Table 1.
Characteristics of included studies
| References | In IPDMA | No. of patients | Median age | Design | HD-MTX | CTX components | Response evaluation | Response rate (CR rate) % | Median FU (months) | Median PFS (months) | Median OS (months) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Freilich et al. [13] | Yes | 12 | 76 | Retro multi | Yes | 1. HD-MTX, IT-MTX, PCB, VINCR; 2. HD-MTX, IT-MTX, AraC; 3.HD-MTX, PCB, IT-MTX, TT | CT or MRI | 91 (75) | 13 | n.r. | 31 |
| Fritsch et al. [24] | Yes | 28 | 75 | Pros single | Yes | R, HD-MTX, CCNU, PCB | MRI | 82 (64) | 36 | 16 | 18 |
| Ghesquieres et al. [18], Ab | Yes | 36 | 66 | Pros multi | Yes | COP, MCOPA, low-dose CYM. | CT or MRI | 61 (53) | n.r. | 16 | 16 |
| Ghesquieres et al. [18], Bb | Yes | 18 | 73 | Pros multi | Yes | MCVP | CT or MRI | 56 (28) | n.r. | 7 | 15 |
| Hoang-Xuan et al. [33] | Yes | 50 | 72 | Pros multi | Yes | HD-MTX, CCNU, PCB, IT-MTX, steroids | CT or MRI | 48 (42) | 36 | 7 | 14 |
| Illerhaus et al. [19] | Yes | 30 | 70 | Pros single | Yes | HD-MTX, CCNU, PCB | MRI | 70 (44) | 78 | 6 | 15 |
| Kurzwelly et al. [21] | Yes | 17 | 75 | Retro multi | No | TMZ | MRI | 53 (47) | 25 | 5 | 21 |
| Laack et al. [16] | No | 19 | 76 | Pros multi | No | WBRT, steroids | MRI | 42 (16) | 6 | 3 | 6 |
| Lee et al. [29]$c | Yes | 38 | 69 | Retro single | Yes | HD-MTX, RANIMST, PCB, steroids | MRI | 74 (42) | 36.5 | 18 | 43 |
| Makino et al. [32] | No | 63 | n.r. | Retro single | Yes | HD-MTX, RANIMST, PCB, steroids | MRI | n.r. | n.r. | 7 | 31 |
| Ney et al. [22] | No | 174 | 72 | Retro single | Yes | HD-MTX, WBRT | CT or MRI | 76 (n.r.) | 34 | 24 | 25 |
| Ng et al. [14] | Yes | 10 | 73 | Retro unclear | Yes | HD-MTX | n.r. | 90 (60) | 23 | 18 | 36 |
| Olivier et al. [31] | No | 35 | 65 | Pros multi | Yes | HD-MTX, VIND, IDA, steroids | MRI | 51 (17) | 57 | 13 | 19 |
| Omuro et al. [17] | Yes | 23 | 68 | Retro multi | Yes | HD-MTX, TMZ | n.r. | 70 (55) | 26 | 8 | 35 |
| Omuro et al. [25]a | No | 98 | 72 | RCT multi | Yes | MPV-A versus HD-MTX TMZ | n.r. | 82 (62) versus 71 (45) | n.r. | 9.5 versus 6.1 | 31 versus 13.8 |
| Pulczynski et al. [30]d | Yes | 42 | 66 | Pros multi | Yes | HD-MTX, ARAC, TMZ | MRI | 88 (60) | 24 | 13 | Not reached |
| Roth et al. [26] | No | 192 | n.r. | RCT multi | Yes | HD-MTX (IFO) | CT or MRI | 44 (30) | n.r. | 4 | 13 |
| Schlegel et al. [27]a | No | 89 | 68 | Pros multi | Yes | HD-MTX, ARAC, DEXA, IF, CYLCO, VINCR, IT-ARAC | n.r. | 57 (49) | 12 | 8 | 22 |
| Schuurmans et al. [23] | Yes | 74 | 65 | Retro multi | Yes | 1. WBRT only; 2. HD-HD-MTX; 3. MBVP | n.r. | 74 (n.r.) | 20 | 7 | 21 |
| Welch et al. [28] | No | 24 | 82 | Retro single | Yes | MVP | CT or MRI | 63 (58) | 15 | 7 | 8 |
| Zhu et al. [20] | Yes | 31 | 74 | Retro single | Yes | HD-MTX | MRI | 96 (60) | 28 | 7 | 37 |
aOnly published in abstract form.
bResults from one single study that stratified therapy according to age (A, 61–69 years; B, ≥70 years).
$cThis is an updated study of previously reported patients by Taoka et al. [34].
dStudy also included patients below 60 years of age, in total N = 66.
ARAC, cytarabine; CCNU, lomustine; CR, complete remission; CT, computed tomography; CTX, chemotherapy; FU, follow-up; HD-MTX, high-dose methotrexate; IDA, idarubicine; IFO, ifosfamide; IT, intrathecal; IPDMA, individual patient data meta-analysis; multi, multicenter study; MBVP, MTX–BCNU–teniposide–dexamethason; MVP, high-dose methotrexate–vincristine–procarbazine; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; n.r., not reported; PBC, procarbazine; PR, partial remission; RANIMST, ranimustine; single, single-center study; pros, prospective study; retro, retrospective study; R, rituximab; RCT, randomized clinical trial; TMZ, temozolomide; TT, thiotepa; VINCR, vincristine; VIND, vindesin; WBRT, whole-brain radiotherapy.