Phase II trial of proton therapy versus photon IMRT for GBM: secondary analysis comparison of progression-free survival between RANO versus clinical assessment
Abstract Background This secondary image analysis of a randomized trial of proton radiotherapy (PT) versus photon intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) compares tumor progression based on clinical radiological assessment versus Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO). Methods Eligible patient...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Neuro-oncology advances 2021-01, Vol.3 (1), p.vdab073-vdab073 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | vdab073 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | vdab073 |
container_title | Neuro-oncology advances |
container_volume | 3 |
creator | Al Feghali, Karine A Randall, James W Liu, Diane D Wefel, Jeffrey S Brown, Paul D Grosshans, David R McAvoy, Sarah A Farhat, Maguy A Li, Jing McGovern, Susan L McAleer, Mary F Ghia, Amol J Paulino, Arnold C Sulman, Erik P Penas-Prado, Marta Wang, Jihong de Groot, John Heimberger, Amy B Armstrong, Terri S Gilbert, Mark R Mahajan, Anita Guha-Thakurta, Nandita Chung, Caroline |
description | Abstract
Background
This secondary image analysis of a randomized trial of proton radiotherapy (PT) versus photon intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) compares tumor progression based on clinical radiological assessment versus Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO).
Methods
Eligible patients were enrolled in the randomized trial and had MR imaging at baseline and follow-up beyond 12 weeks from completion of radiotherapy. “Clinical progression” was based on a clinical radiology report of progression and/or change in treatment for progression.
Results
Of 90 enrolled patients, 66 were evaluable. Median clinical progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.8 (range: 9.4–14.7) months; 10.8 months IMRT versus 11.2 months PT (P = .14). Median RANO-PFS was 8.2 (range: 6.9, 12): 8.9 months IMRT versus 6.6 months PT (P = .24). RANO-PFS was significantly shorter than clinical PFS overall (P = .001) and for both the IMRT (P = .01) and PT (P = .04) groups. There were 31 (46.3%) discrepant cases of which 17 had RANO progression more than a month prior to clinical progression, and 14 had progression by RANO but not clinical criteria.
Conclusions
Based on this secondary analysis of a trial of PT versus IMRT for glioblastoma, while no difference in PFS was noted relative to treatment technique, RANO criteria identified progression more often and earlier than clinical assessment. This highlights the disconnect between measures of tumor response in clinical trials versus clinical practice. With growing efforts to utilize real-world data and personalized treatment with timely adaptation, there is a growing need to improve the consistency of determining tumor progression within clinical trials and clinical practice. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/noajnl/vdab073 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8320688</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/noajnl/vdab073</oup_id><sourcerecordid>2557539884</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c276t-f0e44baf3688c0c67827755e3cf65fd78c4021d56f8f7e803a3a5232a4dfab263</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUFv1DAQhS0EolXplbOPcEjr2HHi5YBUKigrtRRV5Ww5zrjrKrGDJwnaX8NfxZAFwYmTLc9779P4EfKyZGcl24jzEM1j6M-XzrSsEU_IMa8FL3i1UU__uh-RU8RHxhiXlawYf06ORCVEU5XlMfn-eWcQ6HZLp-RNT6OjY4pTDHTaQTLjni6QcEY67n69bm_u7qmLiV69u3lDEWwMnUl7aoLp9-iR2jiMJnnM2jXrIQGij6FwCYDinBa_ZFAL0zeAQO8uPt3-ZtjeB2_z0CBm0wBhekGeOdMjnB7OE_Llw_v7y4_F9e3V9vLiurC8qafCMaiq1jhRK2WZrRvFm0ZKENbV0nWNsnnxspO1U64BxYQRRnLBTdU50-avOiFv19xxbgfobEYn0-sx-SGvp6Px-t9J8Dv9EBetBGcZmgNeHQJS_DoDTnrwaKHvTYA4o-ZSNlJslKqy9GyV2hQRE7g_mJLpn8XqtVh9KDYbXq-GOI__0_4AfPqqIQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2557539884</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Phase II trial of proton therapy versus photon IMRT for GBM: secondary analysis comparison of progression-free survival between RANO versus clinical assessment</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Access via Oxford University Press (Open Access Collection)</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Al Feghali, Karine A ; Randall, James W ; Liu, Diane D ; Wefel, Jeffrey S ; Brown, Paul D ; Grosshans, David R ; McAvoy, Sarah A ; Farhat, Maguy A ; Li, Jing ; McGovern, Susan L ; McAleer, Mary F ; Ghia, Amol J ; Paulino, Arnold C ; Sulman, Erik P ; Penas-Prado, Marta ; Wang, Jihong ; de Groot, John ; Heimberger, Amy B ; Armstrong, Terri S ; Gilbert, Mark R ; Mahajan, Anita ; Guha-Thakurta, Nandita ; Chung, Caroline</creator><creatorcontrib>Al Feghali, Karine A ; Randall, James W ; Liu, Diane D ; Wefel, Jeffrey S ; Brown, Paul D ; Grosshans, David R ; McAvoy, Sarah A ; Farhat, Maguy A ; Li, Jing ; McGovern, Susan L ; McAleer, Mary F ; Ghia, Amol J ; Paulino, Arnold C ; Sulman, Erik P ; Penas-Prado, Marta ; Wang, Jihong ; de Groot, John ; Heimberger, Amy B ; Armstrong, Terri S ; Gilbert, Mark R ; Mahajan, Anita ; Guha-Thakurta, Nandita ; Chung, Caroline</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract
Background
This secondary image analysis of a randomized trial of proton radiotherapy (PT) versus photon intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) compares tumor progression based on clinical radiological assessment versus Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO).
Methods
Eligible patients were enrolled in the randomized trial and had MR imaging at baseline and follow-up beyond 12 weeks from completion of radiotherapy. “Clinical progression” was based on a clinical radiology report of progression and/or change in treatment for progression.
Results
Of 90 enrolled patients, 66 were evaluable. Median clinical progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.8 (range: 9.4–14.7) months; 10.8 months IMRT versus 11.2 months PT (P = .14). Median RANO-PFS was 8.2 (range: 6.9, 12): 8.9 months IMRT versus 6.6 months PT (P = .24). RANO-PFS was significantly shorter than clinical PFS overall (P = .001) and for both the IMRT (P = .01) and PT (P = .04) groups. There were 31 (46.3%) discrepant cases of which 17 had RANO progression more than a month prior to clinical progression, and 14 had progression by RANO but not clinical criteria.
Conclusions
Based on this secondary analysis of a trial of PT versus IMRT for glioblastoma, while no difference in PFS was noted relative to treatment technique, RANO criteria identified progression more often and earlier than clinical assessment. This highlights the disconnect between measures of tumor response in clinical trials versus clinical practice. With growing efforts to utilize real-world data and personalized treatment with timely adaptation, there is a growing need to improve the consistency of determining tumor progression within clinical trials and clinical practice.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2632-2498</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2632-2498</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/noajnl/vdab073</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34337411</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>US: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Clinical Investigations</subject><ispartof>Neuro-oncology advances, 2021-01, Vol.3 (1), p.vdab073-vdab073</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press, the Society for Neuro-Oncology and the European Association of Neuro-Oncology. 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c276t-f0e44baf3688c0c67827755e3cf65fd78c4021d56f8f7e803a3a5232a4dfab263</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c276t-f0e44baf3688c0c67827755e3cf65fd78c4021d56f8f7e803a3a5232a4dfab263</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-2414-0492 ; 0000-0003-3584-023X ; 0000-0002-5538-1336</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8320688/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8320688/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,729,782,786,866,887,1586,1606,27931,27932,53798,53800</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Al Feghali, Karine A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Randall, James W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Diane D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wefel, Jeffrey S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Paul D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grosshans, David R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McAvoy, Sarah A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Farhat, Maguy A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Jing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGovern, Susan L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McAleer, Mary F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghia, Amol J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paulino, Arnold C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sulman, Erik P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Penas-Prado, Marta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Jihong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Groot, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heimberger, Amy B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Armstrong, Terri S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gilbert, Mark R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mahajan, Anita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guha-Thakurta, Nandita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chung, Caroline</creatorcontrib><title>Phase II trial of proton therapy versus photon IMRT for GBM: secondary analysis comparison of progression-free survival between RANO versus clinical assessment</title><title>Neuro-oncology advances</title><description>Abstract
Background
This secondary image analysis of a randomized trial of proton radiotherapy (PT) versus photon intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) compares tumor progression based on clinical radiological assessment versus Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO).
Methods
Eligible patients were enrolled in the randomized trial and had MR imaging at baseline and follow-up beyond 12 weeks from completion of radiotherapy. “Clinical progression” was based on a clinical radiology report of progression and/or change in treatment for progression.
Results
Of 90 enrolled patients, 66 were evaluable. Median clinical progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.8 (range: 9.4–14.7) months; 10.8 months IMRT versus 11.2 months PT (P = .14). Median RANO-PFS was 8.2 (range: 6.9, 12): 8.9 months IMRT versus 6.6 months PT (P = .24). RANO-PFS was significantly shorter than clinical PFS overall (P = .001) and for both the IMRT (P = .01) and PT (P = .04) groups. There were 31 (46.3%) discrepant cases of which 17 had RANO progression more than a month prior to clinical progression, and 14 had progression by RANO but not clinical criteria.
Conclusions
Based on this secondary analysis of a trial of PT versus IMRT for glioblastoma, while no difference in PFS was noted relative to treatment technique, RANO criteria identified progression more often and earlier than clinical assessment. This highlights the disconnect between measures of tumor response in clinical trials versus clinical practice. With growing efforts to utilize real-world data and personalized treatment with timely adaptation, there is a growing need to improve the consistency of determining tumor progression within clinical trials and clinical practice.</description><subject>Clinical Investigations</subject><issn>2632-2498</issn><issn>2632-2498</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>TOX</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUFv1DAQhS0EolXplbOPcEjr2HHi5YBUKigrtRRV5Ww5zrjrKrGDJwnaX8NfxZAFwYmTLc9779P4EfKyZGcl24jzEM1j6M-XzrSsEU_IMa8FL3i1UU__uh-RU8RHxhiXlawYf06ORCVEU5XlMfn-eWcQ6HZLp-RNT6OjY4pTDHTaQTLjni6QcEY67n69bm_u7qmLiV69u3lDEWwMnUl7aoLp9-iR2jiMJnnM2jXrIQGij6FwCYDinBa_ZFAL0zeAQO8uPt3-ZtjeB2_z0CBm0wBhekGeOdMjnB7OE_Llw_v7y4_F9e3V9vLiurC8qafCMaiq1jhRK2WZrRvFm0ZKENbV0nWNsnnxspO1U64BxYQRRnLBTdU50-avOiFv19xxbgfobEYn0-sx-SGvp6Px-t9J8Dv9EBetBGcZmgNeHQJS_DoDTnrwaKHvTYA4o-ZSNlJslKqy9GyV2hQRE7g_mJLpn8XqtVh9KDYbXq-GOI__0_4AfPqqIQ</recordid><startdate>20210101</startdate><enddate>20210101</enddate><creator>Al Feghali, Karine A</creator><creator>Randall, James W</creator><creator>Liu, Diane D</creator><creator>Wefel, Jeffrey S</creator><creator>Brown, Paul D</creator><creator>Grosshans, David R</creator><creator>McAvoy, Sarah A</creator><creator>Farhat, Maguy A</creator><creator>Li, Jing</creator><creator>McGovern, Susan L</creator><creator>McAleer, Mary F</creator><creator>Ghia, Amol J</creator><creator>Paulino, Arnold C</creator><creator>Sulman, Erik P</creator><creator>Penas-Prado, Marta</creator><creator>Wang, Jihong</creator><creator>de Groot, John</creator><creator>Heimberger, Amy B</creator><creator>Armstrong, Terri S</creator><creator>Gilbert, Mark R</creator><creator>Mahajan, Anita</creator><creator>Guha-Thakurta, Nandita</creator><creator>Chung, Caroline</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>TOX</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2414-0492</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3584-023X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5538-1336</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210101</creationdate><title>Phase II trial of proton therapy versus photon IMRT for GBM: secondary analysis comparison of progression-free survival between RANO versus clinical assessment</title><author>Al Feghali, Karine A ; Randall, James W ; Liu, Diane D ; Wefel, Jeffrey S ; Brown, Paul D ; Grosshans, David R ; McAvoy, Sarah A ; Farhat, Maguy A ; Li, Jing ; McGovern, Susan L ; McAleer, Mary F ; Ghia, Amol J ; Paulino, Arnold C ; Sulman, Erik P ; Penas-Prado, Marta ; Wang, Jihong ; de Groot, John ; Heimberger, Amy B ; Armstrong, Terri S ; Gilbert, Mark R ; Mahajan, Anita ; Guha-Thakurta, Nandita ; Chung, Caroline</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c276t-f0e44baf3688c0c67827755e3cf65fd78c4021d56f8f7e803a3a5232a4dfab263</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Clinical Investigations</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Al Feghali, Karine A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Randall, James W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Diane D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wefel, Jeffrey S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Paul D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grosshans, David R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McAvoy, Sarah A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Farhat, Maguy A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Jing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGovern, Susan L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McAleer, Mary F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghia, Amol J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paulino, Arnold C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sulman, Erik P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Penas-Prado, Marta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Jihong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Groot, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heimberger, Amy B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Armstrong, Terri S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gilbert, Mark R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mahajan, Anita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guha-Thakurta, Nandita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chung, Caroline</creatorcontrib><collection>Access via Oxford University Press (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Neuro-oncology advances</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Al Feghali, Karine A</au><au>Randall, James W</au><au>Liu, Diane D</au><au>Wefel, Jeffrey S</au><au>Brown, Paul D</au><au>Grosshans, David R</au><au>McAvoy, Sarah A</au><au>Farhat, Maguy A</au><au>Li, Jing</au><au>McGovern, Susan L</au><au>McAleer, Mary F</au><au>Ghia, Amol J</au><au>Paulino, Arnold C</au><au>Sulman, Erik P</au><au>Penas-Prado, Marta</au><au>Wang, Jihong</au><au>de Groot, John</au><au>Heimberger, Amy B</au><au>Armstrong, Terri S</au><au>Gilbert, Mark R</au><au>Mahajan, Anita</au><au>Guha-Thakurta, Nandita</au><au>Chung, Caroline</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Phase II trial of proton therapy versus photon IMRT for GBM: secondary analysis comparison of progression-free survival between RANO versus clinical assessment</atitle><jtitle>Neuro-oncology advances</jtitle><date>2021-01-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>3</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>vdab073</spage><epage>vdab073</epage><pages>vdab073-vdab073</pages><issn>2632-2498</issn><eissn>2632-2498</eissn><abstract>Abstract
Background
This secondary image analysis of a randomized trial of proton radiotherapy (PT) versus photon intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) compares tumor progression based on clinical radiological assessment versus Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO).
Methods
Eligible patients were enrolled in the randomized trial and had MR imaging at baseline and follow-up beyond 12 weeks from completion of radiotherapy. “Clinical progression” was based on a clinical radiology report of progression and/or change in treatment for progression.
Results
Of 90 enrolled patients, 66 were evaluable. Median clinical progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.8 (range: 9.4–14.7) months; 10.8 months IMRT versus 11.2 months PT (P = .14). Median RANO-PFS was 8.2 (range: 6.9, 12): 8.9 months IMRT versus 6.6 months PT (P = .24). RANO-PFS was significantly shorter than clinical PFS overall (P = .001) and for both the IMRT (P = .01) and PT (P = .04) groups. There were 31 (46.3%) discrepant cases of which 17 had RANO progression more than a month prior to clinical progression, and 14 had progression by RANO but not clinical criteria.
Conclusions
Based on this secondary analysis of a trial of PT versus IMRT for glioblastoma, while no difference in PFS was noted relative to treatment technique, RANO criteria identified progression more often and earlier than clinical assessment. This highlights the disconnect between measures of tumor response in clinical trials versus clinical practice. With growing efforts to utilize real-world data and personalized treatment with timely adaptation, there is a growing need to improve the consistency of determining tumor progression within clinical trials and clinical practice.</abstract><cop>US</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>34337411</pmid><doi>10.1093/noajnl/vdab073</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2414-0492</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3584-023X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5538-1336</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2632-2498 |
ispartof | Neuro-oncology advances, 2021-01, Vol.3 (1), p.vdab073-vdab073 |
issn | 2632-2498 2632-2498 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8320688 |
source | DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Access via Oxford University Press (Open Access Collection); Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); PubMed Central |
subjects | Clinical Investigations |
title | Phase II trial of proton therapy versus photon IMRT for GBM: secondary analysis comparison of progression-free survival between RANO versus clinical assessment |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-04T17%3A01%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Phase%20II%20trial%20of%20proton%20therapy%20versus%20photon%20IMRT%20for%20GBM:%20secondary%20analysis%20comparison%20of%20progression-free%20survival%20between%20RANO%20versus%20clinical%20assessment&rft.jtitle=Neuro-oncology%20advances&rft.au=Al%20Feghali,%20Karine%20A&rft.date=2021-01-01&rft.volume=3&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=vdab073&rft.epage=vdab073&rft.pages=vdab073-vdab073&rft.issn=2632-2498&rft.eissn=2632-2498&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/noajnl/vdab073&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2557539884%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2557539884&rft_id=info:pmid/34337411&rft_oup_id=10.1093/noajnl/vdab073&rfr_iscdi=true |