Microvessel density >or=60 does not predict for outcome after radiation treatment for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: results of a correlative study from the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 90-03 Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether microvessel density (MVD), an immunohistochemical marker for tumor vascularity, predicts for radiotherapy (RT) outcome in locally advanced HNSCC patients. METHODS: A total of 459 patients, enrolled on the RTOG 90-03 trial, had biopsy specimens submitted, and a value for MVD determined, prior to definitive RT. 450 patients were analyzable for this study. Tumor microvessels were stained for factor VIII-related antigen using a standard immunoperoxidase method. The mean number of stained microvessel profiles, from three x200 fields containing the highest MVD (hot spot), was recorded as the MVD. A prospective value of >or=60 was chosen as the threshold for high MVD, tumor vascularity. RESULTS: The median follow-up for the analyzable patients with MVD assessment was 22.0 months and 79.1 months for all living patients. There were no differences concerning the pretreatment characteristics between those RTOG 90-03 patients with a value for MVD and those without a value for MVD. Thus, the present study cohort possessed comparable characteristics with the entire RTOG 90-03 population. MVD values ranged from 5 to 80, with a median value of 30. Only 37 of 450 (8.2%) patients possessed an MVD >or=60. There were no outcome differences for patients with MVD <60 versus >or=60 on multivariate analysis for time to local-regional failure (P = 0.89), time to distant metastasis (P = 0.80), disease-free survival (P = 0.46), and overall survival (P = 0.39). CONCLUSIONS: In this large, correlative study, a MVD >or=60, ie, high tumor vascularity, did not predict for outcome in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients treated with radiotherapy.

Preliminary results of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 97-03: a randomized phase ii trial of concurrent radiation and chemotherapy for advanced squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck.

PURPOSE: To define further the role of concurrent chemoradiotherapy for patients with advanced squamous carcinoma of the head and neck. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group developed this three-arm randomized phase II trial. Patients with stage III or IV squamous carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, or hypopharynx were eligible. Each of three arms proposed a radiation schedule of 70 Gy in 35 fractions. Patients on arm 1 were to receive cisplatin 10 mg/m(2) daily and fluorouracil (FU) 400 mg/m(2) continuous infusion (CI) daily for the final 10 days of treatment. Treatment on arm 2 consisted of hydroxyurea 1 g every 12 hours and FU 800 mg/m(2)/d CI delivered with each fraction of radiation. Arm 3 patients were to receive weekly paclitaxel 30 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 20 mg/m(2). Patients randomly assigned to arms 1 and 3 were to receive their treatments every week; patients on arm 2 were to receive their therapy every other week. RESULTS: Between 1997 and 1999, 241 patients were entered onto study; 231 were analyzable. Ninety-two percent, 79%, and 83% of patients on arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively, were able to complete their radiation as planned or with an acceptable variation. Fewer than 10% of patients had unacceptable deviations or incomplete chemotherapy in the three arms. Estimated 2-year disease-free and overall survival rates were 38.2% and 57.4% for arm 1, 48.6% and 69.4% for arm 2, and 51.3% and 66.6% for arm 3. CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated that three different approaches of concurrent multiagent chemotherapy and radiation were feasible and could be delivered to patients in a multi-institutional setting with high compliance rates.

Can costs be measured and predicted by modeling within a cooperative clinical trials group? Economic methodologic pilot studies of the radiation therapy oncology group (RTOG) studies 90-03 and 91-04.

PURPOSE: To (1) measure radiation therapy costs for patients in randomized controlled clinical trials, (2) compare measured costs to modeling predictions, (3) examine cost distributions, and (4) assess feasibility of collecting economic data within a cooperative group. METHODS: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group conducted economic pilot studies for two Phase III studies that compared fractionation patterns. Expected quantities of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes and relative value units (RVU) were modeled. Institutions retrospectively provided procedure codes, quantities, and components, which were converted to RVUs used for Medicare payments. Cases were included if the radiation therapy quality control review judged them to have been treated per protocol or with minor variation. Cases were excluded if economic quality review found incomplete economic data. RESULTS: The median and mean RVUs were within the range predicted by the model for all arms of one study and above the predicted range for the other study. CONCLUSION: The model predicted resource use well for patients who completed treatment per protocol. Actual economic data can be collected for critical cost items. Some institutions experienced difficulty collecting retrospective data, and prospective collection of data is likely to allow wider participation in future Radiation Therapy Oncology Group economic studies.

Importance of the mini-mental status examination in the treatment of patients with brain metastases: a report from the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group protocol 91-04.

PURPOSE: Little information is available on the importance of pretreatment Mini-Mental Status Exam (MMSE) on long-term survival and neurologic function following treatment for unresectable brain metastases. This study examines the importance of the MMSE in predicting outcome in a group of patients treated with an accelerated fractionation regimen of 30 Gy in 10 daily fractions in 2 weeks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) accrued 445 patients to a Phase III comparison of accelerated hyperfractionated (AH) radiotherapy (1.6 Gy b.i.d.) to a total dose of 54.4 Gy vs. an accelerated fractionation (AF) of 30 Gy in 10 daily fractions from 1991 through 1995. All patients had histologic proof of malignancy at the primary site. Brain metastases were measurable by CT or MRI scan and all patients had a Karnofsky performance score (KPS) of at least 70 and a neurologic function classification of 1 or 2. Two hundred twenty-four patients were entered on the accelerated fractionated arm, and 182 were eligible for analysis (7 patients were judged ineligible, no MMSE information in 29, no survival data in 1, no forms submitted in 1). RESULTS: Average age was 60 years; 58% were male and 25% had a single intracranial lesion on their pretherapy evaluation. KPS was 70 in 32%, 80 in 31%, 90 in 29%, and 100 in 14%. The average MMSE was 26.5, which is the lower quartile for normal in the U.S. population. The range of the MMSE scores was 11-30 with 30 being the maximum. A score of less than 23 indicates possible dementia, which occurred in 16% of the patients prior to treatment. The median time from diagnosis to treatment was 5 days (range, 0-158 days). The median survival was 4.2 months with a 95% confidence interval of 3.7-5.1 months. Thirty-seven percent of the patients were alive at 6 months, and 17% were alive at 1 year. The following variables were examined in a Cox proportional-hazards model to determine their prognostic value for overall survival: age, gender, KPS, baseline MMSE, time until MMSE below 23, time since diagnosis, number of brain metastases, and radiosurgery eligibility. In all Cox model analyses, age, KPS, baseline MMSE, time until MMSE below 23, and time since diagnosis were treated as continuous variables. Statistically significant factors for survival were pretreatment MMSE (p = 0.0002), and KPS (p = 0.02). Age was of borderline significance (p = 0.065) as well as gender (p = 0.074). A poorer outcome is associated with an increasing age, male gender, lower MMSE, and shorter time until MMSE below 23. Improvement in MMSE over time was assessed; 62 patients died prior to obtaining follow-up MMSE, and 30 patients had a baseline MMSE of 30 (the maximum), and, therefore, no improvement could be expected. Of the remaining 88, 48 (54.5%) demonstrated an improvement in their MMSE at any follow-up visit. Lack of decline of MMSE below 23 was seen in long-term survivors, with 81% at 6 months and 66% at 1 year of patients maintaining a MMSE above 23. Analysis of time until death from brain metastases demonstrated that decreasing baseline MMSE (p = 0.003) and primary site (breast vs. lung vs. other p = 0.032) were highly associated with a terminal event. CONCLUSION: While gender and perhaps age remain significant predictors for survival, MMSE is also an important way of assessing a patient's outcome. Accelerated fractionation used in the treatment of brain metastases (30 Gy in 10 fractions) appears to also be associated with an improvement in MMSE and a lack of decline of MMSE below 23 in long-term survivors.

Accelerated hyperfractionation for bronchogenic cancer: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9205.

RTOG 92-05 was a phase II trial developed to evaluate the feasibility, toxicity, and acceptance of a three times daily accelerated hyperfractionation radiation therapy schedule delivering 110 cGy, three times daily, to 79.2 Gy uncorrected tumor dose in 72 fractions, in 24 treatment days, in patients with bronchogenic cancer. The radiographically visible tumor received accelerated hyperfractionation and the other radiation volume received standard hyperfractionation. Three times a day, a dose of 110 cGy was delivered, with an interfractional interval of 4 hours; the middle fraction was a gross tumor boost. This schedule allowed treatment to be completed in approximately 4 1/2 weeks in an effort to minimize repopulation, to have a better biologically modeled therapeutic ratio than other schedules that have been completed in cooperative groups, and to use doses within cooperative group experience. In 33 months 35 patients were entered into the study; 15 of the patients had squamous cell carcinomas, 10 had adenocarcinomas, 8 had large-cell undifferentiated carcinomas, and 2 had unspecified non-small-cell cancers. Nineteen patients had AJCC stage IIIB; 13, IIIA; 14, T4; 10, T3; 13, N2; and 7, N3. Twenty-one patients (60%) had greater than 5% weight loss. The Karnofsky performance status was 90 to 100 in 12 patients and 70 to 80 in 23 patients. Treatment was completed in 91% of patients. Acute toxicity >RTOG grade II occurred in three patients: one skin, one lung, and two esophagus (one each III and IV, the only grade IV in the study). Overall late toxicity > or = grade III occurred in six patients: three lung, one thyroid, one esophagus, and one subcutaneous tissue (all grade III). The median survival was 10.5 months, 1-year survival was 42%, and 3-year survival was 18%. The outcome in this group of patients with many adverse prognostic variables compared favorably to prior RTOG radiation-alone studies.

A phase I/II study to evaluate the effect of fractionated hemibody irradiation in the treatment of osseous metastases--RTOG 88-22.

PURPOSE: The present study was initiated to determine the maximum tolerated total dose that can be delivered by fractionated hemibody irradiation (HBI), as defined by the acute hematological and nonhematological toxicity. Although it was designed as a dose searching trial, the influence of higher doses on occult and overt disease were considered equally important. The study was not designed to evaluate pain relief. The results were compared to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 82-06, which employed single high-dose HBI, to determine if either single or fractionated HBI is more effective in controlling occult or overt disease. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 144 patients were entered from September 1989 to April 1993. Only patients with a single symptomatic bone metastases from either prostate or breast cancer primaries and a KPS > or = 60 were eligible. All patients initially received 30.0 Gy in 10 fractions to the symptomatic area followed by HBI in 2.50 Gy fractions to one of five arms: I-10.0 Gy (37 patients); II-12.5 Gy (23 patients); III-15.0 Gy (18 patients); IV-17.5 Gy (40 patients), and V-20.0 Gy (26 patients). A dose limiting toxicity was defined as an observed toxicity of > or = Grade 3 lasting more than 30 days postcompletion of HBI. If three or more dose-limiting toxicities occurred at any dose level, the previous dose was considered as the maximum tolerable dose. RESULTS: Thirty-six of 142 patients experienced > or = Grade 3 hematological toxicity at some time following HBI. The distribution of dose-limiting hematological toxicity in each arm was: I-two patients; II-one patients; III-zero patients; IV-one patient; and V-three patients. The major nonhematological toxicity was gastrointestinal and occurred in 10 patients. None were dose limiting. At 12 months from the initiation of treatment, the percent of patients with new disease were: Arms I-19%; II-9%; III-17%; IV-19%; V-13%; the percent of patients requiring additional treatment in the hemibody field were: Arms I-36%; II-30%; III-33%; IV-32%; and V-19%. When compared to single high-dose HBI the estimated reduction in the failure rate was 36% after fractionated HBI which potentially represents a modest improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The maximum tolerated dose of fractionated (2.50 Gy) HBI was found to be 17.5 Gy. The major dose limiting toxicity was hematological (thromboleukopenia). There was not a significant dose response effect on occult disease (appearance of new disease) or in the requirement for additional treatment, although certain trends were noted for the higher doses. When only patients completing assigned HBI from RTOG 82-06 and 88-22 were compared, there was no difference in the time to new disease or additional treatment in the treated field. Based on the investigative parameters of this study, single high-dose HBI was as effective as fractionated HBI. The incorporation of cytokines, to ameliorate hematological toxicity, should allow for the delivery of higher doses of fractionated HBI and sequential HBI as a means of delivering systemic irradiation.