Citations

OBJECTIVE Neurosurgeons generate an enormous amount of data daily. Within these data lie rigorous, valid, and reproducible evidence. Such evidence can facilitate healthcare reform and improve quality of care. To measure the quality of care provided objectively, evaluating the safety and efficacy of clinical activities should occur in real time. Registries must be constructed and collected data analyzed with the precision akin to that of randomized clinical trials to accomplish this goal. METHODS The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) Tumor Registry was launched in February 2019 with 8 sites in its initial 1-year pilot phase. The Tumor Registry was proposed by the AANS/CNS Tumor Section and approved by the QOD Scientific Committee in the fall of 2018. The initial pilot phase aimed to assess the feasibility of collecting outcomes data from 8 academic practices across the United States; these outcomes included length of stay, discharge disposition, and inpatient complications. RESULTS As of November 2019, 923 eligible patients have been entered, with the following subsets: intracranial metastasis (17.3%, n = 160), high-grade glioma (18.5%, n = 171), low-grade glioma (6%, n = 55), meningioma (20%, n = 184), pituitary tumor (14.3%, n = 132), and other intracranial tumor (24%, n = 221). CONCLUSIONS The authors have demonstrated here, as a pilot study, the feasibility of documenting demographic, clinical, operative, and patient-reported outcome characteristics longitudinally for 6 common intracranial tumor types.

OBJECTIVE Radiation-induced meningiomas (RIMs) are associated with aggressive clinical behavior. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is sometimes considered for selected RIMs. The authors investigated the effectiveness and safety of SRS for the management of RIMs. METHODS From 12 institutions participating in the International Radiosurgery Research Foundation, the authors pooled patients who had prior cranial irradiation and were subsequently clinically diagnosed with WHO grade I meningiomas that were managed with SRS. RESULTS Fifty-two patients underwent 60 SRS procedures for histologically confirmed or radiologically suspected WHO grade I RIMs. The median ages at initial cranial radiation therapy and SRS for RIM were 5.5 years and 39 years, respectively. The most common reasons for cranial radiation therapy were leukemia (21%) and medulloblastoma (17%). There were 39 multiple RIMs (35%), the mean target volume was 8.61 ± 7.80 cm 3 , and the median prescription dose was 14 Gy. The median imaging follow-up duration was 48 months (range 4–195 months). RIM progressed in 9 patients (17%) at a median duration of 30 months (range 3–45 months) after SRS. Progression-free survival at 5 years post-SRS was 83%. Treatment volume ≥ 5 cm 3 predicted progression (HR 8.226, 95% CI 1.028–65.857, p = 0.047). Seven patients (14%) developed new neurological symptoms or experienced SRS-related complications or T2 signal change from 1 to 72 months after SRS. CONCLUSIONS SRS is associated with durable local control of RIMs in the majority of patients and has an acceptable safety profile. SRS can be considered for patients and tumors that are deemed suboptimal, poor surgical candidates, and those whose tumor again progresses after removal.

Abstract BACKGROUND Extent of resection (EOR) correlates with glioblastoma outcomes. Resectability and EOR depend on anatomical, clinical, and surgeon factors. Resectability likely influences outcome in and of itself, but an accurate measurement of resectability remains elusive. An understanding of resectability and the factors that influence it may provide a means to control a confounder in clinical trials and provide reference for decision making. OBJECTIVE To provide proof of concept of the use of the collective wisdom of experienced brain tumor surgeons in assessing glioblastoma resectability. METHODS We surveyed 13 academic tumor neurosurgeons nationwide to assess the resectability of newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Participants reviewed 20 cases, including digital imaging and communications in medicine-formatted pre- and postoperative magnetic resonance images and clinical vignettes. The selected cases involved a variety of anatomical locations and a range of EOR. Participants were asked about surgical goal, eg, gross total resection, subtotal resection (STR), or biopsy, and rationale for their decision. We calculated a “resectability index” for each lesion by pooling responses from all 13 surgeons. RESULTS Neurosurgeons’ individual surgical goals varied significantly ( P = .015), but the resectability index calculated from the surgeons’ pooled responses was strongly correlated with the percentage of contrast-enhancing residual tumor ( R = 0.817, P < .001). The collective STR goal predicted intraoperative decision of intentional STR documented on operative notes ( P < .01) and nonresectable residual ( P < .01), but not resectable residual. CONCLUSION In this pilot study, we demonstrate the feasibility of measuring the resectability of glioblastoma through crowdsourcing. This tool could be used to quantify resectability, a potential confounder in neuro-oncology clinical trials.