Critical impact of radiotherapy protocol compliance and quality in the treatment of retroperitoneal sarcomas: Results from the 62092-22092 STRASS trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11566-11566
Author(s):  
Rick L.M. Haas ◽  
Jean-Jacques Stelmes ◽  
Facundo Zaffaroni ◽  
Enrico Clementel ◽  
Raquel Bar Deroma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Time ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Composite Endpoint ◽  
Target Volume ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Quality Assurance Program ◽  
Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy ◽  
Overall Treatment Time ◽  
Cancer Society ◽  
The Impact

11566 Background: The EORTC 22092-62092 STRASS trial failed to detect a superiority of neoadjuvant radiotherapy in patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma as compared to surgery alone. As radiotherapy (RT) was the experimental treatment, a comprehensive quality assurance program (RTQA) has been included in the study protocol in order to detect and correct potential RT deviations. We report here the overall trial RTQA results and its potential impact on patient’s outcomes in this international phase III trial. Methods: Plans from all patients randomized to the experimental preoperative RT arm were submitted to a multidisciplinary RTQA team, consisting of medical physicists and radiation-oncologists. Target volume parameters and tumor dose coverage were prospectively reviewed by the RTQA team but not all plans were made compliant. In order to evaluate the impact on oncological outcomes, a composite endpoint, overall RT compliance status, was created; patients were classified into two major groups: RT compliant (RC) group and non-compliant (NRC) group, defining whether RT was as concisely per protocol or not. This composite endpoint combined the information related to PTV coverage, target delineation, total dose received and overall treatment time. Both abdominal recurrence-free survival (ARFS) and OS were compared between RC and NRC patients using Cox’s proportional hazard model adjusted for age, sex, WHO performance status, tumor grade, histological subtype and tumor size at baseline (millimeters). Results: After final review, 75.2% (94 out of 125) of patients had compliant RT plans (65.6% were already compliant at first submission to RTQA team and 9.6% were made compliant after review). Most patients in the NRC (77.4%) had deviations linked to incorrect target volume delineations. 3-year ARFS was 67.2% (95% Confidence interval (CI): 58.0 – 77.8%) and 48.4% (34.3 – 68.2%) for RC and NRC group, respectively (adjusted HR: 2.64, 95% CI: 1.38 – 5.07, p = 0.003). Corresponding OS at 3 years was 89.9% (95% CI: 83.6 – 96.3%) and 75.4% (95% CI: 61.9 – 91.8%) in the RC and NRC group with a trend in favor of RC (adjusted HR: 2.76, 95% CI: 0.91 – 8.43, p = 0.074). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first RTQA evaluation of a phase III sarcoma trial. The data suggests a significant benefit in terms of ARFS and a trend for OS in favor of the RT compliant group. RTQA in prospective clinical trials, investigating new RT techniques, dose levels and indications, continues to be an important and integral part of trial designing. Funding Source: EORTC, EORTC Cancer Research Fund, EUROSARC FP7 278472 and Kom op tegen Kanker (Stand up to Cancer), the Flemish Cancer Society.

Irradiation Fields and Doses in Glioblastoma Multiforme: Are Current Standards Adequate?

2001 ◽  
Vol 87 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Reni ◽  
Cesare Cozzarini ◽  
Maria Grazia Panucci ◽  
Giovanni Luca Ceresoli ◽  
Andrés José María Ferreri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Glioblastoma Multiforme ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Whole Brain ◽  
Female Ratio ◽  
Brain Irradiation ◽  
Impact On Survival ◽  
Prospective Trials ◽  
The Impact

Aims and background The optimum conventional radiotherapy in glioblastoma multiforme patients has not been clearly defined by prospective trials. To better characterize a standard radiotherapy in glioblastoma multiforme, the impact on survival of different fields and doses was analyzed in a retrospective single center series. Methods One hundred and forty-seven patients with glioblastoma multiforme, submitted to biopsy only (n = 15), subtotal (n = 48) or total resection (n = 82) and who completed the planned postsurgical radiotherapy, were considered. The median age was 57 years, the male/female ratio 1.5/1, and the performance status ≥70 in 76%. Whole brain irradiation, followed by a boost to partial brain, was used in 75 cases with a whole brain dose of 44–50 Gy (median, 46) and a partial brain dose of 56–70 Gy (median, 60 Gy). Partial brain irradiation alone was used in 72 patients with a dose of 56–70 Gy (median, 61 Gy). Ninety-eight patients received 56–60 Gy (median, 59 Gy) to partial brain whereas 49 patients received 61–70 Gy (median, 63 Gy). Results There was an almost significantly longer survival in patients irradiated to the partial brain alone with respect to those also receiving whole brain radiotherapy (P = 0.056). Doses <60 Gy significantly prolonged survival (P = 0.006). Multivariate analysis confirmed that the impact on survival of radiation dose was independent of age, performance status, extent of surgery, field of irradiation and the use of chemotherapy. The extent of irradiation field was not independently related to improved survival. Conclusions Our retrospective findings suggest that we reflect on the adequacy of the current standard irradiation parameters. Well-designed prospective trials are necessary to standardize the radiotherapy control group in patients with glioblastoma multiforme to be compared in phase III trials with innovative therapeutic approaches.

scholarly journals TROG 18.01 phase III randomised clinical trial of the Novel Integration of New prostate radiation schedules with adJuvant Androgen deprivation: NINJA study protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e030731 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarad Martin ◽  
Paul Keall ◽  
Shankar Siva ◽  
Peter Greer ◽  
David Christie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
High Dose ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Initial Portion ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a non-invasive alternative to surgery for the treatment of non-metastatic prostate cancer (PC). The objectives of the Novel Integration ofNew prostate radiation schedules with adJuvant Androgen deprivation (NINJA) clinical trial are to compare two emerging SBRT regimens for efficacy with technical substudies focussing on MRI only planning and the use of knowledge-based planning (KBP) to assess radiotherapy plan quality.Methods and analysisEligible patients must have biopsy-proven unfavourable intermediate or favourable high-risk PC, have an Eastern Collaborative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1 and provide written informed consent. All patients will receive 6 months in total of androgen deprivation therapy. Patients will be randomised to one of two SBRT regimens. The first will be 40 Gy in five fractions given on alternating days (SBRT monotherapy). The second will be 20 Gy in two fractions given 1 week apart followed 2 weeks later by 36 Gy in 12 fractions given five times per week (virtual high-dose rate boost (HDRB)). The primary efficacy outcome will be biochemical clinical control at 5 years. Secondary endpoints for the initial portion of NINJA look at the transition of centres towards MRI only planning and the impact of KBP on real-time (RT) plan assessment. The first 150 men will demonstrate accrual feasibility as well as addressing the KBP and MRI planning aims, prior to proceeding with total accrual to 472 patients as a phase III randomised controlled trial.Ethics and disseminationNINJA is a multicentre cooperative clinical trial comparing two SBRT regimens for men with PC. It builds on promising results from several single-armed studies, and explores radiation dose escalation in the Virtual HDRB arm. The initial component includes novel technical elements, and will form an important platform set for a definitive phase III study.Trial registration numberANZCTN 12615000223538.

Altered Fractionation in Radiotherapy

1998 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
Riccardo Valdagni
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Time ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Therapeutic Benefit ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Overall Treatment Time ◽  
Conventional Fractionation ◽  
Normal Tissues ◽  
Normal Tissue Damage ◽  
Altered Fractionation ◽  
Cell Repopulation

Differences between late-responding (slowly proliferating) normal tissues and early-responding (rapidly proliferating) normal tissues and tumor cells and the event of tumor cell repopulation occurring during treatment have essentially led to the development of altered fractionation schemes. Altered fractionation regimens mainly refer to schedules utilising two or more (small dose) fractions per day for part of or for the entire treatment course. It must be underlined that a true standard or conventional fractionation regimen does not exist: no schedule is universally recognised as the standard of reference to be compared with. However, continental European and U.S. conventional regimens are the considered control arm with which the new experimental regimens have to be compared. For this reason they are generally recognised as the standards. The basic rationale for hyperfractionated or accelerated regimens respectively lies in the possibility (a) to deliver higher total doses reducing late-responding normal tissue damage, (b) to deliver total doses in a reduced overall treatment time to defeat tumor clonogen repopulation. Multiple fractions per day should not be delivered with interfraction intervals smaller than 6 hours. Clinical results of phase I-II and limited but convincing phase III randomised trials suggest that a therapeutic benefit can be achieved with new altered regimens.

Serum cathepsin B (CB) levels are prognostic in chemotherapy-naive patients (pts) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and performance status (PS) of 2

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 18036-18036
Author(s):  
J. W. Singer ◽  
F. B. Oldham ◽  
B. Bandstra ◽  
L. Sandalic ◽  
J. Bianco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Median Survival ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Serum Samples ◽  
Protein Levels ◽  
Lysosomal Cysteine Protease ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Impact

18036 Background: CB is an estrogen-influenced lysosomal cysteine protease produced by tumor cells and tumor-associated macrophages; tumor tissue CB protein levels and proteolytic activity are prognostic in NSCLC (Anticancer Res. 2004; 24:4147–61). The prognostic value of serum CB has not previously been evaluated in NSCLC. Here we evaluate the impact of pretreatment CB levels on survival in pts from 2 phase III trials in advanced NSCLC, STELLAR 3 and 4. These trials compared paclitaxel poliglumex (PPX) against commonly used regimens. As the intratumoral metabolic pathway of PPX is characterized by the CB-mediated release of paclitaxel (P) from a polymeric backbone (Ca Chemother Pharm. 2006. Epub ahead of print), correlation of CB levels with PPX efficacy was assessed as well. Methods: Pretreatment serum samples from 450 chemo-naive pts with advanced NSCLC and PS 2 enrolled in STELLAR 3 (P + carboplatin (C) v. PPX + C) (N=315) and STELLAR 4 (vinorelbine or gemcitabine v. PPX) (N=135) were assayed for CB by ELISA (ICON Labs). Values were assessed by quartiles and there was a clear breakpoint at the median. Pts were categorized as high or low CB based on values above or below the median (64 ng/ml). The effect of CB levels on survival was evaluated by log rank for pooled pts from the studies. Results: As detailed in the table , median survival for non-PPX-treated pts was worse if CB was high; in contrast, median survival for PPX-treated pts did not differ by CB level. Pts with high CB receiving PPX showed a trend towards better survival compared to those receiving control regimens. Conclusions: The data suggest that serum CB may be prognostic biomarker for NSCLC. Retrospective analysis suggests a trend towards improved survival in patients with high CB receiving PPX; prospective studies are required to confirm this observation. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

A randomized phase III study of gemcitabine (G) versus GV1001 in sequential combination with G in patients with unresectable and metastatic pancreatic cancer (PC)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4601-4601 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Buanes ◽  
J. Maurel ◽  
W. Liauw ◽  
M. Hebbar ◽  
J. Nemunaitis
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Peptide Vaccine ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Delayed Treatment ◽  
Sequential Combination ◽  
The Impact

4601 Background: A phase I/II study with GV1001, a telomerase peptide vaccine, showed a median overall survival (OS) of 8.6 months in non-resectable PC (Bernhardt SL et al, Br J Cancer. 2006;95:1474–1482). This phase III trial was conducted to determine the impact on overall survival of G monotherapy vs. GV1001 in sequential combination with G in unresectable and metastatic PC. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) had chemotherapy-naive, advanced PC and ECOG performance status 0–1. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive arm A: G (1,000 mg/m2 30 min i.v.) weekly for 7 weeks (w), 1w off and then 3w during 4-weekly cycles, or arm B: GV1001 0.56 mg s.c. plus GM-CSF as immune adjuvant on days 1, 3, 5, 8, 15, 22, 36, then every 4 weeks. Patients who progressed clinically or radiologically during GV1001 continued on GV1001 and concomitant gemcitabine. CT scans were performed every 8 weeks. The primary end-point was OS. A sample size of 520 patients allowed the detection of a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.73 (B/A), with 2α = 0.05 and 90% power. Results: Between June 2006 and May 2008, 365 pts were enrolled (A / B; 182 / 183). The study was stopped prematurely due to a preliminary analysis with 178 events showing no survival benefit of GV1001. Pts were well balanced for baseline characteristics: male 59.3% / 62.8%; median age 61y / 61y; ECOG PS 0 34.3% / 36.7%; locally advanced 22.4% / 20.7%. As of August 2008, 238 pts (A / B : 114 / 124) had died. Median OS was 7.3 / 5.9 months (HR 0.8; 95% CI 0.6–1.0). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.7 / 1.9 months (HR 0.5; 95%CI 0.4–0.7). Grade 3–4 AEs: gastrointestinal 6% / 8%, infection 5% / 5%, vascular disorders 2% / 3%, neutropenia 6% / 3%. Conclusions: GV1001 did not show efficacy in sequential combination with G in advanced PC. The advantage of G monotherapy over the sequential combination may be due to the delayed treatment with G in arm B. [Table: see text]

Glioblastoma (GBM) in elderly patients: A randomized phase III trial comparing survival in patients treated with 6-week radiotherapy (RT) versus hypofractionated RT over 2 weeks versus temozolomide single-agent chemotherapy (TMZ).

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA2002-LBA2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Malmstrom ◽  
B. H. Grønberg ◽  
R. Stupp ◽  
C. Marosi ◽  
D. Frappaz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Survival Data ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Tumor Resection ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Significant Difference

LBA2002 Background: Despite treatment advances, survival of elderly GBM patients (pts) is usually < 12 months. Hypofractionated RT is advocated in order to shorten treatment time, and chemotherapy has been proposed as an alternative to RT. In a randomized trial we compared two different RT schedules with single-agent TMZ chemotherapy. Methods: Newly diagnosed GBM pts age ≥ 60 years with PS 0-2, were randomized to either standard RT (60 Gy in 2 Gy fractions over 6 weeks) or hypofractionated RT (34 Gy in 3,4 Gy fractions over 2 weeks) or 6 cycles of chemotherapy with TMZ (200 mg/m2 day 1-5 every 28 days). Follow-up including quality of life, symptom checklist, and steroid dosing was completed at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months after start of treatment. The primary study end point was overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 342 pts were included. 291 pts were randomized between the 3 treatment options, 51 pts between hypofractionated RT and TMZ. Median age was 70 years (range 60-88), 59% were male and 72% had undergone tumor resection, the remaining 28% had a diagnostic biopsy only. Performance status was 0-1 for 75% of pts. Survival data are available for 334 pts (98%), with 11 pts (3%) being alive. There was no significant difference in OS between the three treatment arms, with median survival being 8 months for TMZ, 7.5 months for hypofractionated RT and 6 months for 6 weeks RT (p=0.14). Conclusions: Elderly patients with GBM have a short survival. Time-consuming therapy that does not offer longer survival should therefore be avoided. Our study showed no advantage of standard 6 weeks RT compared to hypofractionated RT over 2 weeks or 6 cycles of TMZ chemotherapy. These results indicate that standard RT should no longer be offered to the elderly pt population with GBM. Exclusive TMZ chemotherapy may be an alternative to RT. Subgroup analyses and determination of molecular markers is ongoing. Whether outcome could be improved by concomitant chemoradiotherapy is subject of ongoing clinical trials. [Table: see text]

Nomogram to estimate the activity of second-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4524-4524
Author(s):  
Guru Sonpavde ◽  
Gregory Russell Pond ◽  
Neeraj Agarwal ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Angela Q. Qu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
The Impact

4524 Background: Prognostic factors may impact on endpoints used in phase II trials of second-line therapy for advanced UC. We aimed to study the impact of prognostic factors (liver metastasis [LM], anemia [Hb<10 g/dl], ECOG-performance status [PS] ≥1, time from prior chemotherapy [TFPC]) on PFS6 and RR. Methods: Twelve phase II trials evaluating second-line chemotherapy and/or biologics (n=748) in patients with progressive disease were pooled. PFS was defined as tumor progression or death from any cause. PFS6 was defined from the date of registration and calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RR was defined using RECIST 1.0. A nomogram predicting PFS6 was constructed using the RMS package in R (www.r-project.org). Results: Data regarding progression, Hb, LM, PS and TFPC were available from 570 patients. The mean age was 65.1 years, 45.3% had ECOG-PS ≥1, 30.2% had LM, 14.6% had anemia and TFPC was <6 months (mo) in 60.2%. The overall median PFS was 2.7 mo, PFS6 was 22.2% (95% CI: 18.8-25.9) and RR was 17.5% (95% CI: 14.5%-20.9%). For every unit increase in risk group, the hazard of progression increased by 41% and the odds of response decreased by 48% (Table). A nomogram was constructed to predict PFS6 on an individual patient level. Conclusions: PFS6 and RR vary as a function of prognostic factors in patients receiving second-line therapy for advanced UC. A nomogram incorporating prognostic factors might facilitate the evaluation of activity across phase II trials enrolling heterogeneous populations and can help to select and stratify patients for phase III evaluation of suitable agents. [Table: see text]

Impact of concomitant bone-targeted therapies (BTT) on outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients (pts) without prior chemotherapy (ctx) treated with abiraterone acetate (AA) or prednisone (P).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5037-5037 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred Saad ◽  
Karim Fizazi ◽  
Matthew R. Smith ◽  
Thomas W. Griffin ◽  
Anil Londhe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
End Points ◽  
Opiate Use ◽  
Potential Clinical Benefit ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
The Impact

5037 Background: BTT can delay symptomatic progression in cancer pts with bone metastases. In a post hoc analysis, we assessed the impact of concomitant BTT on outcomes in a recent large, multinational study in mCRPC pts without prior ctx. Methods: COU-AA-302 was a phase III trial in asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic pts with progressive mCRPC and no prior ctx. 1,088 pts were stratified by ECOG performance status (ECOG-PS, 0 vs 1) and randomized 1:1 to AA 1 g or placebo QD, plus prednisone 5 mg BID. Radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) were primary end points; secondary end points were times to opiate use, ctx, ECOG-PS deterioration, and PSA progression. The effect of concomitant use of BTT on all end points was assessed retrospectively using a stratified Cox regression model with factors for treatment, concomitant BTT, interaction of treatment and BTT, and baseline covariates. All data were obtained from a prespecified interim analysis at 55% OS events. Results: Median follow-up at the time of analysis was 27.1 mos. Among intent-to-treat (ITT) pts, 184/546 AA and 169/542 P pts received concomitant BTT for treatment of bone metastases, either zoledronic acid (n = 330), other bisphosphonates (n = 16), denosumab (n = 22), and/or other BTT (n = 5). In these pts, concomitant BTT use was associated with improved OS, time to opiate use for cancer pain, and time to ECOG-PS deterioration (Table). Results were similar in a sensitivity analysis including only ITT pts with bone metastases at baseline. Conclusions: In this post hoc, exploratory analysis, concomitant BTT use was associated with delayed symptomatic progression in asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic mCRPC pts. This potential clinical benefit should be investigated in prospective studies. Clinical trial information: NCT00887198. [Table: see text]

The PACE trial: International randomised study of laparoscopic prostatectomy vs. stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and standard radiotherapy vs. SBRT for early stage organ-confined prostate cancer.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS153-TPS153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsty Morrison ◽  
Alison Tree ◽  
Vincent Khoo ◽  
Nicholas John Van As ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Therapeutic Benefit ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Overall Treatment Time ◽  
Multicentre Phase ◽  
Randomised Study

TPS153 Background: The development of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) has provided a further treatment option for early stage prostate cancer. In addition to the benefits of an overall treatment time reduction, profound hypofractionation could result in therapeutic gain given the radiobiology of prostate cancer. Evidence suggests SBRT to be safe and effective; however randomised data is lacking comparing outcomes with standard treatment options. Aim: To assess whether SBRT offers therapeutic benefit in comparison to prostatectomy or standard radiotherapy. Methods: The PACE trial is an international multicentre phase III trial, comprising two parallel randomisation processes. Within PACE A, potential surgical candidates are randomised between radical prostatectomy and SBRT (36.25 Gy in 5 fractions). In PACE B, randomisation is between standard radiotherapy (78Gy in 39 fractions or 62Gy in 20 fractions) and SBRT (36.35Gy in 5 fractions). SBRT can be delivered using Cyberknife or gantry based techniques. Patients with low or intermediate risk prostate cancer are eligible for the trial, and are treated without the use androgen deprivation therapy. Follow up is for a period of 10 years. The aim is to recruit 234 patients to PACE A (117 in each arm) and 858 patients to PACE B (429 patients in each arm). Primary Objectives: PACE A: To determine whether there is improved quality of life after SBRT compared with surgery at 2 years post treatment, using EPIC score to measure urinary incontinence and bowel bother. PACE B: to determine whether SBRT is non-inferior to surgery in terms of freedom from biochemical/clinical failure at 5 years from randomisation. Progress: PACE A has been slower to recruit than anticipated due to the difficulties of a surgery versus radiotherapy randomisation. However, it is expected to reach target accrual, having recruited 57 patients from 3 centres. In contrast, PACE B is recruiting exceptionally well, open in 40 centres, and as of October 2017 recruited 762 patients. Accrual target is expected to be reached by the end of 2017. Clinical trial information: NCT01584258.

scholarly journals Accelerated hyper-versus normofractionated radiochemotherapy with temozolomide in patients with glioblastoma: a multicenter retrospective analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rainer J. Klement ◽  
Ilinca Popp ◽  
David Kaul ◽  
Felix Ehret ◽  
Anca L. Grosu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Standard Treatment ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Target Volume ◽  
Hyperfractionated Radiotherapy ◽  
Adjuvant Temozolomide ◽  
Multicenter Analysis

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document