Toxicity and Efficacy of Different Target Volume Delineations of Radiation Therapy Based on the Updated Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/National Research Group and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Guidelines in Patients With Grade 3-4 Glioma: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.
{"title":"Toxicity and Efficacy of Different Target Volume Delineations of Radiation Therapy Based on the Updated Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/National Research Group and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Guidelines in Patients With Grade 3-4 Glioma: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.","authors":"Yanfang Qiu, Yanxian Li, Cuihong Jiang, Xiangwei Wu, Wen Liu, Changgen Fan, Xu Ye, Lili He, Shuai Xiao, Qi Zhao, Wenqiong Wu, Kailin Chen, Chao Tan, Yuyi Li, Hui Wang, Feng Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.11.094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Our study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of radiation therapy (RT) in the treatment of grade 3-4 glioma by comparing the updated Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)/National Research Group (NRG) with European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) guidelines for target volume delineation.</p><p><strong>Methods and materials: </strong>A total of 245 patients with newly diagnosed World Health Organization grade 3-4 glioma were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to undergo postoperative RT with concurrent and maintenance temozolomide. The radiation target volume delineation was determined by using either the updated RTOG/NRG (n = 122) or EORTC guidelines (n = 123). The primary endpoint was the toxicity associated with treatment. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were considered secondary endpoints.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No differences in low- or high-grade toxicities between the 2 groups, and neither group exhibited grade 5 toxicities. No significant differences in neurologic toxicities were observed between the RTOG/NRG and EORTC groups. The median PFS in the RTOG/NRG group and the EORTC group was 11.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.1-14.9 months) and 10.0 months (95% CI, 3.8-16.2 months), respectively (P = .73). The median OS in the RTOG/NRG group and the EORTC group was 19.5 months (95% CI, 14.2-24.8 months) and 18.5 months (95% CI, 12.8-24.2 months), respectively (P = .80). In patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase wild-type glioblastoma, there were no significant differences between the RTOG/NRG group and the EORTC group in median PFS (8.0 months [95% CI, 6.8-9.2 months] vs. 8.0 months [95% CI, 7.0-9.0 months], P = .38) and median OS (12.0 months [95% CI, 7.2-16.8 months] vs. 11.0 months [95% CI, 9.7-12.3 months], P = .10).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with EORTC principles, postoperative RT according to RTOG/NRG principles did not increase treatment-related toxicities and was equally effective for patients with grade 3-4 glioma, including the subgroup of patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase wild-type glioblastoma.</p>","PeriodicalId":14215,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.11.094","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Our study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of radiation therapy (RT) in the treatment of grade 3-4 glioma by comparing the updated Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)/National Research Group (NRG) with European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) guidelines for target volume delineation.
Methods and materials: A total of 245 patients with newly diagnosed World Health Organization grade 3-4 glioma were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to undergo postoperative RT with concurrent and maintenance temozolomide. The radiation target volume delineation was determined by using either the updated RTOG/NRG (n = 122) or EORTC guidelines (n = 123). The primary endpoint was the toxicity associated with treatment. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were considered secondary endpoints.
Results: No differences in low- or high-grade toxicities between the 2 groups, and neither group exhibited grade 5 toxicities. No significant differences in neurologic toxicities were observed between the RTOG/NRG and EORTC groups. The median PFS in the RTOG/NRG group and the EORTC group was 11.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.1-14.9 months) and 10.0 months (95% CI, 3.8-16.2 months), respectively (P = .73). The median OS in the RTOG/NRG group and the EORTC group was 19.5 months (95% CI, 14.2-24.8 months) and 18.5 months (95% CI, 12.8-24.2 months), respectively (P = .80). In patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase wild-type glioblastoma, there were no significant differences between the RTOG/NRG group and the EORTC group in median PFS (8.0 months [95% CI, 6.8-9.2 months] vs. 8.0 months [95% CI, 7.0-9.0 months], P = .38) and median OS (12.0 months [95% CI, 7.2-16.8 months] vs. 11.0 months [95% CI, 9.7-12.3 months], P = .10).
Conclusions: Compared with EORTC principles, postoperative RT according to RTOG/NRG principles did not increase treatment-related toxicities and was equally effective for patients with grade 3-4 glioma, including the subgroup of patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase wild-type glioblastoma.
期刊介绍:
International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics (IJROBP), known in the field as the Red Journal, publishes original laboratory and clinical investigations related to radiation oncology, radiation biology, medical physics, and both education and health policy as it relates to the field.
This journal has a particular interest in original contributions of the following types: prospective clinical trials, outcomes research, and large database interrogation. In addition, it seeks reports of high-impact innovations in single or combined modality treatment, tumor sensitization, normal tissue protection (including both precision avoidance and pharmacologic means), brachytherapy, particle irradiation, and cancer imaging. Technical advances related to dosimetry and conformal radiation treatment planning are of interest, as are basic science studies investigating tumor physiology and the molecular biology underlying cancer and normal tissue radiation response.