J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2015; 76(04): 298-302
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1396437
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Feasibility of the EORTC/NCIC Trial Protocol in a Neurosurgical Outpatient Unit: The Case for Neurosurgical Neuro-Oncology

Marion Rapp
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Heinrich Heine Medical Centre, Düsseldorf, Germany
Hosai Sadat
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Heinrich Heine Medical Centre, Düsseldorf, Germany
Philipp Joerg Slotty
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Heinrich Heine Medical Centre, Düsseldorf, Germany
Hans Jakob Steiger
2   Neurochirurgische Klinik, Universitätsklinik Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
Wilfried Budach
3   Department of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine Medical Centre, Düsseldorf, Germany
Michael Sabel
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Heinrich Heine Medical Centre, Düsseldorf, Germany
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen


07. März 2014

15. September 2014

27. April 2015 (online)


Objective With the publication of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/National Cancer Information Center (EORTC/NCIC) trial, concomitant radiochemotherapy followed by intermittent chemotherapy became the new treatment standard for patients with primary glioblastoma. Eight years after widespread introduction of this protocol, it is of interest to investigate whether this new standard has been established in daily neuro-oncologic practice. We were particularly interested in its practicality within a neurosurgical neuro-oncologic setting.

Patients and Methods We analyzed primary glioblastoma patients diagnosed between 2005 and 2013 treated at our center according to the EORTC/NCIC trial. Parameters associated with treatment performance (interruption of radiotherapy, concomitant chemotherapy and intermittent chemotherapy, total number of cycles, and side effects) were retrospectively analyzed and compared with the available data from the EORTC/NCIC trial.

Results In this single-center retrospective study, we identified 189 patients (116 men, 73 women; median age: 62 years) who were treated according to the EORTC/NCIC trial protocol. A total of 176 patients received cytoreductive surgery; 13 patients had stereotactic biopsy only (EORTC/NCIC trial: 239 patients and 48 patients, respectively). Radiotherapy had to be interrupted in 9 patients (5%) (EORTC/NCIC trial: 15 patients [5%]) and concomitant chemotherapy in 26 patients (14%) (EORTC/NCIC trial: 37 patients [13%]). In 156 patients (83%), adjuvant TMZ chemotherapy was initiated (6 median temozolomide [TMZ] cycles; range: 1–30). In the EORTC/NCIC trial, 223 patients (47%) received the intermittent chemotherapy protocol (median: 3 cycles; range: 1–7). Overall, 97 patients (62%) completed 6 TMZ cycles (EORTC/NCIC-trial: 105 patients [47%]); dose escalation to 200 mg/qm at the second cycle was performed in 91 patients (58%) (versus 149 patients [67%]). Intermittent TMZ therapy was discontinued in 59 patients (38%) (versus 118 patients [53%]). Median overall survival in our patient cohort was 19 months (versus 14.6 months); median time to progression was 9 months (versus 6.9 months).

Conclusion Comparison between the feasibility of the treatment protocol established by the EORTC/NCIC trial (performed within the setting of a prospective randomized trial) and the daily routine in a dedicated neurosurgical neuro-oncologic department demonstrates that the protocol is suitable for daily practice within a neurosurgical unit.

  • References

  • 1 Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ , et al; European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumor and Radiotherapy Groups; National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 2005; 352 (10) 987-996
  • 2 Picot J, Cooper K, Bryant J, Clegg AJ. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bortezomib and thalidomide in combination regimens with an alkylating agent and a corticosteroid for the first-line treatment of multiple myeloma: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2011; 15 (41) 1-204
  • 3 Kumar N, Kumar P, Angurana SL , et al. Evaluation of outcome and prognostic factors in patients of glioblastoma multiforme: A single institution experience. J Neurosci Rural Pract 2013; 4 (Suppl. 01) S46-S55
  • 4 Michaelsen SR, Christensen IJ, Grunnet K , et al. Clinical variables serve as prognostic factors in a model for survival from glioblastoma multiforme: an observational study of a cohort of consecutive non-selected patients from a single institution. BMC Cancer 2013; 13: 402
  • 5 Stummer W, Kamp MA. The importance of surgical resection in malignant glioma. Curr Opin Neurol 2009; 22 (6) 645-649
  • 6 Macdonald DR, Cascino TL, Schold Jr SC, Cairncross JG. Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8 (7) 1277-1280
  • 7 van den Bent MJ, Wefel JS, Schiff D , et al. Response assessment in neuro-oncology (a report of the RANO group): assessment of outcome in trials of diffuse low-grade gliomas. Lancet Oncol 2011; 12 (6) 583-593
  • 8 Wen PY, Macdonald DR, Reardon DA , et al. Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28 (11) 1963-1972