The proportion of Grade IV MGMT un-methylated patients that experience confirmed-progression-free survival at 6 months (CPFS6). Progression is defined by any of the following:

• ≥25% increase in the sum of products of perpendicular diameters of enhancing lesions compared to the smallest tumor measurement obtained either at baseline or best response, on stable or increasing doses of corticosteroids
• Significant increase in T2/FLAIR non-enhancing lesion on stable or increasing doses of corticosteroids compared to baseline scan or best response following initiation of therapy, not due to co-morbid events
• Any new lesion
• Clear clinical deterioration not attributable to other causes apart from the tumor or changes in corticosteroid dose.
• Failure to return for evaluation due to death or deteriorating condition
• Clear progression of non-measurable disease

All Grade IV MGMT un-methylated patients meeting eligibility criteria who have signed a consent form and who have begun treatment with 18F-DOPA PET image-guided dose escalation RT will be evaluable for the endpoint.

The median survival time and 95%CI will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier.

All eligible patients were included in analysis.

The median progression-free survival time and 95%CI will be estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier.

All patients eligible for analysis were included

The MDASI-BT consists of 28 questions. Twenty-two questions are related to severity of symptoms over the last 24 hours and are answered on a scale of 0-10 where 0=not present and10=as bad as you can imagine. The remaining 6 questions are related to how symptoms have interfered with daily life over the past 24 hours and are answered on a scale of 0-10 where 0=did not interfere and 10=interfered completely. Higher scores indicate greater severity of symptoms and greater interference with daily life. Analysis will include median change percent from baseline.

Patients that completed an assessment at baseline and at the first MRI assessment were included in analysis

Adverse events graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0

Late treatment-related toxicities will be assessed using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) European Organization for Research and the Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) toxicity criteria.

The concordance correlation coefficient will be used to measure agreement between volumes generated with each method, as well as to evaluate inter-observer variability, where variability associated with magnetic resonance imaging will serve as the standard for comparison.

The concordance correlation coefficient will be used to measure agreement between volumes generated with each method, as well as to evaluate inter-observer variability, where variability associated with magnetic resonance imaging will serve as the standard for comparison.

Paired t-test statistical analysis will be performed to determine if any differences exist and the level of statistical significance between treatment volumes defined by magnetic resonance imaging only and treatment volumes defined with both positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging information. The analysis of volumes from 72 grade IV patients will have 90% power to detect differences in volumes with an effect size of 0.39 using a paired t-test with a 0.05 two-sided significance level. Alternate metrics for comparison will also be assessed, including spatial overlap, distanc

Chi-square tests of proportions will be used to test for differences in the proportions of patients with central, in-field, marginal, or distant failures between the patients on this study and historical controls.

Compared by identifying the recurrence volume with each modality and correlating with identification of aggressive disease in the pre-radiation therapy planning images.

Paired t-test statistical analysis will be performed to determine if any differences exist and the level of statistical significance between treatment volumes defined by magnetic resonance imaging only and treatment volumes defined with both positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging information.

Paired t-test statistical analysis will be performed to determine if any differences exist and the level of statistical significance between treatment volumes defined by magnetic resonance imaging only and treatment volumes defined with both positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging information. The analysis of volumes from 72 grade IV patients will have 90% power to detect differences in volumes with an effect size of 0.39 using a paired t-test with a 0.05 two-sided significance level. Alternate metrics for comparison will also be assessed, including spatial overlap, distan

The progression identification timing will be compared by calculating the percentage of time each modality was earlier than conventional magnetic resonance imaging. With a sample size of 72, if the observed percentage earlier than conventional magnetic resonance imaging is 30% for either modality, a two-sided 95% confidence interval for a single proportion using the large sample normal approximation will be +/- 10.6%. Progression identification timing will also be compared using Kaplan-Meier methods and paired t-tests to determine if differences exist between the modalities.

Progression identification timing will be compared using Kaplan-Meier methods and paired t-tests to determine if differences exist between the modalities. An exploratory analysis of diffusion tensor imaging for detecting invasive non-enhancing tumor recurrence will also be performed.