Back to Authors

Kütük, Tuğçe

0000-0003-0416-8612

Mayo Clinic

Baptist Health South Florida

Citations 2

Improved Survival and Prognostication in Melanoma Patients With Brain Metastases: An Update of the Melanoma Graded Prognostic Assessment
Sperduto, Paul W. , Marqueen, Kathryn E. , Chang, Enoch , Li, Jing , Davies, Michael A. , Ebner, Daniel K. , Breen, William G. , Lamba, Nayan , Shih, Helen A. , Mahal, Amandeep R. , Rahman, Rifaquat , Ankrah, Nii, Boggs, Drexell H. , Lewis, Calvin D. , Hyer, Daniel E. , Johri, Fasila, Soliman, Hany , Masucci, Laura , Chiang, Veronica , Phuong, Christina , Dajani, Salah, Wan, Zihan, Niedzwiecki, Donna , Vaios, Eugene , Pasetsky, Jared , Wang, Tony J. C. , Kotecha, Rupesh , Ross, Richard B. , Rusthoven, Chad G. , Nakano, Toshimichi , Tawbi, Hussein A. , Edwards, Donna , Kim, Michelle M , Rahman, Rifaquat , Boggs, Drexell H , Lewis, Calvin , Hyer, Daniel , Buatti, John M , Aneja, Sanjay , Chiang, Veronica , Phuong, Christina , Braunstein, Steve , Sachdev, Sean , Niedzwiecki, Donna , Vaios, Eugene , Pasetsky, Jared , Wang, Tony J C , Kotecha, Rupesh , Ross, Richard B , Rusthoven, Chad G , Nakano, Toshimichi , Tawbi, Hussein , Mehta, Minesh P , Shih, Helen A , Kim, Michelle M. , Buatti, John M. , Roberge, David , Braunstein, Steve , Kirkpatrick, John P. , Kütük, Tuğçe , Mehta, Minesh P.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | April 17, 2025 | Volume: 43 | Issue: 16 | Pages: 1910-1919

10.1200/jco-24-01351 Get It

PURPOSE Survival for patients with melanoma has recently improved. The propensity of melanoma to metastasize to the brain remains a common and serious feature of this disease. The purposes of this study were to evaluate prognostic factors for patients with newly diagnosed melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) in a large cohort treated with modern multimodal therapies, compare those results with those in prior eras, and update the Melanoma Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA). METHODS Univariable and multivariable (MVA) analyses of prognostic factors and treatments associated with survival were performed on 1,796 patients with newly diagnosed MBM treated between January 01, 2015, and December 31, 2021, using a multi-institutional retrospective database. Multiple imputation was used to address missingness of potential predictors. Significant variables in combined MVA were used to update the Melanoma GPA. Comparisons were made with legacy cohorts. RESULTS Median survivals for cohorts A (1985-2007, n = 481), B (2006-2015, n = 823), and C (2015-2021, n = 1,796) were 6.7, 9.8, and 16.6 months and median follow-up times were 40.1, 43.6, and 48.8 months, respectively. In combined MVA, significant prognostic factors for survival were higher Karnofsky Performance Status, fewer MBMs, absence of extracranial metastases, lower serum lactate dehydrogenase, and no immunotherapy before MBM. These factors were incorporated into the updated Melanoma GPA. The combined median and 3-year survivals for patients with GPA 0-1, 1.5-2, and 2.5-4.0 were 5.4, 13.2, and 43.2 months and 12.4%, 28.8%, and 51.6%, respectively. CONCLUSION Prognostic factors have changed and survival has improved for patients with MBM but varies widely by GPA. The updated Melanoma GPA calculator (BrainMetGPA), available free online, can be used to estimate survival, individualize treatment, stratify clinical trials, guide surveillance, and augment clinical trial eligibility. Multidisciplinary treatment is essential. Trials are needed to elucidate the optimal sequencing of various therapeutic modalities.
Benchmarking the efficacy of salvage systemic therapies for recurrent meningioma: A RANO group systematic review and meta-analysis to guide clinical trial design
Kotecha, Rupesh , Akdemir, Eyüb Yaşar , Blakeley, Jaishri O. , Dixit, Karan , Dunn, Ian F. , Galanis, Evanthia , Kurz, Sylvia C. , McDermott, Michael , Odia, Yazmín , Raizer, Jeffrey, Reardon, David A. , Rogers, Leland , Schiff, David , Vogelbaum, Michael A., Wen, Patrick Y. , Akdemir, Eyub Y , Blakeley, Jaishri O , Galanis, Evanthia , Galldiks, Norbert , Weller, Michael , Wen, Patrick Yung , Odia, Yazmin , Kütük, Tuğçe , Ilgın, Can , Ahluwalia, Manmeet S. , Bi, Wenya Linda , Huang, Raymond Y. , Johnson, Derek R. , Kaley, Thomas , Kamson, David , Preusser, Matthias , Rudà, Roberta , Mehta, Minesh P. , McDermott, Michael W.

Neuro-Oncology | January 10, 2025 | Volume: 27 | Issue: 7 | Pages: 1670-1685

10.1093/neuonc/noaf009 Get It

Abstract Background Despite advances in our understanding of the molecular underpinnings of meningioma progression and innovations in systemic and local treatments, recurrent meningiomas remain a substantial therapeutic challenge. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to provide a historical baseline, contemporary analysis, and propose a “rate of probable interest” to inform future clinical trial design and development on behalf of the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology meningioma group. Methods PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ASCOpubs databases were screened for clinical trials evaluating the activity of systemic therapies for adults with recurrent meningiomas. The pooled progression-free survival at 6-months and 1-year (PFS-6 and PFS-1 year) values were calculated using the random effects technique with I2 indices. Results The pooled PFS-6 and PFS-1 year rates for recurrent WHO grade 1 meningiomas were 43.6% (95% CI: 22.7-67.0%, I2 = 80%) and 21.7% (95% CI: 6.2-53.9%, I2 = 76%), and for grades 2-3 meningiomas, the PFS-6 was 38.0% (95% CI: 28.3-48.8%, I2 = 68%). In the targeted therapy group, PFS-6 and PFS-1 year rates stood at 62.0% (I2 = 58%) and 49.0% (I2 = 63%) for grade 1, while for grades 2-3 tumors, the PFS-6 rates with targeted therapy and immunotherapy were 42.1% (I² = 60%) and 46.0% (I² = 0%), respectively. The benchmarks were set at 67% and 54% for PFS-6 and PFS-1 year for grade 1 tumors, and PFS-6 of 49% for grades 2-3 tumors. Conclusions Several studies have reported outcomes in patients with recurrent meningiomas testing a variety of agents with modest, but variable and progressively increasing activity. In this context, we recommend new benchmarks for future trials to define efficacy of future investigational therapies.