Mandal Shreyosi, Joseph Deepa, Krishnan Ajay, Singh Pragya, Arora Rajnish Kumar, Chauhan Udit, Gupta Sweety, R Lekshmi, Gupta Manoj
Department of Radiation Oncology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Institute Rotary Cancer Hospital, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Asian J Neurosurg. 2025 Apr 21;20(3):506-513. doi: 10.1055/s-0045-1807761. eCollection 2025 Sep.
High-grade gliomas (HGGs) have dismal prognosis even with multimodality treatment entailing surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. Hence, assessment of improvement in quality of life (QOL) for evaluating treatment is critical. Target delineation for radiotherapy in HGG is often done according to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and Radiotherapy and Oncology Group (RTOG) contouring guidelines, which differs on exclusion and inclusion of peritumoral edema believed to harbor malignant cells; the guidelines have not been prospectively compared for probable difference in QOL, considering the probable difference in treated volume.
This article compares QOL in HGG patients receiving postoperative radiotherapy using target volume delineation based on the RTOG or EORTC guidelines.
In this single-center, prospective randomized exploratory study, postoperative HGG patients were randomized to either receive radiotherapy according to the EORTC guidelines of target delineation (60 Gy/30 fractions to tumor bed and residual tumor) or the RTOG guidelines (46 Gy/23fractions to tumor bed, residual tumor, and peritumoral edema with 14 Gy/7 fraction boost to the tumor bed and residual tumor) with concurrent temozolomide (TMZ) followed by 6 months of adjuvant TMZ. The aim and primary endpoint of the study was to assess and compare QOL between the arms. Descriptive statistics were used to convey demographic data, proportions for categorical variables, and mean, median, range, and standard deviation for continuous variables. Effect size was assessed using partial eta squared test where values of 0.01, 0.06, and 0.14 signify small, medium, and large effect size, respectively. Repeated measures analysis of variance test was used for comparison of means and assessment of QOL between the EORTC and RTOG groups at 6 months. Absolute volume of planning target volume (PTV) receiving 46 and 60 Gy were described, PTV 46/60 was also described in terms of % of whole brain volume.
Eighteen patients underwent randomization (9 in EORTC and RTOG group each). Statistically significant improvement was noted in the overall posttreatment values in the physical well-being (PWB) domain ( = 0.007).
This is the first study to compare the EORTC and RTOG delineation techniques in terms of QOL. No significant differences in QOL were noted between the two arms. Significant improvement was noted posttreatment in PWB of overall patients.
即使采用手术、放疗和化疗的多模式治疗,高级别胶质瘤(HGGs)的预后仍很差。因此,评估生活质量(QOL)的改善情况以评价治疗效果至关重要。HGG放疗的靶区勾画通常根据欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织(EORTC)和放射治疗及肿瘤学组(RTOG)的轮廓勾画指南进行,这两种指南在是否将被认为含有恶性细胞的瘤周水肿纳入或排除方面存在差异;考虑到治疗体积的可能差异,尚未对这两种指南在QOL方面的可能差异进行前瞻性比较。
本文比较了采用基于RTOG或EORTC指南的靶区体积勾画进行术后放疗的HGG患者的生活质量。
在这项单中心、前瞻性随机探索性研究中,术后HGG患者被随机分为两组,一组根据EORTC靶区勾画指南接受放疗(肿瘤床和残留肿瘤给予60 Gy/30次分割),另一组根据RTOG指南接受放疗(肿瘤床、残留肿瘤和瘤周水肿给予46 Gy/23次分割,肿瘤床和残留肿瘤给予14 Gy/7次分割的增量照射),同时给予替莫唑胺(TMZ),随后进行6个月的辅助TMZ治疗。该研究的目的和主要终点是评估和比较两组之间的生活质量。描述性统计用于传达人口统计学数据、分类变量的比例以及连续变量的均值、中位数、范围和标准差。使用偏eta平方检验评估效应大小,其中值为0.01、0.06和0.14分别表示小、中、大效应大小。使用重复测量方差分析检验比较均值,并评估EORTC组和RTOG组在6个月时的生活质量。描述了接受46 Gy和60 Gy的计划靶区体积(PTV)绝对体积,PTV 46/60也以占全脑体积的百分比来描述。
18例患者进行了随机分组(EORTC组和RTOG组各9例)。在身体健康(PWB)领域的总体治疗后值中观察到统计学上的显著改善(P = 0.007)。
这是第一项在生活质量方面比较EORTC和RTOG勾画技术的研究。两组之间在生活质量方面未观察到显著差异。总体患者的PWB在治疗后有显著改善。