Table 2 Clinical evidence of SVZ as a therapeutic target for GBM

Huang et al.

176 patients

+

Partly

+

SVZ contact (P = 0.008) was significantly associated with a shortened recurrence time

[10]

Evers et al.

55 patients

+ (except one)

External beam radiation therapy (except one)

Bilateral SVZ received greater than the median SVZ dose (43 Gy) had a significant improvement in PFS

[62]

Lee et al.

173 patients

+

+

High radiation therapy doses to ipsilateral SVZ remained an independent predictor of improved PFS but not of OS

[63]

Chen et al.

116 patients

+

+

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT (60 Gy/30 f))

iSVZ dose was greater than 40 Gy, both PFS and OS improved in patients with GBM after GTR

[52]

Luchi et al.

single-institution prospective study

+

+

Hypofractionated high-dose IMRT

Hypofractionated radiation (PTV1 = 68 Gy/8f) had satisfactory results in local control and survival

[64]

Darázs et al.

41 patients

+

+

Higher mean dose (≥ 58 Gy) to the iSVZ2 had significantly better OS

[72]

Adeberg et al.

607 patients

68.5%

71.7%

28.3%

GBM close to the SVZ has decreased survival and a higher risk of multifocal or distant progression

[21]

Gupta et al.

40 patients

+

+

Three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy ((3D-CRT (60 Gy/30 f))

Mean dose of iSVZ greater than 57.9 Gy was an independent factor of OS

[66]

Elicin et al.

60 patients

+

+

3D-CRT (60 Gy/30 f)

Higher cSVZ dose (> 59.2 Gy) had a negative effect on OS and PFS

[67]

Bender et al.

200 patients

+

+

IMRT

Ipsilateral or contralateral SVZ dose had no significant effect on OS and PFS

[68]

Weinberg et al.

50 patients

+

+

External beam radiation therapy (60 Gy/30 f)

Distant SVZ site receiving ≤ 45 Gy had the shortest survival

[22]

Mathew et al.

47 patients

+

+

+

iSVZ dose ≥ 56 Gy trended toward improved OS and PFS, cSVZ dose ≥ 50 Gy appeared to have better OS and PFS

[73]