Search

Objective: Radiation necrosis is becoming an increasingly prevalent complication in patients with brain tumors given the growing utility of stereotactic radiosurgery in modern treatment paradigms. Magnetic resonance-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy (MRgLITT) is a new minimally invasive modality that has exhibited an efficacy comparable to craniotomy in treating radiation necrosis. No studies to date have compared their cost-effectiveness despite the significant additional expenses associated with MRgLITT use. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MRgLITT versus craniotomy in patients with comparable presentations of radiation necrosis., Methods: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was queried from 2011 to 2020 for patients with radiation necrosis and treated using craniotomy or MRgLITT. Admission charges and costs were inflation adjusted to 2020 $US. Surgical cohorts were propensity score-matched according to demographic, clinical, and admission characteristics. Multivariable linear and logistic regression analyses identified associations between type of intervention and outcomes. A semi-Markov model was created to simulate treatment with craniotomy versus MRgLITT. Cost, transition probabilities, and health state utilities were derived from the NIS, individual patient outcomes from multiple institutions, and prospectively collected quality-of-life data from a single institution and verified against other studies. Monte Carlo simulation and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness between the two modalities., Results: In the designated study period, 2869 patients had been admitted with brain tumor radiation necrosis and were managed with neurosurgical intervention. After propensity score matching, MRgLITT, relative to craniotomy, was independently associated with a shorter length of stay (LOS; β = -1.81, p = 0.002), lower odds of complications (OR 0.18, p = 0.033), and higher odds of home discharge (OR 3.05, p = 0.041), but there was no difference in total admission costs between the two modalities (β = $6229, p = 0.081). On Monte Carlo simulation, patients treated with MRgLITT had a lower probability of disease (radiation necrosis or tumor) recurrence (13.5% vs 22.0%, p < 0.001) but an equivalent mortality risk (22.8% vs 22.3%, p = 0.429) compared to the patients treated with craniotomy at the 1-year follow-up. Over a 4-year time horizon, MRgLITT had an incremental cost of -$25,685 and incremental effectiveness of 0.14 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of -$183,464 per QALY relative to craniotomy., Conclusions: MRgLITT was a more cost-effective treatment strategy than craniotomy in the management of patients with brain tumor radiation necrosis. The cost-effectiveness of MRgLITT may be attributed to a shorter LOS, lower complication odds, and higher home discharge odds in the immediate postoperative period and a lower risk of disease recurrence over the long-term follow-up.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is an immunologically "cold" tumor characterized by poor responsiveness to immunotherapy. Standard of care for GBM is surgical resection followed by chemoradiotherapy and maintenance chemotherapy. However, tumor recurrence is the norm, and recurring tumors are found frequently to have acquired molecular changes (e.g., mutations) that may influence their immunobiology. Here, we compared the immune contexture of de novo GBM and recurrent GBM (rGBM) using high-dimensional cytometry and multiplex IHC. Although myeloid and T cells were similarly abundant in de novo and rGBM, their spatial organization within tumors differed and was linked to outcomes. In rGBM, T cells were enriched and activated in perivascular regions and clustered with activated macrophages and fewer regulatory T cells. Moreover, a higher expression of phosphorylated STAT1 by T cells in these regions at recurrence was associated with a favorable prognosis. Together, our data identify differences in the immunobiology of de novo GBM and rGBM and identify perivascular T cells as potential therapeutic targets. See related Spotlight by Bayik et al., p. 787., (©2022 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Social determinants of health (SDoH)-socioeconomic and environmental factors-impact outcomes. The Area Deprivation Index (ADI), a composite of seventeen SDoH factors, has been correlated with poorer outcomes. We aimed to compare outcomes and treatment access for glioblastoma, a universally fatal malignant brain tumor, in patients more (ADI 34-100%) versus less disadvantaged (ADI 0-33%)., Methods: A 5-year retrospective study of Rhode Island Hospital and Mayo Clinic databases was conducted from 2012 to 2017 for patients ≥ 18 years with glioblastoma. Patient addresses were matched to ADI percentiles and grouped into more (top 66% ADI) and less disadvantaged. Adjusted multivariable regressions were used to compare outcomes between groups., Results: A total of 434 patients met inclusion; 92.9% were insured, 56.2% were more disadvantaged (n = 244), and the more disadvantaged cohort was younger on average (62 years). After adjustment, the more disadvantaged group had decreased odds of receiving gross total resection (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.43, 95% CI [0.27-0.68]; p < 0.001). This cohort also had decreased odds of undergoing chemotherapy (aOR 0.51[0.26-0.98]), radiation (aOR 0.39[0.20-0.77]), chemoradiation (aOR 0.42[0.23-0.77]), tumor-treating fields (aOR 0.39[0.16-0.93]), and clinical trial participation (aOR 0.47[0.25-0.91]). No differences in length of survival or postoperative Karnofsky Performance Status Scale were observed., Conclusion: More disadvantaged glioblastoma patients had decreased odds of receiving gross total resection. They also exhibited decreased odds of receiving standard of care like chemoradiation as well as participating in a clinical trial, compared to the less disadvantaged group. More research is needed to identify modifiable SDoH barriers to post-operative treatment in disadvantaged patients with glioblastoma., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Dual-eligible (DE) patients, simultaneous Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, have been shown to have poorer clinical outcomes while incurring higher resource utilization. However, neurosurgical oncology outcomes for DE patients are poorly characterized. Accordingly, we examined the impact of DE status on perioperative outcomes following glioma, meningioma, or metastasis resection., Methods: We identified all admissions undergoing a craniotomy for glioma, meningioma, or metastasis resection in the National Inpatient Sample from 2002 to 2011. Assessed outcomes included inpatient mortality, complications, discharge disposition, length of stay (LOS), and hospital costs. Multivariable regression adjusting for 13 patient, severity, and hospital characteristics assessed the association between DE status and outcomes, relative to four reference insurance groups (Medicare-only, Medicaid-only, private insurance, self-pay)., Results: Of 195,725 total admissions analyzed, 3.0% were dual-eligible beneficiaries (n = 5933). DEs were younger than Medicare admissions (P < 0.001) but older than Medicaid, private, and self-pay admissions (P < 0.001). Relative to other insurance groups, DEs also exhibited higher severity of illness, risk of mortality, and Charlson Comorbidity Index scores as well as treatment at low-volume hospitals (all P < 0.001). DEs had lower mortality than self-pay admissions (odds ratio [OR] 0.47, P = 0.017). Compared to Medicare, Medicaid, private, and self-pay admissions, DEs had lower rates of discharge disposition (OR 0.53, 0.50, 0.34, and 0.27, respectively, all P < 0.001). DEs also had higher complications (OR 1.23 and 1.20, respectively, both P < 0.05) and LOS (β = 1.06 and 1.13, respectively, both P < 0.01) than Medicare and private insurance beneficiaries. Differences in discharge disposition remained significant for all three tumor subtypes, but only glioma DE admissions continued to exhibit higher complications and LOS., Conclusions: DEs undergoing definitive craniotomy for brain tumor had higher rates of unfavorable discharge disposition compared to all other insurance groups and, especially for glioma surgery, had higher inpatient complication rates and LOS. Practice and policy reforms to improve outcomes for this vulnerable clinical population are warranted., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Objective: Medical malpractice litigation is a significant challenge in neurosurgery, with more than 25% of a neurosurgeon's career on average spent with an open malpractice claim. While earlier research has elucidated characteristics of litigation related to brain tumor treatment, factors impacting outcome and indemnity payment amount are incompletely understood., Methods: The authors identified all medical malpractice cases related to brain tumors from 1988 to 2017 in VerdictSearch, a database of 200,000 cases from all 50 states. The outcome for each case was dichotomized from the perspective of the defendant physician as favorable (defendant victory) or unfavorable (plaintiff victory or settlement). Indemnity payments were recorded for cases that resulted in settlement or plaintiff victory. Univariate regression was used to assess the association between case characteristics and case outcome as well as indemnity payment amount. Subsequently, significant variables were used to generate multivariate models for each outcome. Statistical significance was maintained at p < 0.05., Results: A total of 113 cases were analyzed, resulting most commonly in defendant (physician) victory (46.9%), followed by settlement and plaintiff victory (both 26.5%). The most common specialty of the primary defendant was neurosurgery (35.4%), and the most common allegation was improper diagnosis (59.3%). Indemnity payments totaled $191,621,392, with neurosurgical defendants accounting for $109,000,314 (56.9%). The average payments for cases with a plaintiff victory ($3,333,654) and for settlements ($3,051,832) did not significantly differ (p = 0.941). The highest rates of unfavorable outcomes were observed among radiologists (63.6%) and neurosurgeons (57.5%) (p = 0.042). On multivariate regression, severe disability was associated with a lower odds of favorable case outcome (OR 0.21, p = 0.023), while older plaintiff age (> 65 years) predicted higher odds of favorable outcome (OR 5.75, p = 0.047). For 60 cases resulting in indemnity payment, higher payments were associated on univariate analysis with neurosurgeon defendants (β-coefficient = 2.33, p = 0.017), whether the plaintiff underwent surgery (β-coefficient = 2.11, p = 0.012), and the plaintiff experiencing severe disability (β-coefficient = 4.30, p = 0.005). Following multivariate regression, only medical outcome was predictive of increased indemnity payments, including moderate disability (β-coefficient = 4.98, p = 0.007), severe disability (β-coefficient = 6.96, p = 0.001), and death (β-coefficient = 3.23, p = 0.027)., Conclusions: Neurosurgeons were the most common defendants for brain tumor malpractice litigation, averaging more than $3 million per claim paid. Older plaintiff age was associated with case outcome in favor of the physician. Additionally, medical outcome was predictive of both case outcome and indemnity payment amount.