We have located open access text paper links.
Journal Article
Review
Comparative analysis of bevacizumab and LITT for treating radiation necrosis in previously radiated CNS neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Journal of Neuro-oncology 2024 April 16
PURPOSE: Radiation necrosis (RN) is a local inflammatory reaction that arises in response to radiation injury and may cause significant morbidity. This study aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy of bevacizumab and laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) in treating RN in patients with previously radiated central nervous system (CNS) neoplasms.
METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and EMBASE databases were screened. Studies of patients with radiation necrosis from primary or secondary brain tumors were included. Indirect meta-analysis with random-effect modeling was performed to compare clinical and radiological outcomes.
RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were included with 210 patients in the bevacizumab group and 337 patients in the LITT group. Bevacizumab demonstrated symptomatic improvement/stability in 87.7% of cases, radiological improvement/stability in 86.2%, and steroid wean-off in 45%. LITT exhibited symptomatic improvement/stability in 71.2%, radiological improvement/stability in 64.7%, and steroid wean-off in 62.4%. Comparative analysis revealed statistically significant differences favoring bevacizumab in symptomatic improvement/stability (p = 0.02), while no significant differences were observed in radiological improvement/stability (p = 0.27) or steroid wean-off (p = 0.90). The rates of adverse reactions were 11.2% for bevacizumab and 14.9% for LITT (p = 0.66), with the majority being grade 2 or lower (72.2% for bevacizumab and 62.5% for LITT).
CONCLUSION: Both bevacizumab and LITT exhibited favorable clinical and radiological outcomes in managing RN. Bevacizumab was found to be associated with better symptomatic control compared to LITT. Patient-, diagnosis- and lesion-related factors should be considered when choosing the ideal treatment modality for RN to enhance overall patient outcomes.
METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and EMBASE databases were screened. Studies of patients with radiation necrosis from primary or secondary brain tumors were included. Indirect meta-analysis with random-effect modeling was performed to compare clinical and radiological outcomes.
RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were included with 210 patients in the bevacizumab group and 337 patients in the LITT group. Bevacizumab demonstrated symptomatic improvement/stability in 87.7% of cases, radiological improvement/stability in 86.2%, and steroid wean-off in 45%. LITT exhibited symptomatic improvement/stability in 71.2%, radiological improvement/stability in 64.7%, and steroid wean-off in 62.4%. Comparative analysis revealed statistically significant differences favoring bevacizumab in symptomatic improvement/stability (p = 0.02), while no significant differences were observed in radiological improvement/stability (p = 0.27) or steroid wean-off (p = 0.90). The rates of adverse reactions were 11.2% for bevacizumab and 14.9% for LITT (p = 0.66), with the majority being grade 2 or lower (72.2% for bevacizumab and 62.5% for LITT).
CONCLUSION: Both bevacizumab and LITT exhibited favorable clinical and radiological outcomes in managing RN. Bevacizumab was found to be associated with better symptomatic control compared to LITT. Patient-, diagnosis- and lesion-related factors should be considered when choosing the ideal treatment modality for RN to enhance overall patient outcomes.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System: From History to Practice of a Secular Topic.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 5
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
British Society for Rheumatology guideline on management of adult and juvenile onset Sjögren disease.Rheumatology 2024 April 17
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app