Hypofractionated Versus Single-Session Radiosurgery to Preserve Hearing in Patients Affected by Sporadic Vestibular Schwannoma: The ACOUNEU Randomized Clinical Trial.

IF 6.4 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Marcello Marchetti, Valentina Pinzi, Marco Gemma, Valeria Cuccarini, Riccardo Pascuzzo, Irene Cane, Aurora Romeo, Sara Morlino, Elena De Martin, Laura Fariselli
{"title":"Hypofractionated Versus Single-Session Radiosurgery to Preserve Hearing in Patients Affected by Sporadic Vestibular Schwannoma: The ACOUNEU Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"Marcello Marchetti, Valentina Pinzi, Marco Gemma, Valeria Cuccarini, Riccardo Pascuzzo, Irene Cane, Aurora Romeo, Sara Morlino, Elena De Martin, Laura Fariselli","doi":"10.1016/j.ijrobp.2025.03.081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>During the last decades, in addition to tumor control, hearing preservation has become an important priority in the treatment of vestibular schwannoma (VS). Given that the potential advantages of hypofractionated radiosurgery (hRS) over single-session radiosurgery (RS) in terms of improved hearing outcomes remain unclear, this randomized trial aims to provide a robust answer to this question.</p><p><strong>Methods and materials: </strong>The present is a double-arm randomized clinical trial. The study started in 2011 and the last patient was enrolled in 2020. The minimum follow-up was 36 months. The trial involved patients with a diagnosis of sporadic VS with preserved hearing. One hundred and eight patients were enrolled. Participants were randomized to receive either hRS (18 Gy/3 consecutive fractions) or RS (most commonly 12 Gy/1 fraction). At each follow-up, clinical assessment, volumetric magnetic resonance imaging, and audiometry were evaluated. The primary endpoint was hearing sparing 36 months after RS or hRS. The maintenance of a serviceable hearing was defined according to the American Academy of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery classification.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 108 randomized patients, 100 (47 RS and 53 hRS) were included in the analysis (mean age, 55 years; 56% female). No significant differences between hRS and RS were found in terms of hearing preservation (hazard ratio, 1.083; [95% CI, 0.603-1.946], and P = .789), with pretreatment hearing status, age, and dose to cochlea being the only significant predictors. No other parameters, including tumor volume, were associated with hearing preservation. At a median follow-up of 62 months, local control was 92% (95% CI, 84.8%-96.5%). Treatment-related toxicity was mild or moderate, in general not exceeding National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 2.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>To our knowledge, this is the first randomized clinical trial comparing 2 different radiosurgical regimens while focusing on hearing preservation. The study failed to demonstrate the potential advantages of hRS over RS with respect to hearing preservation. The volumetric analysis confirmed an excellent postradiosurgery tumor control rate for both RS and hRS groups. These results may guide the clinicians in the treatment schedule choice to preserve hearing in patients with VS.</p>","PeriodicalId":14215,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-11","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.2025.03.081","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: During the last decades, in addition to tumor control, hearing preservation has become an important priority in the treatment of vestibular schwannoma (VS). Given that the potential advantages of hypofractionated radiosurgery (hRS) over single-session radiosurgery (RS) in terms of improved hearing outcomes remain unclear, this randomized trial aims to provide a robust answer to this question.

Methods and materials: The present is a double-arm randomized clinical trial. The study started in 2011 and the last patient was enrolled in 2020. The minimum follow-up was 36 months. The trial involved patients with a diagnosis of sporadic VS with preserved hearing. One hundred and eight patients were enrolled. Participants were randomized to receive either hRS (18 Gy/3 consecutive fractions) or RS (most commonly 12 Gy/1 fraction). At each follow-up, clinical assessment, volumetric magnetic resonance imaging, and audiometry were evaluated. The primary endpoint was hearing sparing 36 months after RS or hRS. The maintenance of a serviceable hearing was defined according to the American Academy of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery classification.

Results: Of the 108 randomized patients, 100 (47 RS and 53 hRS) were included in the analysis (mean age, 55 years; 56% female). No significant differences between hRS and RS were found in terms of hearing preservation (hazard ratio, 1.083; [95% CI, 0.603-1.946], and P = .789), with pretreatment hearing status, age, and dose to cochlea being the only significant predictors. No other parameters, including tumor volume, were associated with hearing preservation. At a median follow-up of 62 months, local control was 92% (95% CI, 84.8%-96.5%). Treatment-related toxicity was mild or moderate, in general not exceeding National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 2.

Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first randomized clinical trial comparing 2 different radiosurgical regimens while focusing on hearing preservation. The study failed to demonstrate the potential advantages of hRS over RS with respect to hearing preservation. The volumetric analysis confirmed an excellent postradiosurgery tumor control rate for both RS and hRS groups. These results may guide the clinicians in the treatment schedule choice to preserve hearing in patients with VS.

散发性前庭神经鞘瘤患者的低分割与单次放射手术保护听力:ACOUNEU随机临床试验
目的:在过去的几十年里,除了肿瘤控制外,听力保护已成为治疗前庭神经鞘瘤(VS)的重要优先事项。考虑到低分割放射手术(hRS)相对于单次放射手术(RS)在改善听力结果方面的潜在优势尚不清楚,本随机试验旨在为这个问题提供一个有力的答案。方法与材料:本研究为双组随机临床试验。该研究于2011年开始,最后一名患者于2020年入组。最小随访时间为36个月。该试验涉及诊断为散发性VS并保留听力的患者。108名患者入组。参与者被随机分配接受hRS (18 Gy/3连续分数)或RS(最常见的是12 Gy/1分数)。在每次随访中,对临床评估、体积磁共振成像和听力学进行评估。主要终点是RS或hRS后36个月的听力恢复。维持一个可用的听力是根据美国耳鼻喉科头颈外科学会分类定义的。结果:在108例随机患者中,有100例(47 RS和53 hRS)纳入分析(平均年龄55岁;56%的女性)。hRS和RS在听力保存方面无显著差异(风险比,1.083;[95% CI, 0.603-1.946], P = .789),前处理听力状况、年龄和耳蜗剂量是仅有的显著预测因素。没有其他参数,包括肿瘤体积,与听力保存相关。在中位随访62个月时,局部控制率为92% (95% CI, 84.8%-96.5%)。治疗相关毒性为轻度或中度,一般不超过国家癌症研究所不良事件通用术语标准2级。结论:据我们所知,这是第一个比较两种不同放疗方案的随机临床试验,同时重点关注听力保护。该研究未能证明hRS相对RS在听力保护方面的潜在优势。体积分析证实RS组和hRS组的术后肿瘤控制率都很好。这些结果可以指导临床医生选择治疗方案,以保护VS患者的听力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
7.10%
发文量
2538
审稿时长
6.6 weeks
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信