HEALTH PROFESSIONAL · SOURCE READING
Radiation therapy
Source: Childhood Astrocytomas, Other Gliomas, and Glioneuronal/Neuronal Tumors Treatment (PDQ®)–Health Professional Version, National Cancer Institute.
Source updated: April 14, 2025 · Captured 2026-09-09.
Selected source text with whitespace normalised. This Triangle page is not an NCI PDQ summary.
Radiation therapy is usually reserved for patients with disease that does not durably respond to chemotherapy.[21,22,42,43]
For children with low-grade gliomas for whom radiation therapy is indicated, approaches that contour the radiation distribution to the tumor and avoid normal brain tissue (3-D conformal radiation therapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), stereotactic radiation therapy, and proton radiation therapy [charged-particle radiation therapy]) can reduce the acute and long-term toxicities associated with these modalities.[44,45]; [46][Level of evidence C2] Radiation doses of 54 Gy in 1.8 Gy fractions are typically used.[47,48] In a prospective study of 174 patients treated with proton therapy, the 5-year actuarial rate of local control was 85% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78%–90%), the PFS rate was 84% (95% CI, 77%–89%), and the OS rate was 92% (95% CI, 85%–95%). Brain stem and spinal cord tumor locations and a dose of 54 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) or less were associated with inferior local control (P < .01 for both).[49] In a separate study that included 100 patients with WHO grade 2 diffuse gliomas, a subset of patients (n = 16) were treated with radiation therapy. These patients had a 5-year PFS rate of 74% when patients with histone H3 variants were excluded.[14][Level of evidence B4]
Subsequent to radiation therapy administration, care must be taken to distinguish radiation-induced imaging changes, termed pseudoprogression or spurious progression,[50] from disease progression. The peak time to radiation therapy–induced imaging changes, often presenting as an apparent enlargement of the irradiated mass, is 4 to 6 months, but they can manifest even later.[51-54]; [55,56][Level of evidence B4]; [8,57,58][Level of evidence C2] In a report of 83 patients with low-grade astrocytomas, pseudoprogression was more common after radiation doses of higher than 50.4 Gy (RBE) (hazard ratio [HR], 2.61; P = .16). Pseudoprogression was also more common after proton radiation therapy than after photon IMRT (HR, 2.15; P = .048), presumably because of increased effects on the vasculature. Patients with pilocytic histology had lower rates of pseudoprogression than those with nonpilocytic low-grade gliomas (HR, 0.47; P = .037). There was no association with overall disease control.[50]
A report from the SIOP-LGG 2004 (NCT00276640) study and LGG-registry cohorts evaluated the following radiological criteria for pseudoprogression:[59]
Source links and citations
Increasing total tumor–associated T2 lesion.
Increasing focal tumor–associated T2 lesion.
Increasing contrast-enhancing tumor in the first 24 months after radiation therapy.
The following results were observed:
Definite pseudoprogression was radiologically determined in 54 of 136 patients (39.7%) without differences in frequency between radiation therapy modalities: iodine-interstitial radiation therapy (22 of 48 patients) versus photon radiation therapy (24 of 54 patients) versus proton-beam radiation therapy (11 of 20 patients) (P = .780).
Definite pseudoprogression occurred at median 6.3 months (iodine-interstitial radiation therapy, 7.2 months; photon radiation therapy, 4.4 months; proton-beam radiation therapy, 6.5 months) after radiation therapy initiation and persisted for a median of 7.2 months (iodine-interstitial radiation therapy, 8.5 months; photon radiation therapy, 7 months; proton-beam radiation therapy, 7.4 months).
Appearance of necrosis within the focal tumor–associated T2 lesion proved to be a relevant predictor of definite pseudoprogression (P < .001).
Radiation therapy results in long-term radiographic disease control for most children with chiasmatic and posterior pathway chiasmatic gliomas. However, despite radiological control, visual outcomes are variable.
A study from St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital reported on long-term visual acuity outcomes after radiation therapy. For the worse eye, the 5-year cumulative incidence of visual acuity decline was 17.9% and improvement was 13.5%. For the better eye, the 5-year cumulative incidence of visual acuity decline was 11.5% and improvement was 10.6%. After radiation therapy, most patients had stabilization of their vision. Visual change after radiation therapy was most likely to occur within 2 years, supporting the importance of visual assessments during this period.[60]
Source links and citations
Another study of 38 patients (mean age, 3 years; median follow-up, 8.5 years) with optic pathway gliomas treated between 2000 and 2018 complemented the previous data on preservation of long-term visual acuity. For patients treated with early radiation therapy (either up-front or as first salvage), blindness-free survival rates were 100% at 5 and 8 years. In comparison, blindness-free survival rates were 81% at 5 years and 60% at 8 years for patients treated primarily with chemotherapy.[61]
Source links and citations
Other sequelae include intellectual and endocrinologic deterioration, cerebrovascular damage, late death, and possibly an increased risk of secondary tumors.[62-64]; [56][Level of evidence B4] A population-based study identified radiation therapy as the most significant risk factor associated with late mortality, although the patients who required radiation therapy may have reflected a higher-risk population.[64]
Source links and citations
The management of unresectable circumscribed astrocytic gliomas, pediatric-type diffuse low-grade gliomas, glioneuronal tumors, and neuronal tumors is controversial. To identify negative prognostic features in patients treated with radiation therapy, the St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital assessed 150 children (median age, 8 years; range, 1.2–20 years) who received radiation therapy and were monitored for a median of 11.4 years (range, 0.24–29.4 years). Recursive positioning analysis yielded low-risk and high-risk prognostic groups. The 10-year OS rate was 95.6% for patients in the low-risk group, versus 76.4% for patients in the high-risk group. Low-risk tumors included pilocytic astrocytoma/ganglioglioma located outside of the midbrain/thalamus, while high-risk tumors included diffuse astrocytoma or those located in the midbrain/thalamus. Within the high-risk group of patients, delayed radiation therapy (defined as after at least one line of chemotherapy) was associated with a decrement in OS.[65]
Source links and citations
Children with NF1 may be at higher risk of radiation-associated secondary tumors and morbidity resulting from vascular changes. Radiation therapy is used as a last resort in these patients, given the heightened risk of inducing neurological toxic effects and second malignancy.[66]
Source links and citations
Studies cited in this source section
Source citation is not a determination that a study applies to you.
Publication references
Read the original reference and check its publication notices.
- PubMed 10072056 · Original source
- PubMed 11597812 · Original source
- PubMed 14673044 · Original source
- PubMed 18612049 · Original source
- PubMed 19468692 · Original source
- PubMed 19581535 · Original source
- PubMed 19581536 · Original source
- PubMed 22019245 · Original source
- PubMed 22237949 · Original source
- PubMed 22942186 · Original source
- PubMed 23633429 · Original source
- PubMed 23831852 · Original source
- PubMed 25035209 · Original source
- PubMed 25213668 · Original source
- PubMed 26970559 · Original source
- PubMed 29280458 · Original source
- PubMed 30419305 · Original source
- PubMed 30684665 · Original source
- PubMed 30753704 · Original source
- PubMed 31414376 · Original source
- PubMed 31498029 · Original source
- PubMed 32052049 · Original source
- PubMed 32239677 · Original source
- PubMed 33739455 · Original source
- PubMed 34933039 · Original source
- PubMed 8420869 · Original source
Preserved source evidence · Not medical advice
Triangle