Dataset Information

Hypofractionated radiotherapy for newly diagnosed elderly glioblastoma patients: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate different hypofractionated radiotherapy (HRT) regimens for newly diagnosed elderly glioblastoma (GBM) patients.

Methods

We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA), including searches on CENTRAL, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, clinical trial databases and manual search. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. Primary outcomes: overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AE). Secondary outcomes: progression-free-survival (PFS) and quality of life (QoL). We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) table for assessing individual studies and CINeMA for evaluating the certainty of the final body of evidence.

Results

Four RCTs (499 patients) were included. For OS, the estimates from NMA did not provide strong evidence of a difference between the HRTs: 40 Gray (Gy) versus 45 Gy (HR: 0.89; CI 95%: 0.42, 1.91); 34 Gy versus 45 Gy (HR: 0.85; CI 95% 0.43, 1.70); 25 Gy versus 45 Gy (HR: 0.81; CI 95% 0.32, 2.02); 34 Gy versus 40 Gy (HR: 0.95; CI 95% 0.57, 1.61); and 25 Gy versus 34 Gy (HR: 0.95; CI 95% 0.46, 1.97). We performed qualitative synthesis for AE and QoL due to data scarcity and clinical heterogeneity among studies. The four studies reported a similar QoL (assessed by different methods) between arms. One RCT reported grade ≥ 3 AE, with no evidence of a difference between arms. PFS was reported in one study (25 Gy versus 40 Gy), with no evidence of a difference between arms.

Conclusion

This review found no evidence of a difference between the evaluated HRTs for efficacy and safety.

SUBMITTER: de Melo S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8568110 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeBevacizumab is associated with decreased vascular permeability that allows for more aggressive radiotherapy schedules. We conducted a phase II trial in newly diagnosed glioblastoma utilizing a novel hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HFSRT) schedule combined with temozolomide and bevacizumab.Experimental designPatients with tumor volume ≤60 cc were treated with HFSRT (6 × 6 Gy to contrast enhancement and 6 × 4 Gy to FLAIR hyperintensity with dose painting) combined with concomitant/adjuvant temozolomide and bevacizumab at standard doses. Primary endpoint was 1-year overall survival (OS): promising = 70%; nonpromising = 50%; α = 0.1; β = 0.1.ResultsForty patients were enrolled (median age: 55 years; methylated MGMT promoter: 23%; unmethylated: 70%). The 1-year OS was 93% [95% confidence interval (CI), 84-100] and median OS was 19 months. The median PFS was 10 months, with no pseudo-progression observed. The objective response rate (ORR) was 57%. Analysis of The Cancer Genome Atlas glioblastoma transcriptional subclasses (Nanostring assay) suggested patients with a proneural phenotype (26%) fared worse (ORR = 14%, vs. 77% for other subclasses; P = 0.009). Dynamic susceptibility-contrast perfusion MRI showed marked decreases in relative cerebral blood volume over time (P < 0.0001) but had no prognostic value, whereas higher baseline apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratios and persistent hypermetabolism at the 6-month FDG-PET predicted poor OS (P = 0.05 and 0.0001, respectively). Quality-of-life (FACT-BR-4) and neuropsychological test scores were stable over time, although some domains displayed transient decreases following HFSRT.ConclusionsThis aggressive radiotherapy schedule was safe and more convenient for patients, achieving an OS that is comparable with historical controls. Analysis of advanced neuroimaging parameters suggests ADC and FDG-PET as potentially useful biomarkers, whereas tissue correlatives uncovered the poor prognosis associated with the proneural signature in non-IDH-1-mutated glioblastoma.

Project description:BackgroundImmunotherapy for GBM is an emerging field which is increasingly being investigated in combination with standard of care treatment options with variable reported success rates.ObjectiveTo perform a systematic review of the available data to evaluate the safety and efficacy of combining immunotherapy with standard of care chemo-radiotherapy following surgical resection for the treatment of newly diagnosed GBM.MethodsA literature search was performed for published clinical trials evaluating immunotherapy for GBM from January 1, 2000, to October 1, 2020, in PubMed and Cochrane using PICOS/PRISMA/MOOSE guidelines. Only clinical trials with two arms (combined therapy vs. control therapy) were included. Outcomes were then pooled using weighted random effects model for meta-analysis and compared using the Wald-type test. Primary outcomes included 1-year overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), secondary outcomes included severe adverse events (SAE) grade 3 or higher.ResultsNine randomized phase II and/or III clinical trials were included in the analysis, totaling 1,239 patients. The meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in group's 1-year OS [80.6% (95% CI: 68.6%-90.2%) vs. 72.6% (95% CI: 65.7%-78.9%), p = 0.15] or in 1-year PFS [37% (95% CI: 26.4%-48.2%) vs. 30.4% (95% CI: 25.4%-35.6%) p = 0.17] when the immunotherapy in combination with the standard of care group (combined therapy) was compared to the standard of care group alone (control). Severe adverse events grade 3 to 5 were more common in the immunotherapy and standard of care group than in the standard of care group (47.3%, 95% CI: 20.8-74.6%, vs 43.8%, 95% CI: 8.7-83.1, p = 0.81), but this effect also failed to reach statistical significance.ConclusionOur results suggests that immunotherapy can be safely combined with standard of care chemo-radiotherapy without significant increase in grade 3 to 5 SAE; however, there is no statistically significant increase in overall survival or progression free survival with the combination therapy.

Project description:Corticosteroids such as prednisolone and dexamethasone have been established as up-front therapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed immune thrombocytopenia. Recent studies have indicated that other treatments such as rituximab or thrombopoietin receptor agonist can also be effective choices. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to establish a clinically meaningful hierarchy of efficacy and safety of treatments for newly diagnosed primary immune thrombocytopenia in adults. Randomized controlled trials evaluating medical treatments for newly diagnosed immune thrombocytopenia were included. Reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. The main outcome was the sustained response (platelet count >30×109/L for 3-6 months after completion of treatments), while overall response (platelet count >30×109/L for 2-4 weeks after initiation of the up-front treatment) and therapy-related adverse events were the secondary endpoints. A total of 21 randomized controlled trials (1898 patients) were included in this study. Our main findings were a significantly better sustained response in the recombinant human thrombopoietin+dexamethasone and rituximab+dexamethasone arms compared to those of conventional therapies (prednisolone and dexamethasone monotherapy). Moreover, recombinant human thrombopoietin+dexamethasone and +prednisolone improved early overall response compared to prednisolone, dexamethasone, and rituximab-containing regimens. Therapy-related adverse events showed similar profiles and were tolerable in all treatment arms. Regimens containing recombinant human thrombopoietin agonist may be beneficial up-front therapies in addition to the conventional corticosteroid monotherapies. Future head-to-head trials including these regimens and rituximab-containing treatments are necessary in order to overcome the limitations of the small number in our study and determine the most suitable initial therapies for newly diagnosed immune thrombocytopenia.