PURPOSE: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) previously developed three prognostic classes for brain metastases using recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) of a large database. These classes were based on Karnofsky performance status (KPS), primary tumor status, presence of extracranial system metastases, and age. An analysis of RTOG 91-04, a randomized study comparing two dose-fractionation schemes with a comparison to the established RTOG database, was considered important to validate the RPA classes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 445 patients were randomized on RTOG 91-04, a Phase III study of accelerated hyperfractionation versus accelerated fractionation. No difference was observed between the two treatment arms with respect to survival. Four hundred thirty-two patients were included in this analysis. The majority of the patients were under age 65, had KPS 70-80, primary tumor controlled, and brain-only metastases. The initial RPA had three classes, but only patients in RPA Classes I and II were eligible for RTOG 91-04. RESULTS: For RPA Class I, the median survival time was 6. 2 months and 7.1 months for 91-04 and the database, respectively. The 1-year survival was 29% for 91-04 versus 32% for the database. There was no significant difference in the two survival distributions (p = 0.72). For RPA Class II, the median survival time was 3.8 months for 91-04 versus 4.2 months for the database. The 1-year survival was 12% and 16% for 91-04 and the database, respectively (p = 0.22). CONCLUSION: This analysis indicates that the RPA classes are valid and reliable for historical comparisons. Both the RTOG and other clinical trial organizers should currently utilize this RPA classification as a stratification factor for clinical trials.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) previously developed three prognostic classes for brain metastases using recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) of a large database. These classes were based on Karnofsky performance status (KPS), primary tumor status, presence of extracranial system metastases, and age. An analysis of RTOG 91-04, a randomized study comparing two dose-fractionation schemes with a comparison to the established RTOG database, was considered important to validate the RPA classes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 445 patients were randomized on RTOG 91-04, a Phase III study of accelerated hyperfractionation versus accelerated fractionation. No difference was observed between the two treatment arms with respect to survival. Four hundred thirty-two patients were included in this analysis. The majority of the patients were under age 65, had KPS 70-80, primary tumor controlled, and brain-only metastases. The initial RPA had three classes, but only patients in RPA Classes I and II were eligible for RTOG 91-04. RESULTS: For RPA Class I, the median survival time was 6. 2 months and 7.1 months for 91-04 and the database, respectively. The 1-year survival was 29% for 91-04 versus 32% for the database. There was no significant difference in the two survival distributions (p = 0.72). For RPA Class II, the median survival time was 3.8 months for 91-04 versus 4.2 months for the database. The 1-year survival was 12% and 16% for 91-04 and the database, respectively (p = 0.22). CONCLUSION: This analysis indicates that the RPA classes are valid and reliable for historical comparisons. Both the RTOG and other clinical trial organizers should currently utilize this RPA classification as a stratification factor for clinical trials.
Authors: Rainer Souchon; Petra Feyer; Christoph Thomssen; Tanja Fehm; Ingo Diel; Ulrike Nitz; Wolfgang Janni; Joachim Bischoff; Rolf Sauer Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Paul W Sperduto; Norbert Kased; David Roberge; Zhiyuan Xu; Ryan Shanley; Xianghua Luo; Penny K Sneed; Samuel T Chao; Robert J Weil; John Suh; Amit Bhatt; Ashley W Jensen; Paul D Brown; Helen A Shih; John Kirkpatrick; Laurie E Gaspar; John B Fiveash; Veronica Chiang; Jonathan P S Knisely; Christina Maria Sperduto; Nancy Lin; Minesh Mehta Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2011-04-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Diandra N Ayala-Peacock; Ann M Peiffer; John T Lucas; Scott Isom; J Griff Kuremsky; James J Urbanic; J Daniel Bourland; Adrian W Laxton; Stephen B Tatter; Edward G Shaw; Michael D Chan Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-02-20 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Nishi Kothari; Eric Mellon; Sarah E Hoffe; Jessica Frakes; Ravi Shridhar; Jose Pimiento; Ken Meredith; Nam D Tran; Nadia Saeed; Khaldoun Almhanna Journal: J Gastrointest Oncol Date: 2016-08