Ultra-hypofractionated versus conventional chemoradiation for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: Survival and toxicity results of a multicenter randomized trial

Le résumé fourni par la source

PURPOSE: In glioblastoma, standard first-line chemoradiation since the 2005 EORTC/NCIC trial is 30x2Gy with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide. A phase II study suggested ultra-hypofractionation (6x6Gy) may offer comparable survival, with reduced treatment time and costs, potentially improving health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This phase III randomized trial (Netherlands Trial Registry, NL72953.041.20) evaluated non-inferiority of ultra-hypofractionated temozolomide chemoradiation in glioblastoma patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adults with newly diagnosed glioblastoma and a Karnofsky performance status ≥70 were randomized (1:1) to ultra-hypofractionated (6x6Gy in 2 weeks) or standard (30x2Gy in 6 weeks) radiotherapy, both with concurrent and 6 cycles of adjuvant temozolomide. The primary endpoint was 2-year overall survival (OS); the non-inferiority margin was a hazard ratio of 1.2. Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity. RESULTS: Enrollment stopped early, due to slow accrual (n=135/474 planned, 67 experimental, 68 standard). Median OS was shorter in the experimental arm: 13.0 months (95% CI 10.3-15.7) versus 21.0 months (95% CI not estimable). In a time-dependent analysis, survival was similar in the first 6 months (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.39-2.50), but mortality was higher thereafter (HR 2.54, 95% CI 1.57-4.09, p < 0.001). Radiation necrosis or pseudoprogression was more frequent after ultra-hypofractionation (47.8% vs 16.2%; HR 5.20, 95% CI 2.56-10.58), with increased dexamethasone use at 6-12 months. No grade 4-5 toxicities were observed. CONCLUSION: Non-inferiority of the 6x6 Gy chemoradiation regimen could not be demonstrated. This ultra-hypofractionated regimen was associated with inferior survival and increased radiation necrosis, and therefore should not replace standard chemoradiation.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.