Retrospective cohort study finds re-resection reduces mortality risk in high-grade glioma, suggesting secondary surgery extends survival for selected recurrent cases.
Introduction Evidence is limited to define which patients derive meaningful survival benefit from re-resection of recurrent high-grade glioma (HGG). This study aimed to identify clinical determinants of overall survival (OS) in a cohort of patients undergoing surgical resection for HGG, with secondary analysis of the re-resection subgroup. Methods A retrospective single-centre analysis was performed on consecutive patients undergoing HGG resection from 2020-2021. OS was calculated from the date of first resection to death or censorship. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards (PH) model was implemented to identify independent predictors of OS. A secondary Cox PH model was performed in the re-resection subgroup, with OS calculated from the date of second resection. Results Of 70 patients identified, 18 (25.7%) underwent re-resection for recurrent disease. In the whole-cohort multivariate model, re-resection was associated with a 69% reduction in hazard of death (HR 0.306, p = 0.001). Median OS from the second resection was 12.9 months (IDH wildtype: 12.2 months; mutant: 35.1). No independent predictors of post-re-resection survival reached statistical significance. However, clinically relevant trends were observed: adjuvant therapy (HR 0.306, p = 0.169), and absence of surgical complications following re-resection trended towards improved survival (HR 0.648, p = 0.460). Greater extent of second resection is modestly protective (HR 0.991 per %, p = 0.596). Conversely, IDH wildtype (HR 1.963, p = 0.622) and higher ASA grade at re-resection (HR 1.256, p = 0.663) trended towards poorer survival. Conclusions Re-resection was the strongest independent predictor of improved survival in this cohort of high-grade glioma patients. Due to limited sample size in the current re-resection subgroup, no independent factor predicted post-re-resection survival. Prospective studies with larger cohorts are warranted to confirm meaningful selection criteria.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Qiang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: