@article{FeldheimKesslerFeldheimetal.2022,
  author    = {Feldheim, Jonas and Kessler, Almuth F. and Feldheim, Julia J. and Schulz, Ellina and Wend, David and Lazaridis, Lazaros and Kleinschnitz, Christoph and Glas, Martin and Ernestus, Ralf-Ingo and Brandner, Sebastian and Monoranu, Camelia M. and L{\"o}hr, Mario and Hagemann, Carsten},
  title     = {Effects of long-term temozolomide treatment on glioblastoma and astrocytoma WHO grade 4 stem-like cells},
  series = {International Journal of Molecular Sciences},
  volume    = {23},
  journal   = {International Journal of Molecular Sciences},
  number    = {9},
  issn      = {1422-0067},
  doi       = {10.3390/ijms23095238},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-284417},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Glioblastoma leads to a fatal course within two years in more than two thirds of patients. An essential cornerstone of therapy is chemotherapy with temozolomide (TMZ). The effect of TMZ is counteracted by the cellular repair enzyme O\(^6\)-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT). The MGMT promoter methylation, the main regulator of MGMT expression, can change from primary tumor to recurrence, and TMZ may play a significant role in this process. To identify the potential mechanisms involved, three primary stem-like cell lines (one astrocytoma with the mutation of the isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH), CNS WHO grade 4 (HGA)), and two glioblastoma (IDH-wildtype, CNS WHO grade 4) were treated with TMZ. The MGMT promoter methylation, migration, proliferation, and TMZ-response of the tumor cells were examined at different time points. The strong effects of TMZ treatment on the MGMT methylated cells were observed. Furthermore, TMZ led to a loss of the MGMT promoter hypermethylation and induced migratory rather than proliferative behavior. Cells with the unmethylated MGMT promoter showed more aggressive behavior after treatment, while HGA cells reacted heterogenously. Our study provides further evidence to consider the potential adverse effects of TMZ chemotherapy and a rationale for investigating potential relationships between TMZ treatment and change in the MGMT promoter methylation during relapse.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FeldheimKesslerMonoranuetal.2019,
  author    = {Feldheim, Jonas and Kessler, Almuth F. and Monoranu, Camelia M. and Ernestus, Ralf-Ingo and L{\"o}hr, Mario and Hagemann, Carsten},
  title     = {Changes of O\(^6\)-Methylguanine DNA Methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation in glioblastoma relapse—a meta-analysis type literature review},
  series = {Cancers},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Cancers},
  number    = {12},
  issn      = {2072-6694},
  doi       = {10.3390/cancers11121837},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-193040},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Methylation of the O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter has emerged as strong prognostic factor in the therapy of glioblastoma multiforme. It is associated with an improved response to chemotherapy with temozolomide and longer overall survival. MGMT promoter methylation has implications for the clinical course of patients. In recent years, there have been observations of patients changing their MGMT promoter methylation from primary tumor to relapse. Still, data on this topic are scarce. Studies often consist of only few patients and provide rather contrasting results, making it hard to draw a clear conclusion on clinical implications. Here, we summarize the previous publications on this topic, add new cases of changing MGMT status in relapse and finally combine all reports of more than ten patients in a statistical analysis based on the Wilson score interval. MGMT promoter methylation changes are seen in 115 of 476 analyzed patients (24\%; CI: 0.21-0.28). We discuss potential reasons like technical issues, intratumoral heterogeneity and selective pressure of therapy. The clinical implications are still ambiguous and do not yet support a change in clinical practice. However, retesting MGMT methylation might be useful for future treatment decisions and we encourage clinical studies to address this topic},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KlementPoppKauletal.2022,
  author    = {Klement, Rainer J. and Popp, Ilinca and Kaul, David and Ehret, Felix and Grosu, Anca L. and Polat, B{\"u}lent and Sweeney, Reinhart A. and Lewitzki, Victor},
  title     = {Accelerated hyper-versus normofractionated radiochemotherapy with temozolomide in patients with glioblastoma: a multicenter retrospective analysis},
  series = {Journal of Neuro-Oncology},
  volume    = {156},
  journal   = {Journal of Neuro-Oncology},
  number    = {2},
  issn      = {1573-7373},
  doi       = {10.1007/s11060-021-03926-0},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-269806},
  pages     = {407-417},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Background and Purpose The standard treatment of glioblastoma patients consists of surgery followed by normofractionated radiotherapy (NFRT) with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy. Whether accelerated hyperfractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) yields comparable results to NFRT in combination with temozolomide has only sparsely been investigated. The objective of this study was to compare NFRT with HFRT in a multicenter analysis. Materials and Methods A total of 484 glioblastoma patients from four centers were retrospectively pooled and analyzed. Three-hundred-ten and 174 patients had been treated with NFRT (30 × 1.8 Gy or 30 × 2 Gy) and HFRT (37 × 1.6 Gy or 30 × 1.8 Gy twice/day), respectively. The primary outcome of interest was overall survival (OS) which was correlated with patient-, tumor- and treatment-related variables via univariable and multivariable Cox frailty models. For multivariable modeling, missing covariates were imputed using multiple imputation by chained equations, and a sensitivity analysis was performed on the complete-cases-only dataset. Results After a median follow-up of 15.7 months (range 0.8-88.6 months), median OS was 16.9 months (15.0-18.7 months) in the NFRT group and 14.9 months (13.2-17.3 months) in the HFRT group (p = 0.26). In multivariable frailty regression, better performance status, gross-total versus not gross-total resection, MGMT hypermethylation, IDH mutation, smaller planning target volume and salvage therapy were significantly associated with longer OS (all p < 0.01). Treatment differences (HFRT versus NFRT) had no significant effect on OS in either univariable or multivariable analysis. Conclusions Since HFRT with temozolomide was not associated with worse OS, we assume HFRT to be a potential option for patients wishing to shorten their treatment time.},
  language  = {en}
}