Cited by 862Glioma Diagnosis and TreatmentElectromagnetic Fields and Biological EffectsMathematical Biology Tumor Growth

NovoTTF-100A versus physician’s choice chemotherapy in recurrent glioblastoma: A randomised phase III trial of a novel treatment modality

Open access
Stupp, Roger, Wong, Eric T., Kanner, Andrew A., Steinberg, David, Engelhard, Herbert, Heidecke, Volkmar, Kirson, Eilon D., Taillibert, Sophie +27 more·2012·European Journal of Cancer

Abstract

PURPOSE: NovoTTF-100A is a portable device delivering low-intensity, intermediate frequency electric fields via non-invasive, transducer arrays. Tumour Treatment Fields (TTF), a completely new therapeutic modality in cancer treatment, physically interfere with cell division. METHODS: Phase III trial of chemotherapy-free treatment of NovoTTF (20-24h/day) versus active chemotherapy in the treatment of patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Primary end-point was improvement of overall survival. RESULTS: Patients (median age 54 years (range 23-80), Karnofsky performance status 80% (range 50-100) were randomised to TTF alone (n=120) or active chemotherapy control (n=117). Number of prior treatments was two (range 1-6). Median survival was 6.6 versus 6.0 months (hazard ratio 0.86 [95% CI 0.66-1.12]; p=0.27), 1-year survival rate was 20% and 20%, progression-free survival rate at 6 months was 21.4% and 15.1% (p=0.13), respectively in TTF and active control patients. Responses were more common in the TTF arm (14% versus 9.6%, p=0.19). The TTF-related adverse events were mild (14%) to moderate (2%) skin rash beneath the transducer arrays. Severe adverse events occurred in 6% and 16% (p=0.022) of patients treated with TTF and chemotherapy, respectively. Quality of life analyses favoured TTF therapy in most domains. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first controlled trial evaluating an entirely novel cancer treatment modality delivering electric fields rather than chemotherapy. No improvement in overall survival was demonstrated, however efficacy and activity with this chemotherapy-free treatment device appears comparable to chemotherapy regimens that are commonly used for recurrent glioblastoma. Toxicity and quality of life clearly favoured TTF.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.04.011

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the EF-11 trial, a number of patients were discontinued from TTFields therapy very early (after less than 1 month) presumably due to absence of a treatment response rather than true tumor progression based on skepticism of the investigators.

    “A number of patients were discontinued from TTFields therapy very early (after <1 month of therapy), presumably due to absence of a treatment response (rather than true tumor progression) based on skepticism of the investigators.”
  • The EF-11 trial showed objective responses with TTFields alone in 14% of patients compared with 9.6% in the control arm.

    “Still it showed objective responses with TTFields alone in 14% of patients compared with 9.6% in the control arm.”
  • In the EF-11 trial, there were no differences in global health and social functioning between patients treated with TTFields and patients treated with chemotherapy.

    “In the EF-11 trial, there were no differences in global health and social functioning between patients treated with TTFields or chemotherapy.”
  • In the EF-11 trial, cognitive and emotional functioning was higher in the TTFields group than in the chemotherapy group.

    “In fact, cognitive and emotional functioning was higher in the TTFields group than in the chemotherapy group.16”
  • In recurrent glioblastoma, TTFields did not demonstrate improved outcome compared with best physicians' choice chemotherapy.

    “In recurrent disease, the trial has not demonstrated improved outcome compared best physicians’ choice chemotherapy.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stupp, R., Wong, E. T., Kanner, A. A., Steinberg, D., Engelhard, H., Heidecke, V., Kirson, E. D., Taillibert, S., Liebermann, F., Dbalý, V., Ram, Z., Villano, J. L., Rainov, N., Weinberg, U., Schiff, D., Kunschner, L., Raizer, J., Honnorat, J., Sloan, A., Malkin, M., Landolfi, J. C., Payer, F., Mehdorn, M., Weil, R. J., Pannullo, S. C., Westphal, M., Smrcka, M., Chin, L., Kostron, H., Hofer, S., Bruce, J., Cosgrove, R., Paleologous, N., Palti, Y., & Gutin, P. H.
Affiliations
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CH)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center (IL)
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
  • Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital (FR)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • University of Virginia (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • University Hospitals of Cleveland (US)
  • Medical College of Wisconsin (US)
  • John F. Kennedy Medical Center (US)
  • University of Graz (AT)
  • Cleveland Clinic (US)
  • Cornell University (US)
  • Universität Hamburg (DE)
  • Boston University (US)
  • Universität Innsbruck (AT)
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Tufts University (US)
  • Endeavor Health (US)
  • Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
Venue
European Journal of Cancer
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-09
Volume
48
Issue
14
Pages
2192-2202
ISSN
0959-8049 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2149768128
Cited by
862
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 82 · 2023: 75 · 2022: 89 · 2021: 77 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 69 · 2018: 75 · 2017: 58 · 2016: 65 · 2015: 56 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 6
FWCI
17.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biophysics › Electromagnetic Fields and Biological Effects
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › Mathematical Biology Tumor Growth
Keywords
electric field treatment, recurrent glioblastoma, chemotherapy-free treatment, overall survival, progression-free survival, treatment-related adverse events, quality of life, transducer array
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antineoplastic Agents, Brain Neoplasms, Electric Stimulation Therapy, Europe, Female, Glioblastoma, Humans, Israel, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local, Quality of Life, Risk Factors, Time Factors, United States, Proportional Hazards Models, Treatment Outcome, Karnofsky Performance Status, Risk Assessment, Disease-Free Survival, Kaplan-Meier Estimate, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review