Search

BACKGROUND: The risk of recurrence is overestimated by the Kaplan-Meier method when competing events, such as death without recurrence, are present. Such overestimation can be avoided by using the Aalen-Johansen method, which is a direct extension of Kaplan-Meier that accounts for competing events. Meningiomas commonly occur in older individuals and have slow-growing properties, thereby warranting competing risk analysis. The extent to which competing events are considered in meningioma literature is unknown, and the consequences of using incorrect methodologies in meningioma recurrence risk analysis have not been investigated. METHODS: We surveyed articles indexed on PubMed since 2020 to assess the usage of competing risk analysis in recent meningioma literature. To compare recurrence risk estimates obtained through Kaplan-Meier and Aalen-Johansen methods, we applied our international database comprising ~ 8,000 patients with a primary meningioma collected from 42 institutions. RESULTS: Of 513 articles, 169 were eligible for full-text screening. There were 6,537 eligible cases from our PERNS database. The discrepancy between the results obtained by Kaplan-Meier and Aalen-Johansen was negligible among low-grade lesions and younger individuals. The discrepancy increased substantially in the patient groups associated with higher rates of competing events (older patients with high-grade lesions). CONCLUSION: The importance of considering competing events in recurrence risk analysis is poorly recognized as only 6% of the studies we surveyed employed Aalen-Johansen analyses. Consequently, most of the previous literature has overestimated the risk of recurrence. The overestimation was negligible for studies involving low-grade lesions in younger individuals; however, overestimation might have been substantial for studies on high-grade lesions.

BACKGROUND: Craniopharyngiomas, primary brain tumors of the pituitary-hypothalamic axis, can cause clinically significant sequelae. Treatment with the use of surgery, radiation, or both is often associated with substantial morbidity related to vision loss, neuroendocrine dysfunction, and memory loss. Genotyping has shown that more than 90% of papillary craniopharyngiomas carry BRAF V600E mutations, but data are lacking with regard to the safety and efficacy of BRAF-MEK inhibition in patients with papillary craniopharyngiomas who have not undergone previous radiation therapy. METHODS: Eligible patients who had papillary craniopharyngiomas that tested positive for BRAF mutations, had not undergone radiation therapy previously, and had measurable disease received the BRAF-MEK inhibitor combination vemurafenib-cobimetinib in 28-day cycles. The primary end point of this single-group, phase 2 study was objective response at 4 months as determined with the use of centrally determined volumetric data. RESULTS: Of the 16 patients in the study, 15 (94%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 70 to 100) had a durable objective partial response or better to therapy. The median reduction in the volume of the tumor was 91% (range, 68 to 99). The median follow-up was 22 months (95% CI, 19 to 30) and the median number of treatment cycles was 8. Progression-free survival was 87% (95% CI, 57 to 98) at 12 months and 58% (95% CI, 10 to 89) at 24 months. Three patients had disease progression during follow-up after therapy had been discontinued; none have died. The sole patient who did not have a response stopped treatment after 8 days owing to toxic effects. Grade 3 adverse events that were at least possibly related to treatment occurred in 12 patients, including rash in 6 patients. In 2 patients, grade 4 adverse events (hyperglycemia in 1 patient and increased creatine kinase levels in 1 patient) were reported; 3 patients discontinued treatment owing to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In this small, single-group study involving patients with papillary craniopharyngiomas, 15 of 16 patients had a partial response or better to the BRAF-MEK inhibitor combination vemurafenib-cobimetinib. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03224767.).

PURPOSE: Patients with lung cancer and brain metastases represent a markedly heterogeneous population. Accurate prognosis is essential to optimally individualize care. In prior publications, we described the graded prognostic assessment (GPA), but a GPA for patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) has never been reported, and in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the effect of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) was unknown. The 3-fold purpose of this work is to provide the initial report of an SCLC GPA, to evaluate the effect of PD-L1 on survival in patients with NSCLC, and to update the Lung GPA accordingly. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multivariable analysis of prognostic factors and treatments associated with survival was performed on 4183 patients with lung cancer (3002 adenocarcinoma, 611 nonadenocarcinoma, 570 SCLC) with newly diagnosed brain metastases between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, using a multi-institutional retrospective database. Significant variables were used to update the Lung GPA. RESULTS: Overall median survival for lung adenocarcinoma, SCLC, and nonadenocarcinoma was 17, 10, and 8 months, respectively, but varied widely by GPA from 2 to 52 months. In SCLC, the significant prognostic factors were age, performance status, extracranial metastases, and number of brain metastases. In NSCLC, the distribution of molecular markers among patients with lung adenocarcinoma and known primary tumor molecular status revealed alterations/expression in PD-L1 50% to 100%, PD-L1 1% to 49%, epidermal growth factor receptor, and anaplastic lymphoma kinase in 32%, 31%, 30%, and 7%, respectively. Median survival of patients with lung adenocarcinoma and brain metastases with 0, 1% to 49%, and ≥50% PD-L1 expression was 17, 19, and 24 months, respectively (P < .01), confirming PD-L1 is a prognostic factor. Previously identified prognostic factors for NSCLC (epidermal growth factor receptor and anaplastic lymphoma kinase status, performance status, age, number of brain metastases, and extracranial metastases) were reaffirmed. These factors were incorporated into the updated Lung GPA with robust separation between subgroups for all histologies. CONCLUSIONS: Survival for patients with lung cancer and brain metastases has improved but varies widely. The initial report of a GPA for SCLC is presented. For patients with NSCLC-adenocarcinoma and brain metastases, PD-L1 is a newly identified significant prognostic factor, and the previously identified factors were reaffirmed. The updated indices establish unique criteria for SCLC, NSCLC-nonadenocarcinoma, and NSCLC-adenocarcinoma (incorporating PD-L1). The updated Lung GPA, available for free at brainmetgpa.com, provides an accurate tool to estimate survival, individualize treatment, and stratify clinical trials.

Abstract PURPOSE Standard of care for craniopharyngiomas is surgery with or without radiotherapy (RT). Cohort A of Alliance A071601 evaluated the efficacy of BRAF/MEK inhibition with vemurafenib/cobimetinib in patients with previously untreated papillary craniopharyngiomas (PCP), which carry the BRAF V600E mutation. Cohort B is currently enrolling patients with recurrence after RT. In a correlative analysis, we examined changes in RT volumes after BRAF/MEK therapy in Cohort A. METHODS Previously unirradiated patients with BRAF-mutated PCP were treated with vemurafenib/cobimetinib. Sixteen patients had scans available before starting vemurafenib/cobimetinib (“pre-therapy”) and after completing therapy (“post-therapy”). Two patients went off study treatment after 8 and 9 days due to side-effects and were excluded for this analysis. Gross target volumes (GTV) were contoured on pre-therapy and post-therapy scans. On post-therapy scans, an additional target comprising gross disease and at-risk regions for microscopic residual disease (GTV-micro) was defined and considered the treatment volume. Clinical target volume (CTV) was a 5-mm uniform expansion on pre-therapy GTV and post-therapy GTV-micro. Volumes were independently reviewed by two radiation oncologists. Changes in volumes from pre- versus post-therapy were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS In 14 patients evaluated, 57% were female and median age at enrollment was 49.5 years (range 33-83). Median time on treatment was 8.9 months (range 4.0-18.0). Median GTV pre-therapy was 3.8 mL (range 0.2-23.4) versus 0.3 mL (range 0.0-3.2) post-therapy (p=0.0001) and 1.7 mL (range 0.1-8.0) post-therapy GTV-micro (p=0.0001). Median CTV pre-therapy was 13.7 mL (range 2.8-51.8) versus 9.1 mL (range 2.2-27.5) post-therapy (p=0.0001). All tumors abutted the optic chiasm pre-therapy, only 6 did post-therapy. CONCLUSIONS Vemurafenib/cobimetinib resulted in smaller RT volumes. BRAF/MEK inhibitors could reduce RT volumes and spare dose to surrounding normal structures. Enrollment to Cohort B of Alliance A071601 should be considered for patients with recurrent tumors after RT. SUPPORT https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org

PurposeConventional wisdom has rendered patients with brain metastases ineligible for clinical trials for fear that poor survival could mask the benefit of otherwise promising treatments. Our group previously published the diagnosis-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA). Updates with larger contemporary cohorts using molecular markers and newly identified prognostic factors have been published. The purposes of this work are to present all the updated indices in a single report to guide treatment choice, stratify research, and define an eligibility quotient to expand eligibility.MethodsA multi-institutional database of 6,984 patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases underwent multivariable analyses of prognostic factors and treatments associated with survival for each primary site. Significant factors were used to define the updated GPA. GPAs of 4.0 and 0.0 correlate with the best and worst prognoses, respectively.ResultsSignificant prognostic factors varied by diagnosis and new prognostic factors were identified. Those factors were incorporated into the updated GPA with robust separation (P < .01) between subgroups. Survival has improved, but varies widely by GPA for patients with non-small-cell lung, breast, melanoma, GI, and renal cancer with brain metastases from 7-47 months, 3-36 months, 5-34 months, 3-17 months, and 4-35 months, respectively.ConclusionMedian survival varies widely and our ability to estimate survival for patients with brain metastases has improved. The updated GPA (available free at brainmetgpa.com) provides an accurate tool with which to estimate survival, individualize treatment, and stratify clinical trials. Instead of excluding patients with brain metastases, enrollment should be encouraged and those trials should be stratified by the GPA to ensure those trials make appropriate comparisons. Furthermore, we recommend the expansion of eligibility to allow for the enrollment of patients with previously treated brain metastases who have a 50% or greater probability of an additional year of survival (eligibility quotient > 0.50).

BackgroundBreast cancer treatment is based on estrogen receptors (ERs), progesterone receptors (PRs), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). At the time of metastasis, receptor status can be discordant from that at initial diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of discordance and its effect on survival and subsequent treatment in patients with breast cancer brain metastases (BCBM).MethodsA retrospective database of 316 patients who underwent craniotomy for BCBM between 2006 and 2017 was created. Discordance was considered present if the ER, PR, or HER2 status differed between the primary tumor and the BCBM.ResultsThe overall receptor discordance rate was 132/316 (42%), and the subtype discordance rate was 100/316 (32%). Hormone receptors (HR, either ER or PR) were gained in 40/160 (25%) patients with HR-negative primary tumors. HER2 was gained in 22/173 (13%) patients with HER2-negative primary tumors. Subsequent treatment was not adjusted for most patients who gained receptors-nonetheless, median survival (MS) improved but did not reach statistical significance (HR, 17-28 mo, P = 0.12; HER2, 15-19 mo, P = 0.39). MS for patients who lost receptors was worse (HR, 27-18 mo, P = 0.02; HER2, 30-18 mo, P = 0.08).ConclusionsReceptor discordance between primary tumor and BCBM is common, adversely affects survival if receptors are lost, and represents a missed opportunity for use of effective treatments if receptors are gained. Receptor analysis of BCBM is indicated when clinically appropriate. Treatment should be adjusted accordingly.Key points1. Receptor discordance alters subtype in 32% of BCBM patients.2. The frequency of receptor gain for HR and HER2 was 25% and 13%, respectively.3. If receptors are lost, survival suffers. If receptors are gained, consider targeted treatment.

Uveal melanoma (UM) is a rare but life-threatening cancer of the eye. In light of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, hospitals and proton eye therapy facilities must analyze several factors to ensure appropriate treatment protocols for patients and provider teams. Practice considerations to limit COVID-19 transmission in the proton ocular treatment setting for UM are necessary. The Particle Therapy Co-Operative Group is the largest international community of particle/proton therapy providers. Participating experts have current or former affiliation with the member institutions of the Particle Therapy Co-Operative Group Ocular subcommittee with long-standing high-volume proton ocular programs. The practices reviewed in this document must be taken in conjunction with local hospital procedures, multidisciplinary recommendations, and regional/national guidelines, as each community may have its unique needs, supplies, and protocols. Importantly, as the pandemic evolves, so will the strategies and recommendations. Given the unique circumstances for UM patients, along with indications of potential ophthalmologic transmission as a result of health care providers working in close proximity to patients and intrinsic infectious risk from eyelashes, tears, and hair, practice strategies may be adapted to reduce the risk of viral transmission. Certainly, providers and health care systems will continue to examine and provide as safe and effective care as possible for patients in the current environment.

PurposeBrain metastases are a common sequelae of breast cancer. Survival varies widely based on diagnosis-specific prognostic factors (PF). We previously published a prognostic index (Graded Prognostic Assessment [GPA]) for patients with breast cancer with brain metastases (BCBM), based on cohort A (1985-2007, n = 642), then updated it, reporting the effect of tumor subtype in cohort B (1993-2010, n = 400). The purpose of this study is to update the Breast GPA with a larger contemporary cohort (C) and compare treatment and survival across the 3 cohorts.Methods and materialsA multi-institutional (19), multinational (3), retrospective database of 2473 patients with breast cancer with newly diagnosed brain metastases (BCBM) diagnosed from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2017, was created and compared with prior cohorts. Associations of PF and treatment with survival were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were compared with log-rank tests. PF were weighted and the Breast GPA was updated such that a GPA of 0 and 4.0 correlate with the worst and best prognoses, respectively.ResultsMedian survival (MS) for cohorts A, B, and C improved over time (from 11, to 14 to 16 months, respectively; P < .01), despite the subtype distribution becoming less favorable. PF significant for survival were tumor subtype, Karnofsky Performance Status, age, number of BCBMs, and extracranial metastases (all P < .01). MS for GPA 0 to 1.0, 1.5-2.0, 2.5-3.0, and 3.5-4.0 was 6, 13, 24, and 36 months, respectively. Between cohorts B and C, the proportion of human epidermal receptor 2 + subtype decreased from 31% to 18% (P < .01) and MS in this subtype increased from 18 to 25 months (P < .01).ConclusionsMS has improved modestly but varies widely by diagnosis-specific PF. New PF are identified and incorporated into an updated Breast GPA (free online calculator available at brainmetgpa.com). The Breast GPA facilitates clinical decision-making and will be useful for stratification of future clinical trials. Furthermore, these data suggest human epidermal receptor 2-targeted therapies improve clinical outcomes in some patients with BCBM.

BackgroundPatients with gastrointestinal cancers and brain metastases (BM) represent a unique and heterogeneous population. Our group previously published the Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (DS-GPA) for patients with GI cancers (GI-GPA) (1985-2007, n = 209). The purpose of this study is to update the GI-GPA based on a larger contemporary database.MethodsAn IRB-approved consortium database analysis was performed using a multi-institutional (18), multi-national (3) cohort of 792 patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, with newly-diagnosed BM diagnosed between 1/1/2006 and 12/31/2017. Survival was measured from date of first treatment for BM. Multiple Cox regression was used to select and weight prognostic factors in proportion to their hazard ratios. These factors were incorporated into the updated GI-GPA.ResultsMedian survival (MS) varied widely by primary site and other prognostic factors. Four significant factors (KPS, age, extracranial metastases and number of BM) were used to formulate the updated GI-GPA. Overall MS for this cohort remains poor; 8 months. MS by GPA was 3, 7, 11 and 17 months for GPA 0-1, 1.5-2, 2.5-3.0 and 3.5-4.0, respectively. >30% present in the worst prognostic group (GI-GPA of ≤1.0).ConclusionsBrain metastases are not uncommon in GI cancer patients and MS varies widely among them. This updated GI-GPA index improves our ability to estimate survival for these patients and will be useful for therapy selection, end-of-life decision-making and stratification for future clinical trials. A user-friendly, free, on-line app to calculate the GPA score and estimate survival for an individual patient is available at brainmetgpa.com.

The literature describing the prognosis of patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers and brain metastases (BM) is sparse. Our group previously published a prognostic index, the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) for GI cancer patients with BM, based on 209 patients diagnosed from 1985-2005. The purpose of this analysis is to identify prognostic factors for GI cancer patients with newly diagnosed BM in a larger contemporary cohort. A multi-institutional retrospective IRB-approved database of 792 GI cancer patients with new BM diagnosed from 1/1/2006 to 12/31/2016 was created. Demographic data, clinical parameters, and treatment were correlated with survival and time from primary diagnosis to BM (TPDBM). Kaplan-Meier median survival (MS) estimates were calculated and compared with log-rank tests. The MS from time of first treatment for BM for the prior and current cohorts were 5 and 8 months, respectively (P < 0.001). Eight prognostic factors (age, stage, primary site, resection of primary tumor, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), extracranial metastases, number of BM and Hgb were found to be significant for survival, in contrast to only one (KPS) in the prior cohort. In this cohort, the most common primary sites were rectum (24%) and esophagus (23%). Median TPDBM was 22 months. Notably, 37% (267/716) presented with poor prognosis (GPA 0-1.0). Although little improvement in overall survival in this cohort has been achieved in recent decades, survival varies widely and multiple new prognostic factors were identified. Future work will translate these factors into a prognostic index to facilitate clinical decision-making and stratification of future clinical trials.

Background Central nervous system (CNS) injury following brain-directed radiotherapy remains a major challenge. Proton radiotherapy (PRT) minimizes radiation to healthy brain, potentially limiting sequelae. We characterized CNS radiotoxicity, including radiation-induced leukoencephalopathy (RIL), brain tissue necrosis (TN), and cerebral microbleeds (CMB), in glioma patients treated with PRT or photons (XRT). Patients and Methods Thirty-four patients (19 male; median age 39.6 years) with WHO grade 2-3 gliomas treated with partial cranial radiotherapy (XRT [ n  = 17] vs PRT[ n  = 17]) were identified and matched by demographic/clinical criteria. Radiotoxicity was assessed longitudinally for 3 years post-radiotherapy via serial analysis of T2/FLAIR- (for RIL), contrast-enhanced T1- (for TN), and susceptibility (for CMB)-weighted MRI sequences. RIL was rated at whole-brain and hemispheric levels using a novel Fazekas scale-informed scoring system. Results The scoring system proved reliable (ICC > 0.85). Both groups developed moderate-to-severe RIL (62%[XRT]; 71%[PRT]) within 3 years; however, XRT was associated with persistent RIL increases in the contralesional hemisphere, whereas contralesional hemispheric RIL plateaued with PRT at 1-year post-radiotherapy (t  = 2.180; P  = .037). TN rates were greater with PRT (6%[XRT] vs 18%[PRT]; P  = ns). CMB prevalence (76%[XRT]; 71%[PRT]) and burden (mean #CMB: 4.0[XRT]; 4.2[PRT]) were similar; however, XRT correlated with greater contralesional hemispheric CMB burden (27%[XRT]; 17%[PRT]; X 2 = 4.986; P  = .026), whereas PRT-specific CMB clustered at the radiation field margin (X 2 = 14.7; P  = .002). Conclusions CNS radiotoxicity is common and progressive in glioma patients. Injury patterns suggest radiation modality-specificity as RIL, TN, and CMB exhibit unique spatiotemporal differences following XRT vs PRT, likely reflecting underlying dosimetric and radiobiological differences. Familiarity with such injury patterns is essential to improve patient management. Prospective studies are needed to validate these findings and assess their impacts on neurocognitive function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundBrain metastases are a common complication of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Our group previously published the Renal Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) tool. In our prior RCC study (n = 286, 1985-2005), we found marked heterogeneity and variation in outcomes. In our recent update in a larger, more contemporary cohort, we identified additional significant prognostic factors. The purpose of this study is to update the original Renal-GPA based on the newly identified prognostic factors.MethodsA multi-institutional retrospective institutional review board-approved database of 711 RCC patients with new brain metastases diagnosed from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2015 was created. Clinical parameters and treatment were correlated with survival. A revised Renal GPA index was designed by weighting the most significant factors in proportion to their hazard ratios and assigning scores such that the patients with the best and worst prognoses would have a GPA of 4.0 and 0.0, respectively.ResultsThe 4 most significant factors were Karnofsky performance status, number of brain metastases, extracranial metastases, and hemoglobin. The overall median survival was 12 months. Median survival for GPA groups 0-1.0, 1.5-2.0, 2.5-3, and 3.5-4.0 (% n = 25, 27, 30 and 17) was 4, 12, 17, and 35 months, respectively.ConclusionThe updated Renal GPA is a user-friendly tool that will help clinicians and patients better understand prognosis, individualize clinical decision making and treatment selection, provide a means to compare retrospective literature, and provide more robust stratification of future clinical trials in this heterogeneous population. To simplify use of this tool in daily practice, a free online application is available at brainmetgpa.com.

PurposeTo identify prognostic factors, define evolving patterns of care, and the effect of targeted therapies in a larger contemporary cohort of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients with new brain metastases (BM).Methods and materialsA multi-institutional retrospective institutional review board-approved database of 711 RCC patients with new BM diagnosed from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2015, was created. Clinical parameters and treatment were correlated with median survival and time from primary diagnosis to BM. Multivariable analyses were performed.ResultsThe median survival for the prior/present cohorts was 9.6/12 months, respectively (P

PurposeTo update the Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (DS-GPA) for a markedly heterogeneous patient population, patients with melanoma and brain metastases, using a larger, more current cohort, including molecular markers.MethodsThe original Melanoma-GPA is based on data from 483 patients whose conditions were diagnosed between 1985 and 2005. This is a multi-institutional retrospective database analysis of 823 melanoma patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2015. Multivariable analyses identified significant prognostic factors, which were weighted and included in the updated index (Melanoma-molGPA). Multiple Cox regression was used to select and weight prognostic factors in proportion to their hazard ratios to design the updated Melanoma-molGPA in which scores of 4.0 and 0.0 are associated with the best and worst prognoses, as with all of the diagnosis-specific GPA indices. Log-rank tests were used to compare adjacent classes.ResultsThere were 5 significant prognostic factors for survival (age, Karnofsky performance status [KPS], extracranial metastases [ECM], number of brain metastases, and BRAF status), whereas only KPS and the number of brain metastases were significant in the original Melanoma-GPA. Median survival improved from 6.7 to 9.8 months between the 2 treatment eras, and the median survival times for patients with Melanoma-molGPA of 0 to 1.0, 1.5 to 2.0, 2.5 to 3.0, and 3.5 to 4.0 were 4.9, 8.3, 15.8, and 34.1 months (P

PurposeBrain metastases are a common problem in patients with melanoma, but little is known about the effect of gene mutations on survival in these patients.Methods and materialsWe created a retrospective multi-institutional database of 823 patients with melanoma and brain metastases diagnosed between 2006 and 2015. Clinical parameters, gene mutation status (BRAF, C-KIT, NRAS), and treatment were correlated with survival. Treatment patterns and outcomes were compared with a prior era (1985-2005).ResultsBRAF status was known in 584 of 823 patients (71%). BRAF, NRAS, and C-KIT mutations were present in 51%, 22%, and 11% of tested patients, respectively. The median time from primary diagnosis to brain metastasis was 32 months, and overall median survival (MS) from the time of initial treatment of brain metastases was 10 months. MS for BRAF-positive and BRAF-negative patients was 13 months and 9 months, respectively (P=.02). There was no significant difference in MS in patients with or without NRAS or C-KIT mutations. The time from primary diagnosis to brain metastasis did not vary by mutation and was not associated with survival after the diagnosis of brain metastases. MS for the 1985 to 2005 and 2006 to 2015 cohorts was 6.7 months and 10.0 months, respectively (P

BackgroundThe primary objective of this study was to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients with anaplastic astrocytoma (AA) treated with radiotherapy (RT) and either temozolomide (TMZ) or a nitrosourea (NU). Secondary endpoints were time to tumor progression (TTP), toxicity, and the effect of IDH1 mutation status on clinical outcome.MethodsEligible patients with centrally reviewed, histologically confirmed, newly diagnosed AA were randomized to receive either RT+TMZ (n = 97) or RT+NU (n = 99). The study closed early because the target accrual rate was not met.ResultsMedian follow-up time for patients still alive was 10.1 years (1.9-12.6 y); 66% of the patients died. Median survival time was 3.9 years in the RT/TMZ arm (95% CI, 3.0-7.0) and 3.8 years in the RT/NU arm (95% CI, 2.2-7.0), corresponding to a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.94 (P = .36; 95% CI, 0.67-1.32). The differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and TTP between the 2 arms were not statistically significant. Patients in the RT+NU arm experienced more grade ≥3 toxicity (75.8% vs 47.9%, P < .001), mainly related to myelosuppression. Of the 196 patients, 111 were tested for IDH1-R132H status (60 RT+TMZ and 51 RT+NU). Fifty-four patients were IDH negative and 49 were IDH positive with a better OS in IDH-positive patients (median survival time 7.9 vs 2.8 y; P = .004, HR = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.31-0.81).ConclusionsRT+TMZ did not appear to significantly improve OS or TTP for AA compared with RT+ NU. RT+TMZ was better tolerated. IDH1-R132H mutation was associated with longer survival.