IMPORTANCE: Evidence for application of stereotactic and other conformal radiotherapy techniques in treating brain tumors is largely based on data derived from dosimetric, retrospective, or small prospective studies. Therefore, we conducted a randomized clinical trial of stereotactic conformal radiotherapy (SCRT) compared with conventional radiotherapy (ConvRT) evaluating clinically meaningful end points. OBJECTIVE: To compare neurocognitive and endocrine functional outcomes and survival at 5 years in young patients with residual and/or progressive benign or low-grade brain tumors treated with SCRT and ConvRT techniques. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This phase 3 randomized clinical trial enrolled 200 young patients (ages 3-25 years) with residual or progressive benign or low-grade brain tumors at a single center between April 2001 to March 2012. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to either SCRT (n = 104) or ConvRT (n = 96) arms. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to either high-precision SCRT or ConvRT to a dose of 54 Gy in 30 fractions over 6 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Detailed neuropsychological and neuroendocrine assessments were performed at preradiotherapy baseline, at 6 months, and annually thereafter until 5 years on longitudinal follow-up. Change in these functional parameters was compared between the 2 arms as the primary end point and overall survival (OS) as the secondary end point. RESULTS: In total, 200 young patients (median [interquartile range] age, 13 [9-17] years; 133 males and 67 females) were enrolled. Mean full-scale or global intelligence quotient (IQ) and performance IQ scores over a period of 5 years were significantly superior in patients treated with SCRT compared with those treated with ConvRT (difference in slope = 1.48; P = .04 vs difference in slope = 1.64; P = .046, respectively). Cumulative incidence of developing new neuroendocrine dysfunction at 5 years was significantly lower in patients treated with SCRT compared with ConvRT (31% vs 51%; P = .01) while developing a new neuroendocrine axis dysfunction in patients with preexisting dysfunction in at least 1 axis at baseline was also significantly lower in the SCRT arm compared with the ConvRT arm (29% vs 52%; P = .02). Five-year OS in SCRT and ConvRT arms was 86% and 91%, respectively (P = .54). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In young patients with residual and/or progressive benign or low-grade brain tumors requiring radiotherapy for long-term tumor control, SCRT compared with ConvRT achieves superior neurocognitive and neuroendocrine functional outcomes over 5 years without compromising survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00517959.
IMPORTANCE: Evidence for application of stereotactic and other conformal radiotherapy techniques in treating brain tumors is largely based on data derived from dosimetric, retrospective, or small prospective studies. Therefore, we conducted a randomized clinical trial of stereotactic conformal radiotherapy (SCRT) compared with conventional radiotherapy (ConvRT) evaluating clinically meaningful end points. OBJECTIVE: To compare neurocognitive and endocrine functional outcomes and survival at 5 years in young patients with residual and/or progressive benign or low-grade brain tumors treated with SCRT and ConvRT techniques. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This phase 3 randomized clinical trial enrolled 200 young patients (ages 3-25 years) with residual or progressive benign or low-grade brain tumors at a single center between April 2001 to March 2012. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to either SCRT (n = 104) or ConvRT (n = 96) arms. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to either high-precision SCRT or ConvRT to a dose of 54 Gy in 30 fractions over 6 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Detailed neuropsychological and neuroendocrine assessments were performed at preradiotherapy baseline, at 6 months, and annually thereafter until 5 years on longitudinal follow-up. Change in these functional parameters was compared between the 2 arms as the primary end point and overall survival (OS) as the secondary end point. RESULTS: In total, 200 young patients (median [interquartile range] age, 13 [9-17] years; 133 males and 67 females) were enrolled. Mean full-scale or global intelligence quotient (IQ) and performance IQ scores over a period of 5 years were significantly superior in patients treated with SCRT compared with those treated with ConvRT (difference in slope = 1.48; P = .04 vs difference in slope = 1.64; P = .046, respectively). Cumulative incidence of developing new neuroendocrine dysfunction at 5 years was significantly lower in patients treated with SCRT compared with ConvRT (31% vs 51%; P = .01) while developing a new neuroendocrine axis dysfunction in patients with preexisting dysfunction in at least 1 axis at baseline was also significantly lower in the SCRT arm compared with the ConvRT arm (29% vs 52%; P = .02). Five-year OS in SCRT and ConvRT arms was 86% and 91%, respectively (P = .54). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In young patients with residual and/or progressive benign or low-grade brain tumors requiring radiotherapy for long-term tumor control, SCRT compared with ConvRT achieves superior neurocognitive and neuroendocrine functional outcomes over 5 years without compromising survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00517959.
Authors: Tamara Z Vern-Gross; Jane E Schreiber; Alberto Broniscer; Shengjie Wu; Xiaoping Xiong; Thomas E Merchant Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-06-07 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: R Jalali; M Brada; J R Perks; A P Warrington; D Traish; L Burchell; H McNair; D G Thomas; S Robinson; D G Johnston Journal: Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) Date: 2000-06 Impact factor: 3.478
Authors: Margaret B Pulsifer; Roshan V Sethi; Karen A Kuhlthau; Shannon M MacDonald; Nancy J Tarbell; Torunn I Yock Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-06-14 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Marcos Di Pinto; Heather M Conklin; Chenghong Li; Thomas E Merchant Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-08-04 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Thomas E Merchant; Heather M Conklin; Shengjie Wu; Robert H Lustig; Xiaoping Xiong Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-07-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J Jacob; L Feuvret; J-M Simon; M Ribeiro; L Nichelli; C Jenny; D Ricard; D Psimaras; K Hoang-Xuan; P Maingon Journal: Neurol Sci Date: 2022-02-11 Impact factor: 3.307
Authors: Paul D Brown; Caroline Chung; Diane D Liu; Sarah McAvoy; David Grosshans; Karine Al Feghali; Anita Mahajan; Jing Li; Susan L McGovern; Mary-Fran McAleer; Amol J Ghia; Erik P Sulman; Marta Penas-Prado; John F de Groot; Amy B Heimberger; Jihong Wang; Terri S Armstrong; Mark R Gilbert; Nandita Guha-Thakurta; Jeffrey S Wefel Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Theresa A Lawrie; David Gillespie; Therese Dowswell; Jonathan Evans; Sara Erridge; Luke Vale; Ashleigh Kernohan; Robin Grant Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-08-05