A single-center experience with giant cell tumors of sphenoid bone and clivus

2021 ◽  
pp. 030089162110243
Author(s):  
Büşra Yaprak Bayrak ◽  
Emre Özcan ◽  
Çiğdem Vural ◽  
Atakan Emengen ◽  
Burak Çabuk ◽  
...  

Objective: To present pathologic, clinical, and treatment findings for giant cell tumors (GCTs) of sphenoid bone and clivus. Methods: We describe the optimal treatment algorithm in patients with a histopathologic diagnosis of bone GCT by presenting the effects of denosumab treatment in both pediatric and adult patients with GCT undergoing endoscopic transnasal surgery. Clinicopathologic correlation is crucial for the differential diagnosis of GCT and the choice of treatment modality. Conclusion: GCT of bone is a local aggressive tumor that accounts for about 3%–7% of all bone tumors. GCTs located in the cranium are extremely uncommon neoplasms. There are no defined guidelines for the treatment of GCTs in skull base. Following surgical resection of the tumor, the addition of denosumab treatments to radiotherapy has a significant role in preventing the recurrence of GCT and in promoting regression of residual tumor size.

Neurosurgery ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 576-580 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurence D. Watkins ◽  
David Uttley ◽  
Daniel J. Archer ◽  
Peter Wilkins ◽  
Nicholas Plowman

2019 ◽  
Vol 131 (3) ◽  
pp. 695-705
Author(s):  
Jian-Cong Weng ◽  
Da Li ◽  
Liang Wang ◽  
Zhen Wu ◽  
Jun-Mei Wang ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVEIntracranial giant cell tumors (GCTs) are extremely rare neoplasms with dismal survival and recurrence rates. The authors aimed to confirm independent adverse factors for progression-free survival (PFS) and to propose an optimal treatment algorithm.METHODSThe authors reviewed the clinical data of 43 cases of intracranial GCTs in their series. They also reviewed 90 cases of previously reported GCTs in the English language between 1982 and 2017 using Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane databases with keywords of “giant cell tumor” or “osteoclastoma” and “skull,” “skull base,” “temporal,” “frontal,” “sphenoid,” or “occipital.” These prior publication data were processed and used according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Aforementioned risk factors for the authors’ series and the pooled cases were evaluated in patients not lost to follow-up (m = 38 and n = 128, respectively).RESULTSThe authors’ cohort included 28 males and 15 females with a mean age of 30.5 years. Gross-total resection (GTR) was achieved in 15 (34.9%) patients. Fifteen patients (39.5%) who did not undergo GTR received postoperative radiotherapy with a mean total dose of 54.7 ± 4.1 Gy. After a mean follow-up of 71.3 months, 12 (31.6%) patients experienced recurrence, and 4 (10.5%) died of disease. The actuarial 5-year PFS and overall survival (OS) were 68.6% and 90.0% in the authors’ cohort, respectively. A multivariate Cox regression analysis verified that partial resection (HR 7.909, 95% CI 2.296–27.247, p = 0.001), no radiotherapy (HR 0.114, 95% CI 0.023–0.568, p = 0.008), and Ki-67 ≥ 10% (HR 7.816, 95% CI 1.584–38.575, p = 0.012) were independent adverse factors for PFS. Among the 90 cases in the literature, GTR was achieved in 49 (54.4%) cases. Radiotherapy was administered to 33 (36.7%) patients with a mean total dose of 47.1 ± 5.6 Gy. After a mean follow-up of 31.5 months, recurrence and death occurred in 17 (18.9%) and 5 (5.6%) cases, respectively. Among the pooled cases, the 5-year PFS and OS were 69.6% and 89.2%, respectively. A multivariate model demonstrated that partial resection (HR 4.792, 95% CI 2.909–7.893, p < 0.001) and no radiotherapy (HR 0.165, 95% CI 0.065–0.423, p < 0.001) were independent adverse factors for poor PFS.CONCLUSIONSGTR and radiotherapy were independent favorable factors for PFS of intracranial GCTs. Based on these findings, GTR alone or GTR plus radiotherapy was advocated as an optimal treatment; otherwise, partial resection plus radiotherapy with a dose ≥ 45 Gy, if tolerable, was a secondary alternative. Lack of randomized data of the study was stressed, and future studies with larger cohorts are necessary to verify these findings.Systematic review no.: CRD42018090878 (crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/)


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 370
Author(s):  
Motoki Tanikawa ◽  
Hiroshi Yamada ◽  
Tomohiro Sakata ◽  
Mitsuhito Mase

Background: In the treatment of giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB), the efficacy and safety of denosumab, a receptor activator nuclear factor κ-B ligand inhibitor, has previously been demonstrated, especially for unresectable tumors. One of the current issues in denosumab treatment for unresectable GCTB is whether it can be discontinued, or whether the dosage or the dosing interval can safely be adjusted, if discontinuation is not possible, to avoid the occurrence of side effects. Case Description: A 15-year-old boy with diplopia was referred to our hospital after a space-occupying lesion in the sphenoid bone was found on head CT. Partial removal of the tumor was performed through an endoscopic endonasal approach, and pathological diagnosis was confirmed as GCTB. Thereafter, the patient received 120 mg subcutaneous injections of denosumab every 28 days for the first 2 years. Since bone formation was induced and sustained along with tumor reduction, the dosing interval was gradually extended, with 4 monthly dosing for the next 1 year, followed by 6 monthly dosing for the succeeding 2 years. With the extension of the dosing interval, the ossified tumor has regrown slightly, but within an acceptable range. Conclusion: Discontinuation of denosumab treatment for unresectable GCTB was not thought to be possible for the current case due to the nature of the drug, as reported in the literature. Extending the dosing interval up to 6 monthly, as could be done safely in the current case, can be considered a useful and appropriate measure.


1970 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 665-670 ◽  
Author(s):  
James D. Geissinger ◽  
Edir B. Siqueira ◽  
Emanuel R. Ross

2017 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehmet Ali Deveci ◽  
Semra Paydaş ◽  
Gülfiliz Gönlüşen ◽  
Cenk Özkan ◽  
Ömer Sunkar Biçer ◽  
...  

Neurosurgery ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 576-580 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurence D. Watkins ◽  
David Uttley ◽  
Daniel J. Archer ◽  
Peter Wilkins ◽  
Nicholas Plowman

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 1800147
Author(s):  
Yoshiyuki Suehara ◽  
Taketo Okubo ◽  
Taisei Kurihara ◽  
Takuo Hayashi ◽  
Shinji Kohsaka ◽  
...  

1994 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 254-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassio Menezes Raposo Amaral ◽  
Gerson Luiz Julio ◽  
Luiz Antonio Athayde Cardoso ◽  
Marco Antonio de Camargo Bueno

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document