4.3 Article

Integrated boost IMRT with FET-PET-adapted local dose escalation in glioblastomas Results of a prospective phase II study

Journal

STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE
Volume 188, Issue 4, Pages 334-339

Publisher

URBAN & VOGEL
DOI: 10.1007/s00066-011-0060-5

Keywords

Dose escalation; Glioblastoma; Radiotherapy; Dose fractionation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Dose escalations above 60 Gy based on MRI have not led to prognostic benefits in glioblastoma patients yet. With positron emission tomography (PET) using [F-18]fluorethyl-L-tyrosine (FET), tumor coverage can be optimized with the option of regional dose escalation in the area of viable tumor tissue. In a prospective phase II study (January 2008 to December 2009), 22 patients (median age 55 years) received radiochemotherapy after surgery. The radiotherapy was performed as an MRI and FET-PET-based integrated-boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). The prescribed dose was 72 and 60 Gy (single dose 2.4 and 2.0 Gy, respectively) for the FET-PET- and MR-based PTV-FET(72 Gy) and PTV-MR(60 Gy). FET-PET and MRI were performed routinely for follow-up. Quality of life and cognitive aspects were recorded by the EORTC-QLQ-C30/QLQ Brain20 and Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE), while the therapy-related toxicity was recorded using the CTC3.0 and RTOG scores. Median overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were 14.8 and 7.8 months, respectively. All local relapses were detected at least partly within the 95% dose volume of PTV-MR(60 Gy). No relevant radiotherapy-related side effects were observed (excepted alopecia). In 2 patients, a pseudoprogression was observed in the MRI. Tumor progression could be excluded by FET-PET and was confirmed in further MRI and FET-PET imaging. No significant changes were observed in MMSE scores and in the EORTC QLQ-C30/QLQ-Brain20 questionnaires. Our dose escalation concept with a total dose of 72 Gy, based on FET-PET, did not lead to a survival benefit. Acute and late toxicity were not increased, compared with historical controls and published dose-escalation studies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available