• Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. · Jun 2015

    Hypofractionated versus standard radiation therapy with or without temozolomide for older glioblastoma patients.

    • Nils D Arvold, Shyam K Tanguturi, Ayal A Aizer, Patrick Y Wen, David A Reardon, Eudocia Q Lee, Lakshmi Nayak, Laura W Christianson, Margaret C Horvath, Ian F Dunn, Alexandra J Golby, Mark D Johnson, Elizabeth B Claus, E Antonio Chiocca, Keith L Ligon, and Brian M Alexander.
    • Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
    • Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2015 Jun 1; 92 (2): 384-9.

    PurposeOlder patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma have poor outcomes, and optimal treatment is controversial. Hypofractionated radiation therapy (HRT) is frequently used but has not been compared to patients receiving standard fractionated radiation therapy (SRT) and temozolomide (TMZ).Methods And MaterialsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of patients ≥65 years of age who received radiation for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma from 1994 to 2013. The distribution of clinical covariates across various radiation regimens was analyzed for possible selection bias. Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Comparison of hypofractionated radiation (typically, 40 Gy/15 fractions) versus standard fractionation (typically, 60 Gy/30 fractions) in the setting of temozolomide was conducted using Cox regression and propensity score analysis.ResultsPatients received SRT + TMZ (n=57), SRT (n=35), HRT + TMZ (n=34), or HRT (n=9). Patients receiving HRT were significantly older (median: 79 vs 69 years of age; P<.001) and had worse baseline performance status (P<.001) than those receiving SRT. On multivariate analysis, older age (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR]: 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.10, P=.01), lower Karnofsky performance status (AHR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01-1.03; P=.01), multifocal disease (AHR: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.23-3.61, P=.007), and radiation alone (vs SRT + TMZ; SRT: AHR: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.06-2.79; P=.03; HRT: AHR: 3.92; 95% CI: 1.44-10.60, P=.007) were associated with decreased overall survival. After propensity score adjustment, patients receiving HRT with TMZ had similar overall survival compared with those receiving SRT with TMZ (AHR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.50-2.4, P=.82).ConclusionsWith no randomized data demonstrating equivalence between HRT and SRT in the setting of TMZ for glioblastoma, significant selection bias exists in the implementation of HRT. Controlling for this bias, we observed similar overall survival for HRT and SRT with concurrent TMZ among elderly patients, suggesting the need for a randomized trial to compare these regimens directly.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…