Cargando…

Temozolomide chemotherapy versus radiotherapy in high-risk low-grade glioma: A randomized phase III Intergroup study by EORTC/NCIC-CTG/TROG/MRC-CTU (EORTC 22033-26033)

BACKGROUND: Outcome of low-grade glioma (LGG, WHO grade II) is highly variable reflecting molecular heterogeneity of the disease. We compared two different single modality treatment strategies: standard radiotherapy (RT) versus primary temozolomide (TMZ) chemotherapy with the aim of tailoring treatm...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Baumert, Brigitta G., Hegi, Monika E., van den Bent, Martin J., von Deimling, Andreas, Gorlia, Thierry, Hoang-Xuan, Khê, Brandes, Alba A., Kantor, Guy, Taphoorn, Martin J.B., Hassel, Mohamed Ben, Hartmann, Christian, Ryan, Gail, Capper, David, Kros, Johan M., Kurscheid, Sebastian, Wick, Wolfgang, Enting, Roelien, Reni, Michele, Thiessen, Brian, Dhermain, Frederic, Bromberg, Jacoline E., Feuvret, Loic, Reijneveld, Jaap C., Chinot, Olivier, Gijtenbeek, Johanna M. M., Rossiter, John P., Dif, Nicolas, Balana, Carmen, Bravo-Marques, Jose, Clement, Paul M., Marosi, Christine, Tzuk-Shina, Tzahala, Nordal, Robert A., Rees, Jeremy, Lacombe, Denis, Mason, Warren P., Stupp, Roger
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5124485/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27686946
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30313-8
_version_ 1782469865251012608
author Baumert, Brigitta G.
Hegi, Monika E.
van den Bent, Martin J.
von Deimling, Andreas
Gorlia, Thierry
Hoang-Xuan, Khê
Brandes, Alba A.
Kantor, Guy
Taphoorn, Martin J.B.
Hassel, Mohamed Ben
Hartmann, Christian
Ryan, Gail
Capper, David
Kros, Johan M.
Kurscheid, Sebastian
Wick, Wolfgang
Enting, Roelien
Reni, Michele
Thiessen, Brian
Dhermain, Frederic
Bromberg, Jacoline E.
Feuvret, Loic
Reijneveld, Jaap C.
Chinot, Olivier
Gijtenbeek, Johanna M. M.
Rossiter, John P.
Dif, Nicolas
Balana, Carmen
Bravo-Marques, Jose
Clement, Paul M.
Marosi, Christine
Tzuk-Shina, Tzahala
Nordal, Robert A.
Rees, Jeremy
Lacombe, Denis
Mason, Warren P.
Stupp, Roger
author_facet Baumert, Brigitta G.
Hegi, Monika E.
van den Bent, Martin J.
von Deimling, Andreas
Gorlia, Thierry
Hoang-Xuan, Khê
Brandes, Alba A.
Kantor, Guy
Taphoorn, Martin J.B.
Hassel, Mohamed Ben
Hartmann, Christian
Ryan, Gail
Capper, David
Kros, Johan M.
Kurscheid, Sebastian
Wick, Wolfgang
Enting, Roelien
Reni, Michele
Thiessen, Brian
Dhermain, Frederic
Bromberg, Jacoline E.
Feuvret, Loic
Reijneveld, Jaap C.
Chinot, Olivier
Gijtenbeek, Johanna M. M.
Rossiter, John P.
Dif, Nicolas
Balana, Carmen
Bravo-Marques, Jose
Clement, Paul M.
Marosi, Christine
Tzuk-Shina, Tzahala
Nordal, Robert A.
Rees, Jeremy
Lacombe, Denis
Mason, Warren P.
Stupp, Roger
author_sort Baumert, Brigitta G.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Outcome of low-grade glioma (LGG, WHO grade II) is highly variable reflecting molecular heterogeneity of the disease. We compared two different single modality treatment strategies: standard radiotherapy (RT) versus primary temozolomide (TMZ) chemotherapy with the aim of tailoring treatment and identifying predictive molecular factors. METHODS: 477 patients (2005 – 2012, median FU 48 months) with a low-grade glioma (astrocytoma, oligoastrocytoma, oligodendroglioma, WHO grade II) with at least one high-risk feature (age > 40 years, progressive disease, tumor > 5 cm or crossing the midline, neurological symptoms (e.g. focal or mental deficits, increased intracranial pressure or intractable seizures)) were, after stratification by chromosome 1p-status, randomized to either conformal RT (50.4 Gy/28 fractions) or dose-dense TMZ (75 mg/m(2) daily × 21 days, q28 days, max. 12 cycles). Random treatment allocation was performed online using a minimization technique. A planned analysis was performed after 246 progression events. All analyses are intent to treat. Primary clinical endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), correlative analyses included molecular markers (1p/19q co-deletion, MGMT methylation status, IDH1+2 mutations). The trial has been registered at the European Trials Registry (EudraCT 2004-002714-11) and at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00182819). FINDINGS: Four hundred seventy-seven patients were randomized. Severe hematological toxicity occurred in 14% of TMZ-treated patients, infections in 3% of TMZ-treated patients, and 1% of RT-treated patients. Moderate to severe fatigue was recorded in 3% of patients in the RT group and 7% in the TMZ group. At a median follow-up of 48 months (IQR:31–56), median PFS was 39 months (IQR:16–46) in the TMZ arm and 46 months (IQR:19–48) in the RT group (hazard ratio 1.16, 95% CI, 0.9–1.5; p=0.22). Median OS has not been reached. Exploratory analyses identified treatment-dependent variation in outcome of molecular LGG subgroups (n=318). INTERPRETATION: There was no significant difference in outcome of the overall patient population treated with either radiotherapy alone or TMZ chemotherapy alone. Further data maturation is needed for overall survival analyses and evaluation of the full predictive impact of the molecular subtypes for individualized treatment choices. FUNDING: Merck & Co, Swiss-Bridge Award 2011, Swiss Cancer League.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5124485
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51244852017-11-01 Temozolomide chemotherapy versus radiotherapy in high-risk low-grade glioma: A randomized phase III Intergroup study by EORTC/NCIC-CTG/TROG/MRC-CTU (EORTC 22033-26033) Baumert, Brigitta G. Hegi, Monika E. van den Bent, Martin J. von Deimling, Andreas Gorlia, Thierry Hoang-Xuan, Khê Brandes, Alba A. Kantor, Guy Taphoorn, Martin J.B. Hassel, Mohamed Ben Hartmann, Christian Ryan, Gail Capper, David Kros, Johan M. Kurscheid, Sebastian Wick, Wolfgang Enting, Roelien Reni, Michele Thiessen, Brian Dhermain, Frederic Bromberg, Jacoline E. Feuvret, Loic Reijneveld, Jaap C. Chinot, Olivier Gijtenbeek, Johanna M. M. Rossiter, John P. Dif, Nicolas Balana, Carmen Bravo-Marques, Jose Clement, Paul M. Marosi, Christine Tzuk-Shina, Tzahala Nordal, Robert A. Rees, Jeremy Lacombe, Denis Mason, Warren P. Stupp, Roger Lancet Oncol Article BACKGROUND: Outcome of low-grade glioma (LGG, WHO grade II) is highly variable reflecting molecular heterogeneity of the disease. We compared two different single modality treatment strategies: standard radiotherapy (RT) versus primary temozolomide (TMZ) chemotherapy with the aim of tailoring treatment and identifying predictive molecular factors. METHODS: 477 patients (2005 – 2012, median FU 48 months) with a low-grade glioma (astrocytoma, oligoastrocytoma, oligodendroglioma, WHO grade II) with at least one high-risk feature (age > 40 years, progressive disease, tumor > 5 cm or crossing the midline, neurological symptoms (e.g. focal or mental deficits, increased intracranial pressure or intractable seizures)) were, after stratification by chromosome 1p-status, randomized to either conformal RT (50.4 Gy/28 fractions) or dose-dense TMZ (75 mg/m(2) daily × 21 days, q28 days, max. 12 cycles). Random treatment allocation was performed online using a minimization technique. A planned analysis was performed after 246 progression events. All analyses are intent to treat. Primary clinical endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), correlative analyses included molecular markers (1p/19q co-deletion, MGMT methylation status, IDH1+2 mutations). The trial has been registered at the European Trials Registry (EudraCT 2004-002714-11) and at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00182819). FINDINGS: Four hundred seventy-seven patients were randomized. Severe hematological toxicity occurred in 14% of TMZ-treated patients, infections in 3% of TMZ-treated patients, and 1% of RT-treated patients. Moderate to severe fatigue was recorded in 3% of patients in the RT group and 7% in the TMZ group. At a median follow-up of 48 months (IQR:31–56), median PFS was 39 months (IQR:16–46) in the TMZ arm and 46 months (IQR:19–48) in the RT group (hazard ratio 1.16, 95% CI, 0.9–1.5; p=0.22). Median OS has not been reached. Exploratory analyses identified treatment-dependent variation in outcome of molecular LGG subgroups (n=318). INTERPRETATION: There was no significant difference in outcome of the overall patient population treated with either radiotherapy alone or TMZ chemotherapy alone. Further data maturation is needed for overall survival analyses and evaluation of the full predictive impact of the molecular subtypes for individualized treatment choices. FUNDING: Merck & Co, Swiss-Bridge Award 2011, Swiss Cancer League. 2016-09-27 2016-11 /pmc/articles/PMC5124485/ /pubmed/27686946 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30313-8 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This manuscript version is made available under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.
spellingShingle Article
Baumert, Brigitta G.
Hegi, Monika E.
van den Bent, Martin J.
von Deimling, Andreas
Gorlia, Thierry
Hoang-Xuan, Khê
Brandes, Alba A.
Kantor, Guy
Taphoorn, Martin J.B.
Hassel, Mohamed Ben
Hartmann, Christian
Ryan, Gail
Capper, David
Kros, Johan M.
Kurscheid, Sebastian
Wick, Wolfgang
Enting, Roelien
Reni, Michele
Thiessen, Brian
Dhermain, Frederic
Bromberg, Jacoline E.
Feuvret, Loic
Reijneveld, Jaap C.
Chinot, Olivier
Gijtenbeek, Johanna M. M.
Rossiter, John P.
Dif, Nicolas
Balana, Carmen
Bravo-Marques, Jose
Clement, Paul M.
Marosi, Christine
Tzuk-Shina, Tzahala
Nordal, Robert A.
Rees, Jeremy
Lacombe, Denis
Mason, Warren P.
Stupp, Roger
Temozolomide chemotherapy versus radiotherapy in high-risk low-grade glioma: A randomized phase III Intergroup study by EORTC/NCIC-CTG/TROG/MRC-CTU (EORTC 22033-26033)
title Temozolomide chemotherapy versus radiotherapy in high-risk low-grade glioma: A randomized phase III Intergroup study by EORTC/NCIC-CTG/TROG/MRC-CTU (EORTC 22033-26033)
title_full Temozolomide chemotherapy versus radiotherapy in high-risk low-grade glioma: A randomized phase III Intergroup study by EORTC/NCIC-CTG/TROG/MRC-CTU (EORTC 22033-26033)
title_fullStr Temozolomide chemotherapy versus radiotherapy in high-risk low-grade glioma: A randomized phase III Intergroup study by EORTC/NCIC-CTG/TROG/MRC-CTU (EORTC 22033-26033)
title_full_unstemmed Temozolomide chemotherapy versus radiotherapy in high-risk low-grade glioma: A randomized phase III Intergroup study by EORTC/NCIC-CTG/TROG/MRC-CTU (EORTC 22033-26033)
title_short Temozolomide chemotherapy versus radiotherapy in high-risk low-grade glioma: A randomized phase III Intergroup study by EORTC/NCIC-CTG/TROG/MRC-CTU (EORTC 22033-26033)
title_sort temozolomide chemotherapy versus radiotherapy in high-risk low-grade glioma: a randomized phase iii intergroup study by eortc/ncic-ctg/trog/mrc-ctu (eortc 22033-26033)
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5124485/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27686946
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30313-8
work_keys_str_mv AT baumertbrigittag temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT hegimonikae temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT vandenbentmartinj temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT vondeimlingandreas temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT gorliathierry temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT hoangxuankhe temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT brandesalbaa temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT kantorguy temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT taphoornmartinjb temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT hasselmohamedben temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT hartmannchristian temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT ryangail temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT capperdavid temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT krosjohanm temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT kurscheidsebastian temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT wickwolfgang temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT entingroelien temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT renimichele temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT thiessenbrian temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT dhermainfrederic temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT brombergjacolinee temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT feuvretloic temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT reijneveldjaapc temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT chinotolivier temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT gijtenbeekjohannamm temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT rossiterjohnp temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT difnicolas temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT balanacarmen temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT bravomarquesjose temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT clementpaulm temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT marosichristine temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT tzukshinatzahala temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT nordalroberta temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT reesjeremy temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT lacombedenis temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT masonwarrenp temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033
AT stupproger temozolomidechemotherapyversusradiotherapyinhighrisklowgradegliomaarandomizedphaseiiiintergroupstudybyeortcncicctgtrogmrcctueortc2203326033