Back to Authors

McAleer, M.F.

Mayo Clinic

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

Citations 2

RTHP-23. PROSPECTIVE TRIAL OF CONVENTIONALLY FRACTIONATED DOSE CONSTRAINTS FOR RE-IRRADIATION OF PRIMARY BRAIN TUMORS
McGovern, Susan L. , Luo, Dershan , Nguyen, Kham, McAleer, M.F., Grosshans, David R. , Ghia, Amol J. , Sulman, Erik P. , Brown, Paul H., Mahajan, Anita , Sulman, Erik P , Johnson, Michael, Li, Jing , Yeboa, D.N. , Chung, Caroline , Thall, Peter F. , Brown, Paul

Neuro-Oncology | November 11, 2019 | Volume: 21 | Issue: Supplement_6 | Pages: vi214-vi214

10.1093/neuonc/noz175.894 Get It

Abstract PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE Dose constraints for re-irradiation of recurrent primary brain tumors are not well-established, especially for treatment volumes too large for stereotactic radiotherapy. This prospective trial was performed to test dose constraints for conventionally-fractionated re-irradiation of recurrent primary brain tumors MATERIALS/METHODS A single-institution, prospective trial of 21 adults with recurrent brain tumors was performed. Electronic dosimetry records from the first course of radiation (RT1) were obtained and deformed onto the simulation CT for the second course of radiation (RT2). Treatment plans for RT2 were developed that met protocol-assigned dose constraints for RT2 alone and the composite dose of RT1+RT2. Dose constraints were also based on histology and interval since RT1. The primary endpoint was the rate of symptomatic brain necrosis after RT2. RESULTS Twenty one adults enrolled from March 2017 to May 2018. Twelve had glioblastoma, four had oligodendroglioma, two had anaplastic astrocytoma, and one each had choroid plexus papilloma, hemangiopericytoma, and pleomorphic xanthroastrocytoma (PXA). Twenty patients were treated with VMAT and one was treated with proton CSI. Median RT1-RT2 interval was 45 months (range, 9–141 months). Median RT2 dose was 42.8 Gy (range, 17.5–60 Gy). Median PTV volume was 208 cc (range, 7–1537 cc). Median imaging followup was 9 months (range, 1–20 months). Two months after RT2, the patient with PXA developed a trapped temporal horn adjacent to the RT2 treatment volume; pathology from emergent resection revealed necrotic brain tissue. The patient recovered fully and lived another 18 months until dying of disease progression. No other patient developed symptomatic radionecrosis. Median overall survival from RT2 for all patients was 11 months (range, 3–20 months). CONCLUSION Re-irradiation can be performed with conventionally fractionated schemes. Given the low rate of symptomatic radionecrosis, the dose constraints described here are a starting point for future studies of conventionally fractionated re-irradiation.
NIMG-03. PROSPECTIVE PHASE II RANDOMIZED TRIAL COMPARING PROTON THERAPY VS. PHOTON IMRT FOR GBM: SECONDARY ANALYSIS COMPARISON OF PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL BETWEEN RANO VS. CLINICAL AND RADIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Randall, James W. , Grosshans, David R. , Dibaj, Seyedeh, McAvoy, Sarah , McGovern, Susan L. , McAleer, M.F., Ghia, Amol J. , Sulman, Erik P. , Peñas-Prado, Marta , DeGroot, John, Heimberger, Amy B. , Mahajan, Anita , Brown, Paul D. , Sulman, Erik P , Feghali, Karine A. Al , Wefel, Jeffrey S. , Guha‐Thakurta, Nandita , Li, Jing , Paulino, Arnold C. , Wang, Jihong , Heimberger, Amy B. , Armstrong, Terri S. , Gilbert, Mark R. , Chung, Caroline

Neuro-Oncology | November 11, 2019 | Volume: 21 | Issue: Supplement_6 | Pages: vi161-vi162

10.1093/neuonc/noz175.675 Get It

Abstract PURPOSE To compare tumor progression based on clinical radiological assessment and on Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria between GBM patients treated with proton radiotherapy (PT) vs. photon intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). METHODS Eligible patients were enrolled on the described prospective phase II trial and had MR imaging at baseline and follow-up beyond 12 weeks from treatment completion. ‘Clinical’ progression was based on a radiology report of progression in combination with changes in treatment due to suspected disease progression. A single blinded observer applied RANO criteria to determine the RANO-based tumor progression. RESULTS Of 90 enrolled patients, 66 were evaluable, with median follow-up of 19.8 (Range: 3.2–65.1) months; median of 22.6 months for PT (n=25) vs. 18.9 months for IMRT (n=41). Median time to progression (TTP) was 7.9 months based on clinical progression criteria (8.1 months IMRT, 6.3 months PT) and 7.2 months (7.3 months IMRT, 5.7 months PT) by RANO criteria (p=ns for all). Median ‘clinical’ progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.7 (Range: 6.4–11.1) months; 8.9 months IMRT vs. 8.7 months PT (p=0.065). Median RANO PFS was 8.3 (range, 5.8–11.6) months: 8.3 months IMRT vs. 6.9 months PT (p=0.226). There were 14 discrepant cases: 3 had progression based on ‘clinical’ but not RANO criteria, and 11 had progression based on RANO but not ‘clinical’ criteria. CONCLUSION Based on this secondary analysis of a randomized trial of PT vs. IMRT for GBM, there was no difference in tumor progression relative to treatment technique used. There was no statistical difference in PFS noted between clinical and RANO-based assessments, but RANO criteria identified progression more often than clinical assessment, and TTP was shortened with the use of RANO criteria alone. Further development of tumor assessment tools that improve consistency and accuracy of determining tumor progression are needed to guide therapeutic trials in GBM.