PURPOSE To assess whether reirradiation (re-RT) and concurrent bevacizumab (BEV) improve overall survival (OS) and/or progression-free survival (PFS), compared with BEV alone in recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). The primary objective was OS, and secondary objectives included PFS, response rate, and treatment adverse events (AEs) including delayed CNS toxicities. METHODS NRG Oncology/RTOG1205 is a prospective, phase II, randomized trial of re-RT and BEV versus BEV alone. Stratification factors included age, resection, and Karnofsky performance status (KPS). Patients with recurrent GBM with imaging evidence of tumor progression ≥ 6 months from completion of prior chemo-RT were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to re-RT, 35 Gy in 10 fractions, with concurrent BEV IV 10 mg/kg once in every 2 weeks or BEV alone until progression. RESULTS From December 2012 to April 2016, 182 patients were randomly assigned, of whom 170 were eligible. Patient characteristics were well balanced between arms. The median follow-up for censored patients was 12.8 months. There was no improvement in OS for BEV + RT, hazard ratio, 0.98; 80% CI, 0.79 to 1.23; P = .46; the median survival time was 10.1 versus 9.7 months for BEV + RT versus BEV alone. The median PFS for BEV + RT was 7.1 versus 3.8 months for BEV, hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.53 to 1.0; P = .05. The 6-month PFS rate improved from 29.1% (95% CI, 19.1 to 39.1) for BEV to 54.3% (95% CI, 43.5 to 65.1) for BEV + RT, P = .001. Treatment was well tolerated. There were a 5% rate of acute grade 3+ treatment-related AEs and no delayed high-grade AEs. Most patients died of recurrent GBM. CONCLUSION To our knowledge, NRG Oncology/RTOG1205 is the first prospective, randomized multi-institutional study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of re-RT in recurrent GBM using modern RT techniques. Overall, re-RT was shown to be safe and well tolerated. BEV + RT demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in PFS, specifically the 6-month PFS rate but no difference in OS.

Early experience demonstrates that the electronic brachytherapy system performed as expected. Electronic brachytherapy has similar acute toxicity profiles to other high dose rate approaches for accelerated partial breast irradiation and offers the convenience of having the treatment in an unshielded room.

HFRT should be limited to small volume recurrences especially in previously non-irradiated treatment areas at least 6 months following completion of previous RT. Due to treatment plan complexity, future re-irradiation GBM trials should require real time RT review.

BACKGROUND The current study was conducted to evaluate the combination of external beam radiation therapy and hyperthermia in the treatment of patients with locally advanced prostate carcinoma. METHODS Twenty‐six patients were treated on a Phase I/II protocol between June 1990 and April 1993. The median age of the patients was 69 years. Nine patients had well differentiated adenocarcinoma, ten patients had moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma, and six patients had poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma. All patients had American Urologic Society Stage C2‐D1 adenocarcinoma. The median pretreatment prostate specific antigen (PSA) level was 29 ng/mL (range, 6–104 ng/mL). All patients received external beam radiation therapy using a four‐field technique. The median radiation dose was 6800 centigrays (cGy) given in 200‐cGy fractions. Hyperthermia was administered concurrently with radiation therapy to temperatures of 42.5 °C for 30 minutes using a transrectal ultrasound applicator with 3 thermometry probes, given as either a single treatment (9 patients) or as two treatments (17 patients). Overall survival (OS) and biochemical no evidence of disease (bNED) status were calculated using Kaplan–Meier analysis. A consensus conference definition of PSA failure was used. The Cox proportional hazards model was used for multivariate analysis. The median follow‐up for all patients was 71 months. RESULTS The median time to PSA nadir was 15 months with a median PSA nadir value of 1.0 ng/mL. The median and 5‐year OS was 88 months and 73%, respectively, and the median and 5‐year bNED survival was 36 months and 35%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed only the pretreatment PSA level (P = 0.03) and the PSA nadir reached (P < 0.01) to be significant predictors of bNED survival. The duration of hyperthermia therapy showed a trend toward significance for OS (P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS The current Phase I/II protocol evaluating the combination of prostate hyperthermia and external beam radiation therapy for the treatment of patients with locally advanced prostate carcinoma suggests prostate hyperthermia to be feasible with no apparent significant increased toxicity, although there was no significant improvement in treatment outcome when compared with other studies reported in the literature evaluating external beam radiation therapy with or without androgen suppression. However, further investigation into the duration as well as the temperature of the hyperthermia with a greater number of patients is warranted. Cancer 2000;89:399–403. © 2000 American Cancer Society.

No abstract