1
|
Fadul CE, Sheehan JP, Silvestre J, Bonilla G, Bovi JA, Ahluwalia M, Soffietti R, Hui D, Anderson RT. Defining the quality of interdisciplinary care for patients with brain metastases: modified Delphi panel recommendations. Lancet Oncol 2024; 25:e432-e440. [PMID: 39214114 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00198-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2024] [Revised: 03/21/2024] [Accepted: 04/04/2024] [Indexed: 09/04/2024]
Abstract
The value of interdisciplinary teams in improving outcomes and quality of care of patients with brain metastases remains uncertain, partly due to the lack of consensus on key indicators to evaluate interprofessional care. We aimed to obtain expert consensus across disciplines on indicators that evaluate the quality and value of brain metastases care. A steering committee of key opinion leaders curated relevant outcomes and process indicators from a literature review and a stakeholder needs assessment, and an international panel of physicians rated the outcomes and process indicators using a modified Delphi method. After three rounds, a consensus was reached on 29 indicators encompassing brain-directed oncological treatment, surgery, whole-brain radiotherapy, stereotactic radiosurgery, supportive or palliative care, and interdisciplinary team care. The Brain Metastases Quality-of-Care measure reflects the value and quality of brain metastases team-based care according to treatment modality and provides a benchmark of care for this under-studied patient population. The adoption, implementation, and sustainability of this set of indicators could help address the need expressed by patients with cancer, caregivers, and clinicians for more coordinated care across inpatient, outpatient, home, community, and tertiary academic settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Camilo E Fadul
- Department of Neurology, Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
| | - Jason P Sheehan
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Julio Silvestre
- Department of Palliative Care, Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, USA
| | - Gloribel Bonilla
- University of Virginia Comprehensive Cancer Center, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Joseph A Bovi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
| | - Manmeet Ahluwalia
- Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Riccardo Soffietti
- Department of Neuroscience, Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of Turin and City of Health and Science University Hospital, Turin, Italy
| | - David Hui
- Department of Palliative Care, Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Roger T Anderson
- University of Virginia Comprehensive Cancer Center, Charlottesville, VA, USA; Department of Public Health, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gleim N, Rühle A, Heider S, Nägler F, Giordano F, Combs S, Becker J, Niyazi M, Grosu A, Nicolay N, Seidel C. Neuroprotection in radiotherapy of brain metastases: A pattern-of-care analysis in Germany, Austria and Switzerland by the German Society for radiation Oncology - working group Neuro-Radio-Oncology (DEGRO AG-NRO). Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 47:100783. [PMID: 38706724 PMCID: PMC11063589 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100783] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2024] [Revised: 04/14/2024] [Accepted: 04/20/2024] [Indexed: 05/07/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Many patients with solid tumors develop brain metastases (BM). With more patients surviving long-term, preservation of neurocognitive function gains importance. In recent years, several methods to delay cognitive deterioration have been tested in clinical trials. However, knowledge on the extent to which these neuroprotective strategies have been implemented in clinical practice is missing. Materials and methods We performed an online survey regarding treatment patterns of BM in German-speaking countries, focused on the use of neuroprotective approaches. The survey was distributed among radiation oncologists (ROs) registered within the database of the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). Results Physicians of 78 centers participated in the survey. Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is still preferred by 70 % of ROs over stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) in patients with 6-10 BM. For 4-5 BM WBRT is preferred by 23 % of ROs. The fraction of ROs using hippocampal sparing (HS) in WBRT has increased to 89 %, although the technique is used on a regular basis only by a minority (26 %). The drug memantine is not widely prescribed (14% of ROs). A trend was observed for university hospitals to implement neuroprotective approaches more frequently. Conclusion There is considerable heterogeneity regarding the treatment of BM in German-speaking countries and a general standard of care is lacking. Neuroprotective strategies are not yet standard approaches in daily clinical routine, although usage is increasing. Further clinical trials, as well as improvement of technical opportunities and reimbursement, might further shift the treatment landscape towards neuroprotective radiation treatments in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N. Gleim
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Central Germany, Partner Site Leipzig, Liebigstraße 22, Leipzig, Germany
| | - A. Rühle
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Central Germany, Partner Site Leipzig, Liebigstraße 22, Leipzig, Germany
| | - S. Heider
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Central Germany, Partner Site Leipzig, Liebigstraße 22, Leipzig, Germany
| | - F. Nägler
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Central Germany, Partner Site Leipzig, Liebigstraße 22, Leipzig, Germany
| | - F.A. Giordano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany
- DKFZ Hector Cancer Institute, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, Heidelberg, Germany
- Mannheim Institute for Intelligent Systems in Medicine (MIiSM), Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany
| | - S.E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - J. Becker
- Department of Radiotherapy and Special Oncology, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, Hannover, Germany
| | - M. Niyazi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Straße 3, Tübingen, Germany
- Center for Neuro-Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center Tübingen-Stuttgart, University Hospital Tübingen, Herrenbergerstraße 23, Tübingen, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tübingen, A Partnership between DKFZ and University Hospital Tübingen, Auf der Morgenstelle 15, Tübingen, Germany
| | - A.L. Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Freiburg - Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 3, Freiburg, Germany
| | - N.H. Nicolay
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Central Germany, Partner Site Leipzig, Liebigstraße 22, Leipzig, Germany
| | - C. Seidel
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Central Germany, Partner Site Leipzig, Liebigstraße 22, Leipzig, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Buczek D, Zaucha R, Jassem J. Neurotoxicity-sparing radiotherapy for brain metastases in breast cancer: a narrative review. Front Oncol 2024; 13:1215426. [PMID: 38370347 PMCID: PMC10869626 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1215426] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2023] [Accepted: 12/19/2023] [Indexed: 02/20/2024] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer brain metastasis (BCBM) has a devastating impact on patient survival, cognitive function and quality of life. Radiotherapy remains the standard management of BM but may result in considerable neurotoxicity. Herein, we describe the current knowledge on methods for reducing radiation-induced cognitive dysfunction in patients with BCBM. A better understanding of the biology and molecular underpinnings of BCBM, as well as more sophisticated prognostic models and individualized treatment approaches, have appeared to enable more effective neuroprotection. The therapeutic armamentarium has expanded from surgery and whole-brain radiotherapy to stereotactic radiosurgery, targeted therapies and immunotherapies, used sequentially or in combination. Advances in neuroimaging have allowed more accurate screening for intracranial metastases, precise targeting of intracranial lesions and the differentiation of the effects of treatment from disease progression. The availability of numerous treatment options for patients with BCBM and multidisciplinary approaches have led to personalized treatment and improved therapeutic outcomes. Ongoing studies may define the optimal sequencing of available and emerging treatment options for patients with BCBM.
Collapse
|
4
|
Lee CK, Soon YY, Jeffree RL, Joshi R, Koh ES, Lam WS, Le H, Lwin Z, Pinkham MB, Siva S, Ng E, John T. Management Paradigm of Central Nervous System Metastases in NSCLC: An Australian Perspective. JTO Clin Res Rep 2023; 4:100553. [PMID: 37663675 PMCID: PMC10472312 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtocrr.2023.100553] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2022] [Revised: 07/05/2023] [Accepted: 07/21/2023] [Indexed: 09/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Life-prolonging central nervous system active systemic therapies for metastatic NSCLC have increased the complexity of managing brain metastases (BMs). Australian medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and neurosurgeons discussed the evidence guiding the diverse clinical approaches to the management of BM in NSCLC. The Australian context is broadly applicable to other jurisdictions; therefore, we have documented these discussions as principles with broader applications. Patient management was stratified according to clinical and radiologic factors under two broad classifications of newly diagnosed BMs: symptomatic and asymptomatic. Other important considerations include the number and location of metastases, tumor histotypes, molecular subtype, and treatment purpose. Careful consideration of the pace and burden of symptoms, risk of worsening neurologic function at a short interval, and extracranial disease burden should determine whether central nervous system active systemic therapies are used alone or in combination with local therapies (surgery with or without radiation therapy). Most clinical trial evidence currently focuses on historical treatment options or a single treatment modality rather than the optimal sequencing of multiple modern therapies; therefore, an individualized approach is key in a rapidly changing therapeutic landscape.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chee Khoon Lee
- National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Yu Yang Soon
- National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National University Cancer Institute Singapore, National University Hospital, Singapore
| | - Rosalind L. Jeffree
- Kenneth G Jamieson Department of Neurosurgery, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia
| | - Rohit Joshi
- Medical Oncology, Lyell McEwin Hospital, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
- Allied Health & Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
- Adelaide Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medical Science, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Eng-Siew Koh
- Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centres, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Wei-Sen Lam
- Department of Medical Oncology, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Hien Le
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, South Australia, Australia
| | - Zarnie Lwin
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia
- Department of Medical Oncology, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Mark B. Pinkham
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia
- The Radiation Oncology Centre, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Shankar Siva
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Evan Ng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Thomas John
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Memantine in the Prevention of Radiation-Induced Brain Damage: A Narrative Review. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14112736. [PMID: 35681716 PMCID: PMC9179311 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14112736] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2022] [Revised: 05/25/2022] [Accepted: 05/30/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Decline in cognitive function is a major problem for patients undergoing whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT). Scientific interest has increased due to the high dropout rate of patients in the first months after WBRT and the early onset of cognitive decline. Therefore, the study of antiglutamatergic pharmacological prophylaxis and hippocampal-sparing WBRT techniques has been deepened based on the knowledge of the mechanisms of hyperglutamatergic neurotoxicity and the role of some hippocampal areas in cognitive decline. In order to provide a summary of the evidence in this field, and to foster future research in this setting, this literature review presents current evidence on the prevention of radiation-induced cognitive decline and particularly on the role of memantine. Abstract Preserving cognitive functions is a priority for most patients with brain metastases. Knowing the mechanisms of hyperglutamatergic neurotoxicity and the role of some hippocampal areas in cognitive decline (CD) led to testing both the antiglutamatergic pharmacological prophylaxis and hippocampal-sparing whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) techniques. These studies showed a relative reduction in CD four to six months after WBRT. However, the failure to achieve statistical significance in one study that tested memantine alone (RTOG 0614) led to widespread skepticism about this drug in the WBRT setting. Moreover, interest grew in the reasons for the strong patient dropout rates in the first few months after WBRT and for early CD onset. In fact, the latter can only partially be explained by subclinical tumor progression. An emerging interpretation of the (not only) cognitive impairment during and immediately after WBRT is the dysfunction of the limbic and hypothalamic system with its immune and hormonal consequences. This new understanding of WBRT-induced toxicity may represent the basis for further innovative trials. These studies should aim to: (i) evaluate in greater detail the cognitive effects and, more generally, the quality of life impairment during and immediately after WBRT; (ii) study the mechanisms producing these early effects; (iii) test in clinical studies, the modern and advanced WBRT techniques based on both hippocampal-sparing and hypothalamic-pituitary-sparing, currently evaluated only in planning studies; (iv) test new timings of antiglutamatergic drugs administration aimed at preventing not only late toxicity but also acute effects.
Collapse
|
6
|
Li AY, Gaebe K, Jerzak KJ, Cheema PK, Sahgal A, Das S. Intracranial Metastatic Disease: Present Challenges, Future Opportunities. Front Oncol 2022; 12:855182. [PMID: 35330715 PMCID: PMC8940535 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.855182] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2022] [Accepted: 02/16/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Intracranial metastatic disease (IMD) is a prevalent complication of cancer that significantly limits patient survival and quality of life. Over the past half-century, our understanding of the epidemiology and pathogenesis of IMD has improved and enabled the development of surveillance and treatment algorithms based on prognostic factors and tumor biomolecular characteristics. In addition to advances in surgical resection and radiation therapy, the treatment of IMD has evolved to include monoclonal antibodies and small molecule antagonists of tumor-promoting proteins or endogenous immune checkpoint inhibitors. Moreover, improvements in the sensitivity and specificity of imaging as well as the development of new serological assays to detect brain metastases promise to revolutionize IMD diagnosis. In this review, we will explore current treatment principles in patients with IMD, including the emerging role of targeted and immunotherapy in select primary cancers, and discuss potential areas for further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alyssa Y Li
- Institute of Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Karolina Gaebe
- Institute of Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Katarzyna J Jerzak
- Institute of Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Parneet K Cheema
- Division of Oncology, William Osler Health System, Brampton, ON, Canada
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Institute of Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Sunit Das
- Institute of Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Division of Neurosurgery, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Surendran HP, Narmadha MP, Kalavagunta S, Sasidharan A, Dutta D. Preservation of cognitive function after brain irradiation. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2022:10781552221077037. [PMID: 35112915 DOI: 10.1177/10781552221077037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Approximately 50-90% of brain metastatic patients who receive radiation therapy (RT) exhibit cognitive decline which may affects the quality of life of cancer survivors. Hence preservation of cognitive functions in brain metastatic patients becomes important. This review aims to evaluates the pathology or mechanism of cognitive function impairment after brain irradiation and strategies available to preserve cognitive function after radiation therapy. DATA SOURCES Published articles evaluating the pathology behind radiation induced cognitive impairment and strategies to resolve or preserve cognitive impairment were searched for in scientific databases (eg: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane database, Google scholar) using keywords including memantine, brain metastases, radiation therapy, pathophysiology, pathogenesis, mechanism and prevention. DATA SUMMARY Several hypotheses have been offered to explain the mechanism of radiation induced cognitive decline. Among them, vascular hypotheses play a significant role. Some pharmacological agents have been also tested in patients receiving radiotherapy, memantine was found beneficial based with the reference to existing data. CONCLUSION Future studies are required to evaluate the impact of memantine in different types of radiation therapy procedures and its effects on quality of life of brain metastatic survivors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - M P Narmadha
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, Amrita School of Pharmacy, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, India
| | - Sruthi Kalavagunta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, 29286Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, India
| | - Ajay Sasidharan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, 29286Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, India
| | - Debnarayan Dutta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, 29286Amrita Institute of Medical Science, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, India
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
An Updated Review on Memantine Efficacy in Reducing Cognitive Dysfunction of Whole-brain Irradiation for Adult Patients with Brain metastasis. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER MANAGEMENT 2021. [DOI: 10.5812/ijcm.111966] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Context: Increased survival of patients with cancer raises the need to pay attention to long-term side effects. Patients with brain metastasis experienced cognition failure after whole-brain radiotherapy. This review aimed at concluding the efficacy of Memantine in preserving cognitive function by reducing the brain toxicity of whole-brain radiotherapy for metastatic brain cancers. Evidence Acquisition: Published studies evaluating memantine protective effects during brain metastasis radiotherapy were searched for in scientific databases (e.g., Embase, PubMed, Cochrane database, Google Scholar, Scopus) using keywords including whole-brain radiotherapy and Memantine. Results: A total of 4 prospective clinical trials were included in the review. Effects of Memantine on cognition tests were evaluated in these trials. A significantly better Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R) delayed recognition at months 6 was achieved in RTOG 0614 and NRG CC001. Longer time to cognitive decline was found in the memantine arm of the RTOG trial and was statistically significant. Memantine effects were not statistically significant before 2 months. Conclusions: It seems reasonable to consider Memantine during radiation to prevent long-term cognitive failure in patients with brain metastasis due to the current results. Memantine improves cognition function during whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) without adding irreparable complications.
Collapse
|
9
|
Chilukuri S, Burela N. Memantine for Prevention of Brain Irradiation-Induced Cognitive Toxicity: A Tale of an Underappreciated and Underused Intervention. JCO Glob Oncol 2020; 6:1384-1388. [PMID: 32926643 PMCID: PMC7529526 DOI: 10.1200/go.20.00342] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Srinivas Chilukuri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Apollo Proton Cancer Centre, Chennai, India
| | - Nagarjuna Burela
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Apollo Proton Cancer Centre, Chennai, India
| |
Collapse
|