical Sciences
1109 Neurosciences
Socio Economic Objective 0 Not Applicable
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
ERA Research output type C Journal article
Copyright notice ©2015, Elsevier Ltd.
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30087404

Document type: Journal Article
Collections: Faculty of Health
School of Medicine
Connect to link resolver
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 12 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 12 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 253 Abstract Views, 2 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Fri, 03 Mar 2017, 11:23:57 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.