umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Postoperative neoadjuvant temozolomide before radiotherapy versus standard radiotherapy in patients 60 years or younger with anaplastic astrocytoma or glioblastoma: a randomized trial
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: Acta Oncologica, ISSN 0284-186X, E-ISSN 1651-226X, Vol. 56, no 12, p. 1776-1785Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Introduction: A pilot study of temozolomide (TMZ) given before radiotherapy (RT) for anaplastic astrocytoma (AA) and glioblastoma (GBM) resulted in prolonged survival compared to historical controls receiving RT alone. We therefore investigated neoadjuvant TMZ (NeoTMZ) in a randomized trial. During enrollment, concomitant and adjuvant radio-chemotherapy with TMZ became standard treatment. The trial was amended to include concurrent TMZ.Patients and methods: Patients, after surgery for GBM or AA, age 60 years and performance status (PS) 0-2, were randomized to either 2-3 cycles of TMZ, 200mg/m(2) days 1-5 every 28 days, followed by RT 60Gy in 30 fractions or RT only. Patients without progressive disease after two TMZ cycles, received the third cycle. From March 2005, TMZ 75mg/m(2) was administered daily concomitant with RT. TMZ was recommended first-line treatment at progression. Primary endpoint was overall survival and secondary safety.Results: The study closed prematurely after enrolling 144 patients, 103 with GBM and 41 with AA. Median age was 53 years (range 24-60) and 89 (62%) were male. PS was 0-1 for 133 (92%) patients, 53 (37%) had complete surgical resection and 18 (12%) biopsy. Ninety-two (64%) received TMZ concomitant with RT. Seventy-two (50%) were randomized to neoadjuvant treatment. For the overall study population survival was 20.3 months for RT and 17.7 months for NeoTMZ (p=.76), this not reaching the primary objective. For the preplanned subgroup analysis, we found that NeoTMZ AA patients had a median survival of 95.1 months compared to 35.2 months for RT (p=.022). For patients with GBM, no difference in survival was observed (p=.10). MGMT and IDH status affected outcome.Conclusions: No advantage of NeoTMZ was noted for the overall study population or subgroup of GBM, while NeoTMZ resulted in 5 years longer median survival for patients diagnosed as AA.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis Group, 2017. Vol. 56, no 12, p. 1776-1785
National Category
Cancer and Oncology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-143564DOI: 10.1080/0284186X.2017.1332780ISI: 000418118800016PubMedID: 28675067OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-143564DiVA, id: diva2:1170554
Available from: 2018-01-03 Created: 2018-01-03 Last updated: 2018-06-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Malmström, AnnikaHenriksson, Roger

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Malmström, AnnikaHenriksson, Roger
By organisation
Oncology
In the same journal
Acta Oncologica
Cancer and Oncology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 7 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf