BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this study was to compare overall survival (OS) of patients with AA treated with RT and either TMZ or NU. Secondary endpoints: time to tumor progression (TTP), toxicities of the regimens and molecular analyses. METHODS: Eligibility criteria: age ≥18 years; central review of AA; KPS ≥60. Patients were randomized 1:1 to RT 59.4 Gy with TMZ versus NU (BCNU or CCNU). An estimated increase from 3 to 4.5 years on the median survival time (MST) would require a sample size of 216 patients per arm (power = 90% with a one-sided alpha = 0.05). RESULTS: Because accrual goals were not met, the trial was closed in 2007. From 2002-2007, 196 eligible patients were randomized, 97 (RT + TMZ) and 99 (RT + NU). Stratification factors were balanced between the 2 arms. 65% of patients have died at the time of this report. Median follow-up time for patients still alive was 9.1 years (1.9-11.6 years). There was no difference in OS between the RT + TMZ and the RT + NU arm (MST 3.9 versus 3.8 years; p-value = 0.37). The differences in PFS and TTP between the 2 arms were not statistically significant. The RT + NU arm had a significantly higher rate of worse overall grade ≥3 toxicity (75.8% versus 47.9%; p-value < .001), related to bone marrow toxicity. Of the 196 patients, 111 were tested for IDH status, 60 (RT + TMZ) and 51 (RT + NU). 54 patients were IDH negative and 49 were IDH positive with a better OS in IDH positive patients (MST 7.9 versus 2.8 years; p-value = 0.006, HR = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.31-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: RT + TMZ did not appear to significantly improve OS or TTP for AA compared with RT+ NU. RT + TMZ was better tolerated. IDH mutation was associated with better survival outcome. Clinical trial information: NCT00004259. Supported by National Cancer Institute grants U10CA21661, U10CA180868, U10CA180822 and U10CA37422 and Merck & Co.
. 2015 Nov 9;17(Suppl 5):v3. doi: 10.1093/neuonc/nov206.12
ATCT-12: RESULTS OF NRG ONCOLOGY/RTOG 9813- A PHASE III RANDOMIZED STUDY OF RADIATION THERAPY (RT) AND TEMOZOLOMIDE (TMZ) VERSUS RT AND NITROSOUREA (NU) THERAPY FOR ANAPLASTIC ASTROCYTOMA (AA)
Susan Chang
1, Peixin Zhang
2, J Gregory Cairncross
3, Mark R Gilbert
4, Jean Paul Bahary
5, Carol Dolinskas
6, Kenneth D Aldape
7, Erica Bell
8, David Sciff
9, Kurt Jaeckle
10, Paul D Brown
10, Geoffrey R Barger
11, Maria Werner-Wasik
12, Helen Shih
13, David Brachman
14, Marta Penas Prado
15, H Ian Robins
16, Karl Belanger
17, Christopher J Schultz
18, Arnab Chakravarti
8, Minesh Mehta
19
J Gregory Cairncross
3University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
Find articles by J Gregory Cairncross
Maria Werner-Wasik
12Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Find articles by Maria Werner-Wasik
Karl Belanger
17Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada
Find articles by Karl Belanger
1University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
2NRG, Philadelphia, PA, USA
3University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
4NCI, Bethesda, MD, USA
5University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada
6University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
7University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
8Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
9University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
10Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
11Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA
12Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
13Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
14Barrow Neurological Institute, Phoenix, AZ, USA
15MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
16University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA
17Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada
18Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
19University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, USA
Issue date 2015 Nov.
Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology 2015.
PMCID: PMC4638563
