Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2026
O-(2-[
Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01252459 (Amino-acid PET Versus MRI Guided Re-irradiation in Patients With Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme - a Randomised Phase II Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Amino-acid PET Versus MRI Guided Re-irradiation in Patients With Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme - a Randomised Phase II Trial
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Volumetric discordance between ¹⁸F-FET-PET/MRI and MRI-based radiotherapy target volumes in high-grade glioma: a prospective pilot study (FETSMaRT).Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Trial
- PET|MR Open Source Radiomics Models for Treatment Outcome Prediction in Recurrent GBM.Cancers · 2026Article
- FET-PETTranslational cancer research · 2026Article
- Multimodal PET-MR segmentation for glioblastoma: complementarity for treatment planning and recurrence definition.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026Article
- [Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Article
- FET PET Does Not Improve Outcomes Compared with MRI for Re-Irradiation of Recurrent Glioblastoma: GLIAA/NOA-10 ARO2013-01 Trial.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2026Article
- A multicenter analysis of prognostic factors for patients undergoing re-irradiation for recurrent glioblastoma.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on byFET-PET2026
Authors and funding
29 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundO-(2-[
methodsGLIAA was a multicentre, open-label, parallel randomised study done in 15 radiation oncology centres in Germany. Patients aged 18 years or older with a Karnofsky performance score greater than 60% and a macroscopic WHO grade IV recurrent glioblastoma (1-6 cm) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either FET-PET-based or CE-T1MRI-based target volume delineation followed by re-irradiation with 39 Gy in 13 fractions. Randomisation was performed centrally, using a minimisation technique with a random element and a computer-assisted randomisation tool, stratified by time since first radiotherapy, previous chemotherapy, tumour diameter, MGMT status, and planned chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival from randomisation, assessed in the per-protocol population (patients who initiated treatment per their assigned group). Adverse events were systematically assessed in all patients who commenced therapy. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01252459), German Clinical Trials Registry (DRKS00000634), and European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT 2012-001121-27), and is completed.
findingsBetween Nov 22, 2013, and Aug 18, 2021, 271 patients were recruited and screened for eligibility, 200 of whom were randomly assigned to re-irradiation based on FET-PET (n=100) or CE-T1MRI (n=100). 85 (43%) participants were female and 115 (58%) were male. 98 patients in the FET-PET group and 97 in the CE-T1MRI group were treated per protocol. Median follow-up for censored patients was 12·2 months (IQR 6·6-20·7). Median progression-free survival was 4·0 months (95% CI 3·7-5·2) in the FET-PET group and 4·9 months (3·7-6·0) in the CE-T1MRI group (one-sided stratified log-rank p=0·98; adjusted hazard ratio 1·14 [95% CI 0·85-1·52]; p=0·39; median follow-up for six censored patients 4·1 months [IQR 2·3-6·6]). The most common grade 3-4 adverse event was radionecrosis (eight [8%] of 99 in the FET-PET group vs seven [7%] of 99 in the CE-T1MRI group). Acute and subacute serious adverse events occurred in 15 (15%) of 99 patients in each group; possibly re-irradiation-related late serious adverse events occurred in ten (10%) of 97 patients in the FET-PET group and 18 (19%) of 96 in the CE-T1MRI group. There were no treatment-related deaths.
interpretationFET-PET-based target volume delineation for re-irradiation did not lead to a significant clinical benefit compared with CE-T1MRI-based treatment in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Thus, CE-T1MRI remains the preferred delineation method in this setting.
fundingDeutsche Krebshilfe.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41429128What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.