Background and ObjectivesApproximately 10% of patients with glioma with epilepsy need antiseizure medication (ASM) triple therapy due to refractory epilepsy. The aim of this study was to evaluate... Show moreBackground and ObjectivesApproximately 10% of patients with glioma with epilepsy need antiseizure medication (ASM) triple therapy due to refractory epilepsy. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether levetiracetam combined with valproic acid and clobazam (LEV + VPA + CLB), a frequently prescribed triple therapy, has favorable effectiveness compared with other triple therapy combinations in patients with glioma.MethodsThis was a multicenter retrospective observational cohort study. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of time to treatment failure for any reason, from the start of ASM triple therapy treatment. The secondary outcomes included cumulative incidences of the following: (1) time to treatment failure due to uncontrolled seizures; (2) time to treatment failure due to adverse effects; and (3) time to recurrent seizures. Patients were followed up for a maximum duration of 36 months.ResultsOf 1,435 patients in the original cohort, 90 patients received ASM triple therapy after second-line ASM treatment failure due to uncontrolled seizures. LEV + VPA + CLB was prescribed to 48% (43/90) and other ASM triple therapy to 52% (47/90) of patients. The cumulative incidence of treatment failure for any reason of LEV + VPA + CLB did not statistically significantly differ from that of other ASM triple therapy combinations (12 months: 47% [95% CI 31%–62%] vs 42% [95% CI 27%–56%], p = 0.892). No statistically significant differences for treatment failure due to uncontrolled seizures (12 months: 12% [95% CI 4%–25%] vs 18% [95% CI 8%–30%], p = 0.445), adverse effects (12 months: 22% [95% CI 11%–36%] vs 15% [95% CI 7%–27%], p = 0.446), or recurrent seizures (1 month: 65% [95% CI 48%–78%] vs 63% [95% CI 47%–75%], p = 0.911) were found. Show less
Background Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a frequently chosen treatment for patients with brain metastases and the number of long-term survivors is increasing. Brain necrosis (e.g.... Show moreBackground Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a frequently chosen treatment for patients with brain metastases and the number of long-term survivors is increasing. Brain necrosis (e.g. radionecrosis) is the most important long-term side effect of the treatment. Retrospective studies show a lower risk of radionecrosis and local tumor recurrence after fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (fSRS, e.g. five fractions) compared with stereotactic radiosurgery in one or three fractions. This is especially true for patients with large brain metastases. As such, the 2022 ASTRO guideline of radiotherapy for brain metastases recommends more research to fSRS to reduce the risk of radionecrosis. This multicenter prospective randomized study aims to determine whether the incidence of adverse local events (either local failure or radionecrosis) can be reduced using fSRS versus SRS in one or three fractions in patients with brain metastases.Methods Patients are eligible with one or more brain metastases from a solid primary tumor, age of 18 years or older, and a Karnofsky Performance Status = 70. Exclusion criteria include patients with small cell lung cancer, germinoma or lymphoma, leptomeningeal metastases, a contraindication for MRI, prior inclusion in this study, prior surgery for brain metastases, prior radiotherapy for the same brain metastases (in-field re-irradiation). Participants will be randomized between SRS with a dose of 15-24 Gy in 1 or 3 fractions (standard arm) or fSRS 35 Gy in five fractions (experimental arm). The primary endpoint is the incidence of a local adverse event (local tumor failure or radionecrosis identified on MRI scans) at two years after treatment. Secondary endpoints are salvage treatment and the use of corticosteroids, bevacizumab, or antiepileptic drugs, survival, distant brain recurrences, toxicity, and quality of life.Discussion Currently, limiting the risk of adverse events such as radionecrosis is a major challenge in the treatment of brain metastases. fSRS potentially reduces this risk of radionecrosis and local tumor failure. Show less
Background: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a frequently chosen treatment for patients with brain metastases and the number of long-term survivors is increasing. Brain necrosis (e.g.... Show moreBackground: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a frequently chosen treatment for patients with brain metastases and the number of long-term survivors is increasing. Brain necrosis (e.g. radionecrosis) is the most important long-term side effect of the treatment. Retrospective studies show a lower risk of radionecrosis and local tumor recurrence after fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (fSRS, e.g. five fractions) compared with stereotactic radiosurgery in one or three fractions. This is especially true for patients with large brain metastases. As such, the 2022 ASTRO guideline of radiotherapy for brain metastases recommends more research to fSRS to reduce the risk of radionecrosis. This multicenter prospective randomized study aims to determine whether the incidence of adverse local events (either local failure or radionecrosis) can be reduced using fSRS versus SRS in one or three fractions in patients with brain metastases.Methods: Patients are eligible with one or more brain metastases from a solid primary tumor, age of 18 years or older, and a Karnofsky Performance Status ≥ 70. Exclusion criteria include patients with small cell lung cancer, germinoma or lymphoma, leptomeningeal metastases, a contraindication for MRI, prior inclusion in this study, prior surgery for brain metastases, prior radiotherapy for the same brain metastases (in-field re-irradiation). Participants will be randomized between SRS with a dose of 15-24 Gy in 1 or 3 fractions (standard arm) or fSRS 35 Gy in five fractions (experimental arm). The primary endpoint is the incidence of a local adverse event (local tumor failure or radionecrosis identified on MRI scans) at two years after treatment. Secondary endpoints are salvage treatment and the use of corticosteroids, bevacizumab, or antiepileptic drugs, survival, distant brain recurrences, toxicity, and quality of life.Discussion: Currently, limiting the risk of adverse events such as radionecrosis is a major challenge in the treatment of brain metastases. fSRS potentially reduces this risk of radionecrosis and local tumor failure.Trial registration: ClincalTrials.gov, trial registration number: NCT05346367 , trial registration date: 26 April 2022.Keywords: Brain metastases; Brain necrosis; Fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (fSRS); Hypofractionation; Local tumor failure; Radionecrosis; Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Show less
Background Glioblastoma (GBM), the most common glial primary brain tumour, is without exception lethal. Every year approximately 600 patients are diagnosed with this heterogeneous disease in The... Show moreBackground Glioblastoma (GBM), the most common glial primary brain tumour, is without exception lethal. Every year approximately 600 patients are diagnosed with this heterogeneous disease in The Netherlands. Despite neurosurgery, chemo -and radiation therapy, these tumours inevitably recur. Currently, there is no gold standard at time of recurrence and treatment options are limited. Unfortunately, the results of dedicated trials with new drugs have been very disappointing. The goal of the project is to obtain the evidence for changing standard of care (SOC) procedures to include whole genome sequencing (WGS) and consequently adapt care guidelines for this specific patient group with very poor prognosis by offering optimal and timely benefit from novel therapies, even in the absence of traditional registration trials for this small volume cancer indication. Methods The GLOW study is a prospective diagnostic cohort study executed through collaboration of the Hartwig Medical Foundation (Hartwig, a non-profit organisation) and twelve Dutch centers that perform neurosurgery and/or treat GBM patients. A total of 200 patients with a first recurrence of a glioblastoma will be included. Dual primary endpoint is the percentage of patients who receive targeted therapy based on the WGS report and overall survival. Secondary endpoints include WGS report success rate and number of targeted treatments available based on WGS reports and number of patients starting a treatment in presence of an actionable variant. At recurrence, study participants will undergo SOC neurosurgical resection. Tumour material will then, together with a blood sample, be sent to Hartwig where it will be analysed by WGS. A diagnostic report with therapy guidance, including potential matching off-label drugs and available clinical trials will then be sent back to the treating physician for discussing of the results in molecular tumour boards and targeted treatment decision making. Discussion The GLOW study aims to provide the scientific evidence for changing the SOC diagnostics for patients with a recurrent glioblastoma by investigating complete genome diagnostics to maximize treatment options for this patient group. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05186064. Show less
Meer, P.B. van der; Dirven, L.; Fiocco, M.; Vos, M.J.; Kouwenhoven, M.C.M.; Bent, M.J. van den; ... ; Koekkoek, J.A.F. 2022
Background and Objectives: About 30% of patients with glioma need an add-on antiseizure medication (ASM) due to uncontrolled seizures on ASM monotherapy. This study aimed to determine whether... Show moreBackground and Objectives: About 30% of patients with glioma need an add-on antiseizure medication (ASM) due to uncontrolled seizures on ASM monotherapy. This study aimed to determine whether levetiracetam combined with valproic acid (LEV + VPA), a commonly prescribed duotherapy, is more effective than other duotherapy combinations including either LEV or VPA in patients with glioma. Methods: In this multicenter retrospective observational cohort study, treatment failure (i.e., replacement by, addition of, or withdrawal of an ASM) for any reason was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included (1) treatment failure due to uncontrolled seizures and (2) treatment failure due to adverse effects. Time to treatment failure was estimated from the moment of ASM duotherapy initiation. Multivariable cause-specific Cox proportional hazard models were estimated to study the association between risk factors and treatment failure. The maximum duration of follow-up was 36 months. Results: A total of 1,435 patients were treated with first-line monotherapy LEV or VPA, of which 355 patients received ASM duotherapy after they had treatment failure due to uncontrolled seizures on monotherapy. LEV + VPA was prescribed in 66% (236/355) and other ASM duotherapy combinations including LEV or VPA in 34% (119/355) of patients. Patients using other duotherapy vs LEV + VPA had a higher risk of treatment failure for any reason (cause-specific adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.50 [95% CI 1.07-2.12], p = 0.020), due to uncontrolled seizures (cause-specific aHR 1.73 [95% CI 1.10-2.73], p = 0.018), but not due to adverse effects (cause-specific aHR 0.88 [95% CI 0.47-1.67], p = 0.703). Discussion: This observational cohort study suggests that LEV + VPA has better efficacy than other ASM combinations. Similar toxicities were experienced in the 2 groups. Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class III evidence that for patients with glioma with uncontrolled seizures on ASM monotherapy, LEV + VPA has better efficacy than other ASM combinations. Show less
Mirven, P.B. van; Dirven, L.; Fiocco, M.; Vos, M.J.; Kouwenhoven, M.C.M.; Bent, M.J. van den; ... ; Koekkoek, J.A.F. 2022
Background The feasibility of implementing an advance care planning (ACP) program in daily clinical practice for glioblastoma patients is unknown. We aimed to evaluate a previously developed... Show moreBackground The feasibility of implementing an advance care planning (ACP) program in daily clinical practice for glioblastoma patients is unknown. We aimed to evaluate a previously developed disease-specific ACP program, including the optimal timing of initiation and the impact of the program on several patient-, proxy-, and care-related outcomes. Methods The content and design of the ACP program were evaluated, and outcomes including health-related quality of life (HRQoL), anxiety and depression, and satisfaction with care were measured every 3 months over 15 months. Results Eighteen patient-proxy dyads and two proxies participated in the program. The content and design of the ACP program were rated as sufficient. The preference for the optimal timing of initiation of the ACP program varied widely, however, most of the participants preferred initiation shortly after chemoradiation. Over time, aspects of HRQoL remained stable in our patient population. Similarly, the ACP program did not decrease the levels of anxiety and depression in patients, and a large proportion of proxies reported anxiety and/or depression. The needed level of support for proxies was relatively low throughout the disease course, and the level of feelings of caregiver mastery was relatively high. Overall, patients were satisfied with the provided care over time, whereas proxies were less satisfied in some aspects. Conclusions The content and design of the developed disease-specific ACP program were rated as satisfactory. Whether the program has an actual impact on patient-, proxy-, and care-related outcomes proxies remain to be investigated. Show less
Meer, P.B. van der; Dirven, L.; Fiocco, M.; Vos, M.J.; Kouwenhoven, M.C.M.; Bent, M.J. van den; ... ; Koekkoek, J.A.F. 2022
Background and Objectives: About 30% of patients with glioma need an add-on antiseizure medication (ASM) due to uncontrolled seizures on ASM monotherapy. This study aimed to determine whether... Show moreBackground and Objectives: About 30% of patients with glioma need an add-on antiseizure medication (ASM) due to uncontrolled seizures on ASM monotherapy. This study aimed to determine whether levetiracetam combined with valproic acid (LEV + VPA), a commonly prescribed duotherapy, is more effective than other duotherapy combinations including either LEV or VPA in patients with glioma. Methods: In this multicenter retrospective observational cohort study, treatment failure (i.e., replacement by, addition of, or withdrawal of an ASM) for any reason was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included (1) treatment failure due to uncontrolled seizures and (2) treatment failure due to adverse effects. Time to treatment failure was estimated from the moment of ASM duotherapy initiation. Multivariable cause-specific Cox proportional hazard models were estimated to study the association between risk factors and treatment failure. The maximum duration of follow-up was 36 months. Results A total of 1,435 patients were treated with first-line monotherapy LEV or VPA, of which 355 patients received ASM duotherapy after they had treatment failure due to uncontrolled seizures on monotherapy. LEV + VPA was prescribed in 66% (236/355) and other ASM duotherapy combinations including LEV or VPA in 34% (119/355) of patients. Patients using other duotherapy vs LEV + VPA had a higher risk of treatment failure for any reason (cause-specific adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.50 [95% CI 1.07-2.12], p = 0.020), due to uncontrolled seizures (cause-specific aHR 1.73 [95% CI 1.10-2.73], p = 0.018), but not due to adverse effects (cause-specific aHR 0.88 [95% CI 0.47-1.67], p = 0.703). Discussion: This observational cohort study suggests that LEV + VPA has better efficacy than other ASM combinations. Similar toxicities were experienced in the 2 groups. Classification of Evidence This study provides Class III evidence that for patients with glioma with uncontrolled seizures on ASM monotherapy, LEV + VPA has better efficacy than other ASM combinations. Show less
Background: Screening glioma patients regularly for possible mood disorders may facilitate early identification and referral of patients at risk. This study evaluated if the EORTC QLQ-C30 Emotional... Show moreBackground: Screening glioma patients regularly for possible mood disorders may facilitate early identification and referral of patients at risk. This study evaluated if the EORTC QLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning (EF) scale could be used as an initial screening measure to identify patients possibly having a mood disorder. Methods: EORTC QLQ-C30 EF and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores were collected as part of a study assessing the impact of timing of patient-reported outcome assessments on actual health-related quality of life outcomes (N = 99). Spearman correlations and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to determine the association between the EF and HADS (sub)scales. Receiver Operating Characteristic analyses were performed to determine optimal cut-off EF scores to identify patients possibly having a mood disorder (i.e. HADS subscale score >= 8 points). Results: EF and HADS (sub)scales correlated moderately (HADS-A: r = -0.65; HADS-D: r = -0.52). Significant EF score differences were found between patients with HADS >= 8 versus <8 points (HADS-A: mean difference (MD) = 32 and HADS-D: MD = 23). The EF scale had excellent (HADS-A; AUC = 0.88) and borderline excellent (HADS-D; AUC = 0.78) distinguishing capabilities. A statistically optimal (EF score <80) and a most inclusive (sensitivity of 100%, corresponding to an EF score <97) EF cut-off score correctly identified 88.0% and 96.0% of patients with a possible mood disorder, respectively. Conclusion: EORTC QLQ-C30 EF scale seems to be an appropriate screening measure to identify glioma patients possibly having a mood disorder in need of further assessment. Show less
Background: Glioma patients may experience behavioral and personality changes (BPC), negatively impacting their lives and that of their relatives. However, there is no clear definition of BPC for... Show moreBackground: Glioma patients may experience behavioral and personality changes (BPC), negatively impacting their lives and that of their relatives. However, there is no clear definition of BPC for adult glioma patients, and here we aimed to determine which characteristics of BPC are relevant to include in this definition.Methods: Possible characteristics of BPC were identified in the literature and presented to patients and (former) caregivers in an online survey launched via the International Brain Tumour Alliance. Participants had to rate the relevance of each presented characteristic of BPC, the three characteristics with the most impact on their lives, and possible missing characteristics. A cluster analysis and discussions with experts provided input to categorize characteristics and propose a definition for BPC.Results: Completed surveys were obtained from 140 respondents; 35% patients, 50% caregivers, and 15% unknown. Of 49 proposed characteristics, 35 were reported as relevant by at least 25% (range: 7%-44%) of respondents. Patients and caregivers rated different characteristics as most important. Common characteristics included in the top 10 of both patients and caregivers were lack of motivation, change in being socially active, not able to finish things, and change in the level of irritation. No characteristics were reported missing by >= 5 respondents. Three categories of BPC were identified: (1) emotions, needs, and impulses (2) personality traits, and (3) poor judgement abilities.Conclusion: The work resulted in a proposed definition for BPC in glioma patients, for which endorsement from the neuro-oncological community will be sought. A next step is to identify or develop an instrument to evaluate BPC in glioma patients. Show less
Meer, P.B. van der; Dirven, L.; Fiocco, M.; Vos, M.J.; Kouwenhoven, M.C.M.; Bent, M.J. van den; ... ; Koekkoek, J.A.F. 2021
Objective This study aimed at estimating the cumulative incidence of antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment failure of first-line monotherapy levetiracetam vs valproic acid in glioma patients with... Show moreObjective This study aimed at estimating the cumulative incidence of antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment failure of first-line monotherapy levetiracetam vs valproic acid in glioma patients with epilepsy.Methods In this retrospective observational study, a competing risks model was used to estimate the cumulative incidence of treatment failure, from AED treatment initiation, for the two AEDs with death as a competing event. Patients were matched on baseline covariates potentially related to treatment assignment and outcomes of interest according to the nearest neighbor propensity score matching technique. Maximum duration of follow-up was 36 months.Results In total, 776 patients using levetiracetam and 659 using valproic acid were identified. Matching resulted in two equal groups of 429 patients, with similar covariate distribution. The cumulative incidence of treatment failure for any reason was significantly lower for levetiracetam compared to valproic acid (12 months: 33% [95% confidence interval (CI) 29%-38%] vs 50% [95% CI 45%-55%]; P < .001). When looking at specific reasons of treatment failure, treatment failure due to uncontrolled seizures was significantly lower for levetiracetam compared to valproic acid (12 months: 16% [95% CI 12%-19%] vs 28% [95% CI 23%-32%]; P < 0.001), but no differences were found for treatment failure due to adverse effects (12 months: 14% [95% CI 11%-18%] vs 15% [95% CI 11%-18%]; P = .636).Significance Our results suggest that levetiracetam may have favorable efficacy compared to valproic acid, whereas level of toxicity seems similar. Therefore, levetiracetam seems to be the preferred choice for first-line AED treatment in patients with glioma. Show less
Background It is unknown if the implementation of an advance care planning (ACP) program is feasible in daily clinical practice for glioblastoma patients. We aimed to develop an ACP program and... Show moreBackground It is unknown if the implementation of an advance care planning (ACP) program is feasible in daily clinical practice for glioblastoma patients. We aimed to develop an ACP program and assess the preferred content, the best time to introduce such a program in the disease trajectory, and possible barriers and facilitators for participation and implementation. Methods A focus group with health care professionals (HCPs) and individual semi-structured interviews with patients and proxies (of both living and deceased patients) were conducted. Results All predefined topics were considered relevant by participants, including the current situation, worries/fears, (supportive) treatment options, and preferred place of care/death. Although HCPs and proxies of deceased patients indicated that the program should be implemented relatively early in the disease trajectory, patient-proxy dyads were more ambiguous. Several patient-proxy dyads indicated that the program should be initiated later in the disease trajectory. If introduced early, topics about the end of life should be postponed. A frequently mentioned barrier for participation was that the program would be too confronting, while a facilitator was adequate access to information. Conclusion This study resulted in an ACP program specifically for glioblastoma patients. Although participants agreed on the program content, the optimal timing of introducing such a program was a matter of debate. Our solution is to offer the program shortly after diagnosis but let patients and proxies decide which topics they want to discuss and when. The impact of the program on several patient- and care-related outcomes will be evaluated in the next step. Show less
Background Little is known about the symptoms glioma patients experience in the year before diagnosis, either or not resulting in health care usage. This study aimed to determine the incidence of... Show moreBackground Little is known about the symptoms glioma patients experience in the year before diagnosis, either or not resulting in health care usage. This study aimed to determine the incidence of symptoms glioma patients experienced in the year prior to diagnosis, and subsequent visits to a general practitioner (GP).Methods Glioma patients were asked to complete a 30-item study-specific questionnaire focusing on symptoms they experienced in the 12 months before diagnosis. For each indicated symptom, patients were asked whether they consulted the GP for this issue.Results Fifty-nine patients completed the questionnaires, 54 (93%) with input of a proxy. The median time since diagnosis was 4 months (range 1-12). The median number of symptoms experienced in the year before diagnosis was similar between gliomas with favourable and poor prognosis, i.e. 6 (range 0-24), as were the five most frequently mentioned problems: fatigue (n = 34, 58%), mental tiredness (n = 30, 51%), sleeping disorder (n = 24, 41%), headache (n = 23, 39%) and stress (n = 20, 34%). Twenty-six (44%) patients visited the GP with at least one issue. Patients who did consult their GP reported significantly more often muscle weakness (11 vs 3, p = 0.003) than patients who did not, which remained significant after correction for multiple testing, which was not the case for paralysis in hand/leg (10 vs 4), focussing (11 vs 6) or a change in awareness (9 vs 4).Conclusions Glioma patients experience a range of non-specific problems in the year prior to diagnosis, but only patients who consult the GP report more often neurological problems. Show less
Kerkhof, M.; Koekkoek, J.A.F.; Vos, M.J.; Bent, M.J. van den; Taal, W.; Postma, T.J.; ... ; Taphoorn, M.J.B. 2019
BackgroundWhen glioma patients experience long-term seizure freedom the question arises whether antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) should be continued. As no prospective studies exist on seizure recurrence... Show moreBackgroundWhen glioma patients experience long-term seizure freedom the question arises whether antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) should be continued. As no prospective studies exist on seizure recurrence in glioma patients after AED withdrawal, we evaluated the decision-making process to withdraw AEDs in glioma patients, and seizure outcome after withdrawal.MethodsPatients with a histologically confirmed low grade or anaplastic glioma were included. Eligible patients were seizure free1year from the date of last antitumor treatment, or 2years since the last seizure when seizures occurred after the end of the last antitumor treatment. Patients and neuro-oncologists made a shared decision on the preferred AED treatment (i.e. AED withdrawal or continuation). Primary outcomes were: (1) outcome of the shared decision-making process and (2) rate of seizure recurrence.ResultsEighty-three patients fulfilled all eligibility criteria. However, in 12/83 (14%) patients, the neuro-oncologist had serious objections to AED withdrawal. Therefore, 71/83 (86%) patients were analyzed; In 46/71 (65%) patients it was decided to withdraw AED treatment. In the withdrawal group, 26% (12/46) had seizure recurrence during follow-up. Seven of these 12 patients (58%) had tumor progression, of which three within 3months after seizure recurrence. In the AED continuation group, 8% (2/25) of patients had seizure recurrence of which one had tumor progression.ConclusionIn 65% of patients a shared decision was made to withdraw AEDs, of which 26% had seizure recurrence. AED withdrawal should only be considered in carefully selected patients with a presumed low risk of tumor progression. Show less
Kerkhof, M.; Koekkoek, J.A.F.; Vos, M.J.; Bent, M.J. van den; Taal, W.; Postma, T.J.; ... ; Taphoorn, M.J.B. 2019
Background When glioma patients experience long-term seizure freedom the question arises whether antiepileptic drug (AEDs) should be continued. As no prospective studies exist on seizure recurrence... Show moreBackground When glioma patients experience long-term seizure freedom the question arises whether antiepileptic drug (AEDs) should be continued. As no prospective studies exist on seizure recurrence in glioma patients after AED withdrawal, we evaluated the decision-making process to withdraw AEDs in glioma patients, and seizure outcome after withdrawal.Methods Patients with a histologically confirmed low grade or anaplastic glioma were included. Eligible patients were seizure free ≥ 1 year from the date of last antitumor treatment, or ≥ 2 years since the last seizure when seizures occurred after the end of the last antitumor treatment. Patients and neuro-oncologists made a shared decision on the preferred AED treatment (i.e. AED withdrawal or continuation). Primary outcomes were: (1) outcome of the shared decision-making process and (2) rate of seizure recurrence.Results Eighty-three patients fulfilled all eligibility criteria. However, in 12/83 (14%) patients, the neuro-oncologist had serious objections to AED withdrawal. Therefore, 71/83 (86%) patients were analyzed; In 46/71 (65%) patients it was decided to withdraw AED treatment. In the withdrawal group, 26% (12/46) had seizure recurrence during follow-up. Seven of these 12 patients (58%) had tumor progression, of which three within 3 months after seizure recurrence. In the AED continuation group, 8% (2/25) of patients had seizure recurrence of which one had tumor progression.Conclusion In 65% of patients a shared decision was made to withdraw AEDs, of which 26% had seizure recurrence. AED withdrawal should only be considered in carefully selected patients with a presumed low risk of tumor progression. Show less
Kerkhof, M.; Koekkoek, J.A.F.; Vos, M.J.; Bent, M. van den; Taal, W.; Postma, T.J.; ... ; Taphoorn, M.J.B. 2017
