Search

PurposeRadiotherapy is one of the most important treatments for high-grade glioma (HGG), but the best way to delineate the target areas for radiotherapy remains controversial, so our aim was to compare the dosimetric differences in radiation treatment plans generated based on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and National Research Group (NRG) consensus to provide evidence for optimal target delineation for HGG.MethodsWe prospectively enrolled 13 patients with a confirmed HGG from our hospital and assessed dosimetric differences in radiotherapy treatment plans generated according to the EORTC and NRG-2019 guidelines. For each patient, two treatment plans were generated. Dosimetric parameters were compared by dose–volume histograms for each plan.ResultsThe median volume for planning target volume (PTV) of EORTC plans, PTV1 of NRG-2019 plans, and PTV2 of NRG-2019 plans were 336.6 cm3 (range, 161.1–511.5 cm3), 365.3 cm3 (range, 123.4–535.0 cm3), and 263.2 cm3 (range, 116.8–497.7 cm3), respectively. Both treatment plans were found to have similar efficiency and evaluated as acceptable for patient treatment. Both treatment plans showed well conformal index and homogeneity index and were not statistically significantly different (P = 0.397 and P = 0.427, respectively). There was no significant difference in the volume percent of brain irradiated to 30, 46, and 60 Gy according to different target delineations (P = 0.397, P = 0.590, and P = 0.739, respectively). These two plans also showed no significant differences in the doses to the brain stem, optic chiasm, left and right optic nerves, left and right lens, left and right eyes, pituitary, and left and right temporal lobes (P = 0.858, P = 0.858, P = 0.701 and P = 0.794, P = 0.701 and P = 0.427, P = 0.489 and P = 0.898, P = 0.626, and P = 0.942 and P = 0.161, respectively).ConclusionThe NRG-2019 project did not increase the dose of organs at risk (OARs) radiation. This is a significant finding that further lays the groundwork for the application of the NRG-2019 consensus in the treatment of patients with HGGs.Clinical trial registrationThe effect of radiotherapy target area and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) on the prognosis of high-grade glioma and its mechanism, number ChiCTR2100046667. Registered 26 May 2021.

BackgroundThe purpose of this retrospective analysis was to build and validate nomograms to predict the cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) of head and neck neuroendocrine carcinoma (HNNEC) patients.MethodsA total of 493 HNNEC patients were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 2004 and 2015, and 74 HNNEC patients were collected from the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University/Hunan Cancer Hospital (HCH) between 2008 and 2020. Patients from SEER were randomly assigned into training (N=345) and internal validation (N=148) groups, and the independent data group (N=74) from HCH was used for external validation. Independent prognostic factors were collected using an input method in a Cox regression model, and they were then included in nomograms to predict 3‐, 5‐, and 10‐year CSS and OS rates of HNNEC patients. Finally, we evaluated the internal and external validity of the nomograms using the consistency index, while assessing their prediction accuracy using calibration curves. A receiver operating curve (ROC) was also used to measure the performance of the survival models.ResultsThe 3-, 5-, and 10-year nomograms of this analysis demonstrated that M classification had the largest influence on CSS and OS of HNNEC, followed by the AJCC stage, N stage, age at diagnosis, sex/gender, radiation therapy, and marital status. The training validation C-indexes for the CSS and OS models were 0.739 and 0.713, respectively. Those for the internal validation group were 0.726 and 0.703, respectively, and for the external validation group were 0.765 and 0.709, respectively. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 3-, 5-, and 10-year CSS and OS models were 0.81, 0.82, 0.82, and 0.78, 0.81, and 0.82, respectively. The C-indexes were all higher than 0.7, indicating the high accuracy ability of our model’s survival prediction.ConclusionsIn this study, prognosis nomograms in HNNEC patients were constructed to predict CSS and OS for the first time. Clinicians can identify patients’ survival risk better and help patients understand their survival prognosis for the next 3, 5, and 10 years more clearly by using these nomograms.