BACKGROUND: We performed a dose-escalation trial to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with standard concurrent and sequential-dose temozolomide (TMZ) in patients with glioblastoma multiforme. METHODS: Histologically proven glioblastoma patients underwent IMRT dose escalation. IMRT was delivered over 5 weeks with the simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique to the two planning target volumes (PTVs) defined by adding 5-mm margin to the respective clinical target volumes (CTVs). CTV1 was the tumor bed plus the enhancing lesion with 10-mm margin; CTV2 was the area of perifocal edema with 20-mm margin. Only the PTV1 dose was escalated (planned dose escalation: 60, 62.5, 65, 67.5, 70 Gy) while the PTV2 dose remained the same (45 Gy). RESULTS: Forty consecutive glioblastoma patients were treated. While no dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was recorded during the dose escalation up to 67.5/2.7 Gy, two out of the first six consecutively enrolled patients on the highest dose level (70/2.8 Gy) experienced a DLT, and therefore a cohort expansion was required. 3/14 patients experienced a DLT on the highest planned dose level, and therefore the MTD was not exceeded. After a median follow-up time of 25 months no grade >2 late neurological toxicity was recorded. CONCLUSIONS: By using a SIB IMRT technique, a radiation dose of 70 Gy in 25 fractions (biological effective dose--BED--of 92.8 Gy) can be delivered with concurrent and sequential standard dose TMZ, without unacceptable acute toxicity in patients with glioblastoma.
BACKGROUND: We performed a dose-escalation trial to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with standard concurrent and sequential-dose temozolomide (TMZ) in patients with glioblastoma multiforme. METHODS: Histologically proven glioblastomapatients underwent IMRT dose escalation. IMRT was delivered over 5 weeks with the simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique to the two planning target volumes (PTVs) defined by adding 5-mm margin to the respective clinical target volumes (CTVs). CTV1 was the tumor bed plus the enhancing lesion with 10-mm margin; CTV2 was the area of perifocal edema with 20-mm margin. Only the PTV1 dose was escalated (planned dose escalation: 60, 62.5, 65, 67.5, 70 Gy) while the PTV2 dose remained the same (45 Gy). RESULTS: Forty consecutive glioblastomapatients were treated. While no dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was recorded during the dose escalation up to 67.5/2.7 Gy, two out of the first six consecutively enrolled patients on the highest dose level (70/2.8 Gy) experienced a DLT, and therefore a cohort expansion was required. 3/14 patients experienced a DLT on the highest planned dose level, and therefore the MTD was not exceeded. After a median follow-up time of 25 months no grade >2 late neurological toxicity was recorded. CONCLUSIONS: By using a SIB IMRT technique, a radiation dose of 70 Gy in 25 fractions (biological effective dose--BED--of 92.8 Gy) can be delivered with concurrent and sequential standard dose TMZ, without unacceptable acute toxicity in patients with glioblastoma.
Authors: Ulrich Hermanto; Erik K Frija; Mingfwu J Lii; Eric L Chang; Anita Mahajan; Shiao Y Woo Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-01-08 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Changhu Chen; Denise Damek; Laurie E Gaspar; Allen Waziri; Kevin Lillehei; B K Kleinschmidt-DeMasters; Monica Robischon; Kelly Stuhr; Kyle E Rusthoven; Brian D Kavanagh Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-10-06 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: June L Chan; Susan W Lee; Benedick A Fraass; Daniel P Normolle; Harry S Greenberg; Larry R Junck; Stephen S Gebarski; Howard M Sandler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: W J Curran; C B Scott; J Horton; J S Nelson; A S Weinstein; A J Fischbach; C H Chang; M Rotman; S O Asbell; R E Krisch Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1993-05-05 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Roger Stupp; Monika E Hegi; Warren P Mason; Martin J van den Bent; Martin J B Taphoorn; Robert C Janzer; Samuel K Ludwin; Anouk Allgeier; Barbara Fisher; Karl Belanger; Peter Hau; Alba A Brandes; Johanna Gijtenbeek; Christine Marosi; Charles J Vecht; Karima Mokhtari; Pieter Wesseling; Salvador Villa; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; Thierry Gorlia; Michael Weller; Denis Lacombe; J Gregory Cairncross; René-Olivier Mirimanoff Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2009-03-09 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Nathan S Floyd; Shiao Y Woo; Bin S Teh; Charlotte Prado; Wei-Yuan Mai; Todd Trask; Philip L Gildenberg; Paul Holoye; Mark E Augspurger; L Steven Carpenter; Hsin H Lu; J Kam Chiu; Walter H Grant; E Brian Butler Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Marc D Piroth; Michael Pinkawa; Richard Holy; Gabriele Stoffels; Cengiz Demirel; Charbel Attieh; Hans J Kaiser; Karl J Langen; Michael J Eble Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2009-11-23 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Piernicola Pedicini; Alba Fiorentino; Vittorio Simeon; Paolo Tini; Costanza Chiumento; Luigi Pirtoli; Marco Salvatore; Giovanni Storto Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2014-04-04 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Michelle M Kim; Corey Speers; Pin Li; Matthew Schipper; Larry Junck; Denise Leung; Daniel Orringer; Jason Heth; Yoshie Umemura; Daniel E Spratt; Daniel R Wahl; Yue Cao; Theodore S Lawrence; Christina I Tsien Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2019-04-11 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Paolo Tini; Valerio Nardone; Pierpaolo Pastina; Giuseppe Battaglia; Clelia Miracco; Lucio Sebaste; Giovanni Rubino; Alfonso Cerase; Luigi Pirtoli Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2017-10-12 Impact factor: 3.411