Search

Glioblastoma is an aggressive cancer with a notoriously poor prognosis. Recent advances in treatment have increased overall survival, though this may be accompanied by an increased incidence of leptomeningeal disease (LMD). LMD carries a particularly severe prognosis and remains a late stage manifestation of glioblastoma without satisfactory treatment. The objective of this review is to survey the literature on treatment of LMD in glioblastoma and to more fully characterize the current therapeutic strategies. The authors performed a systematic review following PRISMA criteria on PubMed and OVID databases. Articles that included adult patients with LMD from glioblastoma were retrieved and reviewed. LMD in glioblastoma patients is increasing in incidence, with reports of up to 21%. The overall survival without treatment is alarmingly brief, with patients surviving between 1.6–3.8 months. All studies showed that treatment does improve overall survival significantly, increasing to 11.7 months in one study. However, no one adjuvant or surgical therapy has been shown to improve survival in LMD significantly over another. Direct treatment methods include chemotherapy (standard, anti-angiogenic, intrathecal, immunotherapy), and radiation. Hydrocephalus is a complication in LMD that can be treated with ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement, however treating hydrocephalus and delivering intrathecal chemotherapy is a challenge. Though evidence remains lacking and there is no consensus, treatments show a trend towards improving survival and should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Further studies are necessary in the pursuit of a standard of care.

Introduction: Glioblastoma is an aggressive cancer with a notoriously poor prognosis. Recent advances in treatment have increased overall survival, though this may be accompanied by an increased incidence of leptomeningeal disease (LMD). LMD carries a particularly severe prognosis and remains a late stage manifestation of glioblastoma without satisfactory treatment. The objective of this review is to survey the literature on treatment of LMD in glioblastoma and to more fully characterize the current therapeutic strategies. Methods: The authors performed a systematic review following PRISMA criteria on PubMed. Articles that included adult patients with LMD from glioblastoma multiforme were retrieved and reviewed. Results: LMD in glioblastoma patients is increasing in incidence, with reports of up to 21%. The overall survival without treatment is alarmingly brief, with patients surviving between 1.6-3.8 months. All studies showed that treatment does improve overall survival significantly, increasing to 11.7 months in one study. However, no one adjuvant or surgical therapy has been shown to improve survival in LMD significantly over another. Direct treatment methods include chemotherapy (standard, anti-angiogenic, intrathecal, immunotherapy), and radiation. Hydrocephalus is a complication in LMD that can be treated with ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement, however treating hydrocephalus and delivering intrathecal chemotherapy is a challenge. Conclusion: Though evidence remains lacking and there is no consensus, treatments show a trend towards improving survival and should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Further studies are necessary in the pursuit of a standard of care.

Glioblastoma is an aggressive cancer with a notoriously poor prognosis. Recent advances in treatment have increased overall survival, though this may be accompanied by an increased incidence of leptomeningeal disease (LMD). LMD carries a particularly severe prognosis and remains a late stage manifestation of glioblastoma without satisfactory treatment. The objective of this review is to survey the literature on treatment of LMD in glioblastoma and to more fully characterize the current therapeutic strategies.The authors performed a systematic review following PRISMA criteria on PubMed and OVID databases. Articles that included adult patients with LMD from glioblastoma were retrieved and reviewed.LMD in glioblastoma patients is increasing in incidence, with reports of up to 21%. The overall survival without treatment is alarmingly brief, with patients surviving between 1.6-3.8 months. All studies showed that treatment does improve overall survival significantly, increasing to 11.7 months in one study. However, no one adjuvant or surgical therapy has been shown to improve survival in LMD significantly over another. Direct treatment methods include chemotherapy (standard, anti-angiogenic, intrathecal, immunotherapy), and radiation. Hydrocephalus is a complication in LMD that can be treated with ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement, however treating hydrocephalus and delivering intrathecal chemotherapy is a challenge.Though evidence remains lacking and there is no consensus, treatments show a trend towards improving survival and should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Further studies are necessary in the pursuit of a standard of care.

Background and objectives The prevalence of substance use disorders (SUD), particularly involving opiates and benzodiazepines, has increased to the detriment of public health and the economy. Here, we evaluate relapse factors among the high-risk demographic of patients with SUD and comorbid affective disorders. Methods A retrospective chart review of 76 patients discharged after detoxification and simultaneous psychiatric care for concomitant affective disorders and SUDs. Relapse was assessed by two independent evaluators via postdischarge chart review, which included state-wide healthcare utilization, by patient, through healthcare information exchange systems. A Cox Hazards analysis was performed to characterize relapse risk factors. Results Benzodiazepine use, admission through the emergency department (ED) rather than direct admission, frequent ED use in the preceding year, and history of prior attendance at multiple detoxification programs were risk factors for shortened time-to-relapse. Polysubstance use and intravenous drug use prolonged time to relapse. Discussion and conclusions Notable findings include the significant relapse risk associated with benzodiazepine abuse and frequent prior ED utilization. These risk factors could reflect a number of underlying mediators for relapse, including anxiety, disease burden, and malingering. Additionally, this study recapitulates the observation in other patient populations that the majority of health resource utilization is attributed to a small population of patients. Scientific significance This study is the first to identify relapse predictors among dual-diagnosis affective disorder and SUD patients in survival analysis, and replicates the alarming and largely unknown effect that benzodiazepines have on increasing relapse risk.