L R Kleinberg1, V Stieber2, T Mikkelsen3, K Judy4, J Weingart1, G Barnett5, J Olson6, S Desideri1, X Ye1, S Grossman1. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, 401 North Broadway, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA. 2. Piedmont Radiation Oncology, Winston-Salem, NC, USA. 3. Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA. 4. Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 5. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 6. Emory University, Atlanta, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to define the maximal safe radiation dose to guide further study of the GliaSite balloon brachytherapy (GSBT) system in untreated newly diagnosed glioblastoma (NEW-GBM) and recurrent high-grade glioma (REC-HGG). GBST is a balloon placed in the resection cavity and later filled through a subcutaneous port with liquid I-125 Iotrex, providing radiation doses that diminish uniformly with distance from the balloon surface. METHODS: The Adult Brain Tumor Consortium initiated prospective dose-finding studies to determine maximum tolerated dose in NEW-GBM treated before standard RT or after surgery for REC-HGG. Patients were inevaluable if there was progression before the 90-day posttreatment toxicity evaluation point. RESULTS: Ten NEW-GBM patients had the balloon placed, and 2/10 reached the 90 day timepoint. Five REC-HGG enrolled and two were assessable at the 90-day evaluation endpoint. Imaging progression occurred before 90-day evaluation in 7/12 treated patients. The trials were closed as too few patients were assessable to allow dose escalation, although no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed. Median survival from treatment was 15.3 months (95 % CI 7.1-23.6) for NEW-GBM and 12.8 months (95 % CI 4.2-20.9) for REC-HGG. CONCLUSION: These trials failed to determine a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for further testing as early imaging changes, presumed to be progression, were common and interfered with the assessment of treatment-related toxicity. The survival outcomes in these and other related studies, although based on small populations, suggest that GSBT may be worthy of further study using clinical and survival endpoints, rather than standard imaging results. The implications for local therapy development are discussed.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to define the maximal safe radiation dose to guide further study of the GliaSite balloon brachytherapy (GSBT) system in untreated newly diagnosed glioblastoma (NEW-GBM) and recurrent high-grade glioma (REC-HGG). GBST is a balloon placed in the resection cavity and later filled through a subcutaneous port with liquid I-125 Iotrex, providing radiation doses that diminish uniformly with distance from the balloon surface. METHODS: The Adult Brain Tumor Consortium initiated prospective dose-finding studies to determine maximum tolerated dose in NEW-GBM treated before standard RT or after surgery for REC-HGG. Patients were inevaluable if there was progression before the 90-day posttreatment toxicity evaluation point. RESULTS: Ten NEW-GBM patients had the balloon placed, and 2/10 reached the 90 day timepoint. Five REC-HGG enrolled and two were assessable at the 90-day evaluation endpoint. Imaging progression occurred before 90-day evaluation in 7/12 treated patients. The trials were closed as too few patients were assessable to allow dose escalation, although no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed. Median survival from treatment was 15.3 months (95 % CI 7.1-23.6) for NEW-GBM and 12.8 months (95 % CI 4.2-20.9) for REC-HGG. CONCLUSION: These trials failed to determine a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for further testing as early imaging changes, presumed to be progression, were common and interfered with the assessment of treatment-related toxicity. The survival outcomes in these and other related studies, although based on small populations, suggest that GSBT may be worthy of further study using clinical and survival endpoints, rather than standard imaging results. The implications for local therapy development are discussed.
Authors: Robert Cardinale; Minhee Won; Ali Choucair; Michael Gillin; Arnab Chakravarti; Christopher Schultz; Luis Souhami; Allan Chen; Huong Pham; Minesh Mehta Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-06-05 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: J B Stubbs; A D Strickland; R K Frank; J Simón; K McMillan; J A Williams Journal: Cancer Biother Radiopharm Date: 2000-12 Impact factor: 3.099
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: S W Lee; B A Fraass; L H Marsh; K Herbort; S S Gebarski; M K Martel; E H Radany; A S Lichter; H M Sandler Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1999-01-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Alessandro Olivi; Stuart A Grossman; Stephen Tatter; Fred Barker; Kevin Judy; Jeffrey Olsen; Jeffrey Bruce; Dana Hilt; Joy Fisher; Steve Piantadosi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Lawrence Kleinberg; Geoffrey Yoon; John D Weingart; Michele Parisi; Alessandro Olivi; Nicholas A Detorie; Timothy A Chan Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2009-04-23 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: J F Dempsey; J A Williams; J B Stubbs; T J Patrick; J F Williamson Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1998-09-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Lawrence R Kleinberg; Jon Weingart; Peter Burger; Katherine Carson; Stuart A Grossman; Khan Li; Alessandro Olivi; Moody D Wharam; Henry Brem Journal: Cancer Invest Date: 2004 Impact factor: 2.176