Opinion statement
Gliomas that affect the optic pathways are for the most part low-grade neoplasms that often, but not always, have good prognoses. Optimal treatment and management of optic pathway gliomas remains unclear and the decision hinges upon several factors including patient age, tumor location, and visual symptoms. We favor a treatment approach that is dependent on the location of tumor within anterior, chiasmal or posterior/hypothalamic visual pathways. In children who are minimally or not symptomatic, we recommend observation rather than early treatment intervention. Most of these patients will have neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) based on the natural history and their pilocytic astrocytoma histology. Serial magnetic resonance imaging studies and formal neuro-ophthalmology testing should enable close observation of these patients, with intervention being reserved for when tumor progression results in significant visual loss or proptosis. Chemotherapy is an accepted first line treatment, and a number of effective medications are available, although no agent has proven clearly superior. If progression is accompanied by the complete loss of vision, surgery can be utilized to help alleviate structural issues (ie, proptosis). Minimally symptomatic chiasmal or hypothalamic tumors that arise in the setting of NF1 can also be observed initially because of their favorable prognosis. Children with NF1 and chiasmal or posterior visual tumors who progress either on imaging or clinical grounds (ie, development of significant visual deficits) should be treated first with chemotherapy rather than radiation therapy to minimize the effects on the developing central nervous system. Individuals without NF1 presenting with a chiasmal or hypothalamic mass are candidates for biopsy to determine the underlying pathology of the lesion. Symptomatic patients with pilocytic astrocytoma should first receive chemotherapy. In contrast, other histologies including malignant optic pathway gliomas should be treated similar to other gliomas that occur in other locations with appropriate doses of radiation and chemotherapy.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Optic pathway gliomas (OPGs) are astrocytic neoplasms that are typically low-grade tumors arising from the optic nerve, chiasm or posterior tract [1••]. They account for approximately 2 % of gliomas in the central nervous system and 3 %‒5 % of childhood intracranial tumors. OPGs commonly present in childhood with 75 % of patients being diagnosed prior to the age of 10 and 90 % by the age of 20 [2]. Classification is based on anatomic location and concomitant diagnosis of neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) [3]. The pathogenesis of OPGs may be related to allelic chromosomal loss such as loss of chromosome 17q that can occur in pilocytic astrocytomas or loss of neurofibromin in patients with NF1 [4].
Tumors arise in the anterior visual pathway in 25 %‒30 % and can be further subdivided into orbital, intracanalicular, or intracranial prechiasmal lesions. These tumors are almost exclusively pilocytic astrocytomas, and growth is almost universally slow. Tumors may be infiltrative or demarcated from the normal optic nerve and invasion of the leptomeninges can often be seen. Compression of the optic nerve may occur as the tumor enlarges, resulting in demyelination and atrophy of the nerve. In contrast, posterior visual pathway tumors arising in the optic chiasm, hypothalamus, or anterior third ventricle, are a more heterogeneous group of tumors and are more often nonpilocytic astrocytomas. Therefore, their behavior is also more heterogeneous and their prognosis is significantly poorer [5, 6].
Presenting symptoms depend upon the location in which the tumor arises. Patients with orbital lesions most commonly present with proptosis and less likely with strabismus or spasmus nutans. Because of the young age at diagnosis, visual impairment is a relatively uncommon presenting symptom although fundoscopic examination may exhibit edema or pallor of the optic disc. Chiasmal lesions most often present with visual symptoms but can also present with symptoms arising from obstructive hydrocephalus. Hypothalamic gliomas may present as diencephalic syndrome such as failure to thrive in an alert and cheerful child. Children may present with endocrinopathies leading to precocious puberty or accelerated linear growth. Patients with NF1 should have annual ophthalmologic screening for identification of optic pathway gliomas until age 10 [1••, 7].
The diagnosis of OPG should be considered in situations of unexplained visual loss, monocular or asymmetric nystagmus, diencephalic syndrome, or optic nerve atrophy. Brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) including fine cuts through the orbit and optic pathway is the diagnostic imaging of choice. Findings may include tubular thickening of the optic nerve and chiasm, a suprasellar lesion, or optic nerve/tract involvement. Differential diagnoses include suprasellar germinoma, craniopharyngioma, glioma, sarcoidosis, lymphoma, or Langerhans histiocytosis [8]. The natural history of OPGs varies dependent on the histologic findings, location, and the genetic background of NF1 [9, 10].
Overall, OPGs are associated with an indolent clinical course and long-term survival, underscoring the need for addressing long-term treatment complications in treatment decisions [11]. Patients with NF1 and a more anterior location of the tumor are associated with the most favorable outcomes. Visual acuity loss is the most significant morbidity associated with OPGs, with blindness developing in almost 20 % of affected individuals. For this reason, treatment should be based on patient’s age, genetic predisposition (NF1), location of the lesion, and growth rate and is best rendered by a multidisciplinary team including ophthalmology, radiation oncology, neuro-oncology, neuroradiology, and neurosurgery (Table 1) [12–15].
Treatment
Diet and lifestyle
Although no specific studies have looked at OPGs and diet, there have been some studies looking at the use of ketogenic diets and gliomas in general. The use of the ketogenic diet derives from the Warburg hypothesis that tumor tissue relies mostly on glycolysis rather than oxidative phosphorylation for metabolism. In using the ketogenic diet, which provides low carbohydrates, high fat, and moderate protein, glucose levels in the blood are decreased and ketone bodies that bypass glycolysis are funneled directly into oxidative phosphorylation for metabolism. Mouse studies have shown that a ketogenic diet led to smaller tumor size, increased survival, and alterations in gene expression and reactive oxygen species [16]. Anecdotally, there have been some case reports on patients who have had success with tumor control on a ketogenic diet, but one clinical trial in patients with glioblastoma multiforme on ketogenic diets showed some difficulty with diet tolerability and minor differences in overall progression free survival [17].
Pharmacologic treatment
There have been no definitive studies establishing the superiority of one specific chemotherapeutic agent over others for OPGs. At our institution, we prefer starting with temozolomide given its favorable side effect profile, but all other chemotherapy options listed have been used for OPG treatment both alone and in conjunction.
- Standard dosage :
-
150 mg/m2 once daily for 5 days of a 28 day cycle.
- Contraindications :
-
Hypersensitivity to temozolomide or any component of the formulation; hypersensitivity to dacarbazine; myelosuppression.
- Main drug interactions :
-
Valproic acid.
- Main side effects :
-
Myelosuppression, moderate emetic potential, Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia, constipation.
- Special points :
-
Unlabeled use; Dosage varies depending on its use with other chemotherapeutic agents. At our institution, this is our first line agent due to tolerability of side effect profile.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
100 mg (5) capsules, $1261.45
- Standard dosage :
-
450 mg/m2 in 1 h infusion on day 1 in a 3-week cycle.
- Contraindications :
-
Allergic reaction to carboplatin, cisplatin, or other platinum-containing formulations, mannitol, or any component of the formulation; myelosuppression or bleeding.
- Main drug interactions :
-
May enhance effect of immunosuppressant drugs, ototoxic effects of aminoglycosides, and neurotoxic effects of cisplatin (ie, peripheral neuropathy).
- Main side effects :
-
Myelosuppression, electrolyte abnormalities, renal impairment, hepatic impairment, ototoxicity.
- Special points :
-
Unlabeled use; Dosage varies depending on its use with other chemotherapeutic agents.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
450 mg/45 mL (45 mL) intravenous solution, $120.
- Standard dosage :
-
30 mg/m2/d in a 3-h infusion with mannitol and saline on day 1 and 2 out of 3-week cycle.
- Contraindications :
-
Hypersensitivity to cisplatin, other platinum-containing compounds, or component of the formulation; pre-existing renal impairment; myelosuppression; hearing impairment.
- Main drug interactions :
-
Aminoglycosides, immunosuppressants, myelosuppressive agents.
Main side effects: nausea, vomiting, hypersensitivity/anaphylactoid reactions, hyperuricemia, infusion site reactions, neurotoxicity, ototoxicity, renal toxicity.
- Special points :
-
Unlabeled use; Dosage varies depending on its use with other chemotherapeutic agents.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
200 mg/200 mL (200 mL) $86.64.
- Standard dosage :
-
1500 mg/m2 in a 1-h infusion on day 1 out of 3-week cycle
- Contraindications :
-
Hypersensitivity to cyclophosphamide or any component of the formulation
- Main drug interactions :
-
Vitamin K antagonists, immunosuppressants, CYP3A4 inhibitors, CYP2B6 substrates, cardiac glycosides.
- Main side effects :
-
Myelosuppression, cardiotoxicity, fertility, nausea, vomiting, hemorrhagic cystitis, hypersensitivity, immunosuppression, pneumonitis, secondary malignancies, wound healing impairment.
- Special points :
-
Unlabeled use; Dosage varies depending on its use with other chemotherapeutic agents.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
1 g (1) cyclophosphamide reconstituted solution $879.00.
- Standard dosage :
-
150 mg/m2/d in 1-h infusion on day 1 and 2 out of 3-week cycle.
- Contraindications :
-
Hypersensitivity to etoposide or any component of the formulation.
- Main drug interactions :
-
May decrease the metabolism of CYP3A4 substrates and enhance the anticoagulant effect of vitamin K antagonists (ie, warfarin).
- Main side effects :
-
Myelosuppression, hypersensitivity reaction (anaphylactic-like reactions), hypotension with rapid administration, secondary malignancies.
- Special points :
-
Unlabeled use; Dosage varies depending on its use with other chemotherapeutic agents.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
1 gm/50 mL (50 mL) intravenous solution, $105.60.
- Standard dosage :
-
120 mg/m2/d, days 1‒7 in a 3-week cycle.
- Contraindications :
-
Hypersensitivity to procarbazine or any component of the formulation; myelosuppression.
- Main drug interactions :
-
Inhibits monoamine oxidase thus enhancing the effects of multiple classes of medications that are metabolized by these enzymes. Patients should be placed on a diet that minimizes exposure to tyramine.
- Main side effects :
-
High emetic potential, myelosuppression, CNS toxicity (paresthesia, neuropathy), hypersensitivity.
- Special points :
-
Unlabeled use; Dosage varies depending on its use with other chemotherapeutic agents.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
100 capsules (matulane oral) 50 mg, $6434.81.
- Standard dosage :
-
1.5 mg/m2 in a 1-h infusion on day 1 out of 3-week cycle.
- Contraindications :
-
Patients with the demyelinating form of Charcot-Marie-Tooth syndrome, pre-existing neuropathy.
- Main drug interactions :
-
May decrease the metabolism of CYP3A4 substrates.
- Main side effects :
-
Constipation, infusion site reactions from extravasation, neurotoxicity, respiratory distress or bronchospasm, uric acid nephropathy.
- Special points :
-
Unlabeled use; Dosage varies depending on its use with other chemotherapeutic agents.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
Vincasar PFS intravenous 1 mg/mL (1 mL) $18.06.
Interventional procedures
Ophthalmological screening [20–23]
Patients with known OPGs and those diagnosed with NF1 should be serially screened for progressive visual loss. Although visual acuity is the primary screening test, it is difficult to perform in younger children. Visual evoked potentials and optical coherence tomography (OCT) are tools that can be helpful in the screening visit.
- Contraindications :
-
None.
- Complications :
-
None.
- Special points :
-
More thorough testing may be necessary in younger children given inconsistencies in their acuity exam.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
High
MRI brain [24]
Cases with characteristic imaging findings on MRI can obviate biopsy of suspected lesions for diagnosis. MRI is the preferred method of imaging although head CT can be used as an initial screening tool at the time of presentation or when MRI is contraindicated. Lesions are often isodense to brain and contrast enhancement may be variable.
- Contraindications :
-
Renal impairment may preclude contrast use.
- Complications :
-
None.
- Special points :
-
Sedation is often necessary for children to complete MRI.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
High.
Surgery
Surgery is typically considered only in the event of single nerve involvement, progressive and disfiguring proptosis, blindness, and significant mass effect or hydrocephalus. Complete resection of a tumor would only be considered and possible if the lesion is limited to one optic nerve because the procedure may cause blindness. Tumor resection or ventricular shunting may be needed in the setting of obstructive hydrocephalus.
- Contraindications :
-
Diffuse or bilateral optic nerve involvement.
- Complications :
-
Blindness.
- Special points :
-
Patients with NF1 often have diffuse disease burden with increased failure rate after surgical intervention.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
Variable.
Assistive devices
Dependent on degree of vision loss and best evaluated by blind rehabilitation service experts.
Therapy and exercise
Blind rehabilitation services and vision therapy.
- Usage :
-
Indicated when visual loss may be impairing independent functioning.
- Special points :
-
Consider school for the blind for implementation of multidisciplinary approach to therapy.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
High.
- Other treatments :
Radiation
Once utilized as the primary treatment modality, radiotherapy is typically deferred until at least age 5‒7 because of the potential for late risks including endocrinopathy, vasculopathy, and cognitive decline. Radiotherapy is considered a viable option in children older than age 5‒7 whose tumors are not amenable to surgery and/or tumors that have progressed despite other treatments. Conventionally, external-beam fractionated radiation therapy has been the treatment of choice. Radiotherapy is associated with 10-year relapse-free survival rates of 71 %‒90 % and stabilization of vision of 69 %‒81 % [29–32]. Indeed with regard to tumor stabilization and visual outcomes, radiotherapy is the modality with which other options are compared and remains the fall-back option when others fail. The results of a number of studies have suggested that using early introduction of radiotherapy rather than after visual decline or chemotherapy progression is associated with better visual outcomes [29–32]. For example, in a study of 27 patients with OPG treated at St. Jude Children’s Cancer Hospital on a prospective trial of conformal radiotherapy as the first treatment, patients were more likely to have useful vision before and after radiotherapy. [25] Although radiotherapy is effective, given the long-term survival for these patients, early radiotherapy has to be counterbalanced with development of complications later in life. Highly conformal techniques of radiation including proton beam radiotherapy and fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy have shown promise to limit the radiation exposure to surrounding brain tissue and minimize associated late risks [29, 30, 33, 34].
- Contraindications :
-
Relative contraindication in age less than 5 years.
- Complications :
-
Visual loss, edema, cognitive dysfunction, endocrine abnormalities, vasculopathy.
- Special points :
-
Maximal effect of radiation may take years to be observed. Irradiation is associated with an increased incidence of secondary tumor development occurring years later and can result in the development of secondary Moyamoya disease, especially in NF1 patients.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
Variable.
Emerging therapies
- Standard procedure :
-
Chemotherapy.
- Contraindications :
-
Hemorrhage, wound healing difficulty, recent surgery.
- Complications :
-
Hemorrhage, gastrointestinal perforation, hypertension, wound dehiscence.
- Special points :
-
Most effective if edema associated with lesion contributing to symptoms or clinical presentation. Figure 1 demonstrates an example of OPG treated with bevacizumab at our institution with prolonged tumor control.
- Cost/cost effectiveness :
-
400 mg/16 mL (16 mL), $3115.87.
Pediatric considerations
The information provided in this manuscript applies mostly to children given the fact that the mean age of patients at diagnosis is 8.8 years.
References and Recommended Reading
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
Shapey J, Danesh-Meyer HV, Kaye AH. Diagnosis and management of optic nerve glioma. J Clin Neurosci. 2011;18(12):1585–91. Description of clinical history and current treatments for optic nerve gliomas.
Binning MJ, Liu JK, Kestle JR, Brockmeyer DL, Walker ML. Optic pathway gliomas: a review. Neurosurg Focus. 2007;23(5):E2.
Listernick R, Ferner RE, Liu GT, Gutmann DH. Optic pathway gliomas in neurofibromatosis-1: controversies and recommendations. Ann Neurol. 2007;61(3):189–98.
Boyd KP, Korf BR, Theos A. Neurofibromatosis type 1. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009;6((1):1–14. quiz 15‒16.
Cirak B. Optic nerve glioma. J Neurosurg. 2003;99(2 Suppl):246. author reply 246.
Dewandel P, Demaerel P. Optic nerve glioma. JBR-BTR. 2001;84(2):61.
Gutmann DH, Listernick R, Ferner RE. Screening for symptomatic optic pathway glioma in children with neurofibromatosis type 1. Eye (Lond). 2011;25(6):818. author reply 818‒9.
Liu GT. Optic gliomas of the anterior visual pathway. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2006;17(5):427–31.
Jahraus CD, Tarbell NJ. Optic pathway gliomas. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2006;46(5):586–96.
Lynch TM, Gutmann DH. Neurofibromatosis 1. Neurol Clin. 2002;20(3):841–65.
Opocher E, Kremer LC, Da Dalt L, et al. Prognostic factors for progression of childhood optic pathway glioma: a systematic review. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42(12):1807–16.
Diaz RJ, Laughlin S, Nicolin G, Buncic JR, Bouffet E, Bartels U. Assessment of chemotherapeutic response in children with proptosis due to optic nerve glioma. Childs Nerv Syst. 2008;24(6):707–12.
Balcer LJ, Liu GT, Heller G, et al. Visual loss in children with neurofibromatosis type 1 and optic pathway gliomas: relation to tumor location by magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Ophthalmol. 2001;131(4):442–5.
Kelly JP, Leary S, Khanna P, Weiss AH. Longitudinal measures of visual function, tumor volume, and prediction of visual outcomes after treatment of optic pathway gliomas. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(6):1231–7.
Campagna M, Opocher E, Viscardi E, et al. Optic pathway glioma: long-term visual outcome in children without neurofibromatosis type-1. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2010;55(6):1083–8.
Stafford P, Abdelwahab MG, do Kim Y, Preul MC, Rho JM, Scheck AC. The ketogenic diet reverses gene expression patterns and reduces reactive oxygen species levels when used as an adjuvant therapy for glioma. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2010;10(7):74.
Rieger J, Bahr O, Maurer GD, Hattingen E, Franz K, Brucker D, et al. ERGO: a pilot study of ketogenic diet in recurrent glioblastoma. Int J Oncol. 2014;44(6):1843–52.
Gururangan S, Fisher MJ, Allen JC, Herndon II JE, Quinn JA, Reardon DA, et al. Temozolomide in children with progressive low-grade glioma. Neuro Oncol. 2007;9(2):161–8.
Laithier V, Grill J, Le Deley MC, Ruchoux MM, Couanet D, Doz F, et al. French Society of Pediatric Oncology. Progression-free survival in children with optic pathway tumors: dependence on age and quality of the response to chemotherapy –results of the first French prospective study for the French Society of Pediatric Oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(24):4572–8.
Gutmann DH, Avery R, Ferner RE, Listernick R. Visual function and optic pathway glioma: a critical response. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013;131(1):120–1.
Fard MA, Fakhree S, Eshraghi B. Correlation of optical coherence tomography parameters with clinical and radiological progression in patients with symptomatic optic pathway gliomas. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2013;251(10):2429–36.
Parsa CF. Why visual function does not correlate with optic glioma size or growth. Arch Ophthalmol. 2012;130(4):521–2.
Avery RA, Ferner RE, Listernick R, Fisher MJ, Gutmann DH, Liu GT. Visual acuity in children with low grade gliomas of the visual pathway: implications for patient care and clinical research. J Neurooncol. 2012;110(1):1–7.
Taylor T, Jaspan T, Milano G, et al. Radiological classification of optic pathway gliomas: experience of a modified functional classification system. Br J Radiol. 2008;81(970):761–6.
Awdeh RM, Kiehna EN, Drewry RD, et al. Visual outcomes in pediatric optic pathway glioma after conformal radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;84(1):46–51.
Marwaha G, Macklis R, Singh AD. Radiation therapy: orbital tumors. Dev Ophthalmol. 2013;52:94–101.
Xu D, Liu D, Zhang Z, et al. Gamma Knife surgery in the management of orbital tumors. J Neurosurg. 2010;113(Suppl):34–8.
Stieber VW. Radiation therapy for visual pathway tumors. J Neuroophthalmol. 2008;28(3):222–30.
Combs SE, Schulz-Ertner D, Moschos D, Thilmann C, Huber PE, Debus J. Fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy of optic pathway gliomas: tolerance and long-term outcome. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;62:814–9.
Debus J, Kocagoncu KO, Hoss A, Wenz F, Wannenmacher M. Fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) for optic glioma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;44:243–8.
Grabenbauer GG, Schuchardt U, Buchfelder M, Rödel CM, Gusek G, Marx M, et al. Radiation therapy of optico-hypothalamic gliomas (OHG)—radiographic response, vision and late toxicity. Radiother Oncol. 2000;54:239–45.
Tao ML, Barnes PD, Billett AL, Leong T, Shrieve DC, Scott RM, et al. Childhood optic chiasm gliomas: radiographic response following radiotherapy and long-term clinical outcome. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;39(3):579–87.
Fuss M, Hug EB, Schaefer RA, Nevinny-Stickel M, Miller DW, Slater JM, et al. Proton radiation therapy (PRT) for pediatric optic pathway gliomas: comparison with 3D planned conventional photons and a standard photon technique. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;45(5):1117–26.
Han SR, Kim KN, Yee GT, Choi CY, Lee DJ, Sohn MJ, et al. Fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy using Novalis for confined intra-orbital optic nerve glioma in pediatric patient. Childs Nerv Syst. 2013;29(5):867–71.
Avery RA, Hwang EI, Jakacki RI, Packer RJ. Marked recovery of vision in children with optic pathway gliomas treated with bevacizumab. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2014;132(1):111–4. Highlights the use of bevacizumab as a new treatment optic pathway gliomas.
Compliance with Ethics Guidelines
Conflict of Interest
Reena Parada Thomas, Iris C. Gibbs, Linda Wei Xu, and Lawrence Recht declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Neurologic Ophthalmology and Otology
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Thomas, R.P., Gibbs, I.C., Xu, L.W. et al. Treatment Options for Optic Pathway Gliomas. Curr Treat Options Neurol 17, 2 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11940-014-0333-2
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11940-014-0333-2