Cargando…

Comparison of carbon ion and photon reirradiation for recurrent glioblastoma

PURPOSE: Purpose of this study was to investigate overall survival in recurrent glioblastoma treated with either carbon ion reirradiation or photon reirradiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study we evaluated 78 consecutive patients with recurrent IDH (Isocitrate dehydrogenase)-wil...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lautenschlaeger, F. S., Dumke, R., Schymalla, M., Hauswald, H., Carl, B., Stein, M., Keber, U., Jensen, A., Engenhart-Cabillic, R., Eberle, F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9038837/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34523017
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00066-021-01844-8
_version_ 1784693991423344640
author Lautenschlaeger, F. S.
Dumke, R.
Schymalla, M.
Hauswald, H.
Carl, B.
Stein, M.
Keber, U.
Jensen, A.
Engenhart-Cabillic, R.
Eberle, F.
author_facet Lautenschlaeger, F. S.
Dumke, R.
Schymalla, M.
Hauswald, H.
Carl, B.
Stein, M.
Keber, U.
Jensen, A.
Engenhart-Cabillic, R.
Eberle, F.
author_sort Lautenschlaeger, F. S.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Purpose of this study was to investigate overall survival in recurrent glioblastoma treated with either carbon ion reirradiation or photon reirradiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study we evaluated 78 consecutive patients with recurrent IDH (Isocitrate dehydrogenase)-wildtype glioblastoma (38 patients carbon ion re-radiotherapy, 40 patients photon re-radiotherapy) treated with either carbon ion reirradiation or stereotactic photon reirradiation. 45 Gy (RBE; 15 fractions) carbon ion reirradiation (CIRT) or 39 Gy (13 fractions) photon reirradiation (FSRT) was administered, respectively. Overall survival was investigated with respect to histological, clinical, and epidemiological features. Kaplan–Meier and multivariate Cox statistics were calculated. A propensity score-matched analysis of the FSRT and CIRT groups using variables from a validated prognosis score was carried out. RESULTS: The type of reirradiation (CIRT vs. FSRT) significantly influenced overall survival—8.0 months vs. 6.5 months (univariate: p = 0.046)—and remained an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis (p = 0.017). Propensity score-adjusted analysis with CIRT versus FSRT as the dependent variable yielded a significant overall survival advantage for the CIRT group (median OS 8.9 versus 7.2 months, p = 0.041, 1‑year survival 29 versus 10%). Adverse events (AE) were evaluated for both subgroups. For the FSRT group no toxicity ≥ grade 4 occurred. For the CIRT subgroup no grade 5 AE occurred, but 1 patient developed a grade 4 radionecrosis. We encountered 4 grade 3 toxicities. One patient developed a zoster at the trunk, 2 progressed in their paresis, and 1 featured progressive dysesthesia. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, carbon ion treatment is a safe and feasible treatment option for recurrent glioblastoma. Due to the retrospective nature of the study and two different dose levels for CIRT or FSRT, the improved outcome in CIRT reirradiation might be an effect of higher biological impact from carbon ions or a simple dose-escalation effect. This hypothesis needs prospective testing in larger patient cohorts. A prospective phase III randomized trial is in preparation at our center.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9038837
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90388372022-05-07 Comparison of carbon ion and photon reirradiation for recurrent glioblastoma Lautenschlaeger, F. S. Dumke, R. Schymalla, M. Hauswald, H. Carl, B. Stein, M. Keber, U. Jensen, A. Engenhart-Cabillic, R. Eberle, F. Strahlenther Onkol Original Article PURPOSE: Purpose of this study was to investigate overall survival in recurrent glioblastoma treated with either carbon ion reirradiation or photon reirradiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study we evaluated 78 consecutive patients with recurrent IDH (Isocitrate dehydrogenase)-wildtype glioblastoma (38 patients carbon ion re-radiotherapy, 40 patients photon re-radiotherapy) treated with either carbon ion reirradiation or stereotactic photon reirradiation. 45 Gy (RBE; 15 fractions) carbon ion reirradiation (CIRT) or 39 Gy (13 fractions) photon reirradiation (FSRT) was administered, respectively. Overall survival was investigated with respect to histological, clinical, and epidemiological features. Kaplan–Meier and multivariate Cox statistics were calculated. A propensity score-matched analysis of the FSRT and CIRT groups using variables from a validated prognosis score was carried out. RESULTS: The type of reirradiation (CIRT vs. FSRT) significantly influenced overall survival—8.0 months vs. 6.5 months (univariate: p = 0.046)—and remained an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis (p = 0.017). Propensity score-adjusted analysis with CIRT versus FSRT as the dependent variable yielded a significant overall survival advantage for the CIRT group (median OS 8.9 versus 7.2 months, p = 0.041, 1‑year survival 29 versus 10%). Adverse events (AE) were evaluated for both subgroups. For the FSRT group no toxicity ≥ grade 4 occurred. For the CIRT subgroup no grade 5 AE occurred, but 1 patient developed a grade 4 radionecrosis. We encountered 4 grade 3 toxicities. One patient developed a zoster at the trunk, 2 progressed in their paresis, and 1 featured progressive dysesthesia. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, carbon ion treatment is a safe and feasible treatment option for recurrent glioblastoma. Due to the retrospective nature of the study and two different dose levels for CIRT or FSRT, the improved outcome in CIRT reirradiation might be an effect of higher biological impact from carbon ions or a simple dose-escalation effect. This hypothesis needs prospective testing in larger patient cohorts. A prospective phase III randomized trial is in preparation at our center. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-09-14 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9038837/ /pubmed/34523017 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00066-021-01844-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Lautenschlaeger, F. S.
Dumke, R.
Schymalla, M.
Hauswald, H.
Carl, B.
Stein, M.
Keber, U.
Jensen, A.
Engenhart-Cabillic, R.
Eberle, F.
Comparison of carbon ion and photon reirradiation for recurrent glioblastoma
title Comparison of carbon ion and photon reirradiation for recurrent glioblastoma
title_full Comparison of carbon ion and photon reirradiation for recurrent glioblastoma
title_fullStr Comparison of carbon ion and photon reirradiation for recurrent glioblastoma
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of carbon ion and photon reirradiation for recurrent glioblastoma
title_short Comparison of carbon ion and photon reirradiation for recurrent glioblastoma
title_sort comparison of carbon ion and photon reirradiation for recurrent glioblastoma
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9038837/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34523017
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00066-021-01844-8
work_keys_str_mv AT lautenschlaegerfs comparisonofcarbonionandphotonreirradiationforrecurrentglioblastoma
AT dumker comparisonofcarbonionandphotonreirradiationforrecurrentglioblastoma
AT schymallam comparisonofcarbonionandphotonreirradiationforrecurrentglioblastoma
AT hauswaldh comparisonofcarbonionandphotonreirradiationforrecurrentglioblastoma
AT carlb comparisonofcarbonionandphotonreirradiationforrecurrentglioblastoma
AT steinm comparisonofcarbonionandphotonreirradiationforrecurrentglioblastoma
AT keberu comparisonofcarbonionandphotonreirradiationforrecurrentglioblastoma
AT jensena comparisonofcarbonionandphotonreirradiationforrecurrentglioblastoma
AT engenhartcabillicr comparisonofcarbonionandphotonreirradiationforrecurrentglioblastoma
AT eberlef comparisonofcarbonionandphotonreirradiationforrecurrentglioblastoma