1
|
Hahnemann L, Krämer A, Fink C, Jungk C, Thomas M, Christopoulos P, Lischalk J, Meis J, Hörner-Rieber J, Eichkorn T, Deng M, Lang K, Paul A, Meixner E, Weykamp F, Debus J, König L. Fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy of intracranial postoperative cavities after resection of brain metastases - Clinical outcome and prognostic factors. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 46:100782. [PMID: 38694237 PMCID: PMC11061678 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100782] [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: 10/21/2023] [Revised: 04/17/2024] [Accepted: 04/20/2024] [Indexed: 05/04/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and Purpose After surgical resection of brain metastases (BM), radiotherapy (RT) is indicated. Postoperative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) reduces the risk of local progression and neurocognitive decline compared to whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT). Aside from the optimal dose and fractionation, little is known about the combination of systemic therapy and postoperative fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (fSRT), especially regarding tumour control and toxicity. Methods In this study, 105 patients receiving postoperative fSRT with 35 Gy in 7 fractions performed with Cyberknife were retrospectively reviewed. Overall survival (OS), local control (LC) and total intracranial brain control (TIBC) were analysed via Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify prognostic factors. Results Median follow-up was 20.8 months. One-year TIBC was 61.6% and one-year LC was 98.6%. Median OS was 28.7 (95%-CI: 16.9-40.5) months. In total, local progression (median time not reached) occurred in 2.0% and in 20.4% radiation-induced contrast enhancements (RICE) of the cavity (after median of 14.3 months) were diagnosed. Absence of extracranial metastases was identified as an independent prognostic factor for superior OS (p = <0.001) in multivariate analyses, while a higher Karnofsky performance score (KPS) was predictive for longer OS in univariate analysis (p = 0.041). Leptomeningeal disease (LMD) developed in 13% of patients. Conclusion FSRT after surgical resection of BM is an effective and safe treatment approach with excellent local control and acceptable toxicity. Further prospective randomized trials are needed to establish standardized therapeutic guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L. Hahnemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - A. Krämer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Mainz, Langenbeckstraße 1, 55131 Mainz, Germany
| | - C. Fink
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - C. Jungk
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - M. Thomas
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, Thoraxklinik and National Center for Tumor Diseases at Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC-H), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Germany
| | - P. Christopoulos
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, Thoraxklinik and National Center for Tumor Diseases at Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg (TLRC-H), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Germany
| | - J.W. Lischalk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perlmutter Cancer Center at New York University Langone Health at Long Island, New York, NY, USA
| | - J. Meis
- Institute of Medical Biometry, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - J. Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - T. Eichkorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - M. Deng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - K. Lang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - A. Paul
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - E. Meixner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - F. Weykamp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - J. Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Heavy Ion Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 450, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology (E050), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - L. König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Samanci Y, Ali Tepebasili M, Deniz Ardor G, Haluk Duzkalir A, Orbay Askeroglu M, Peker S. Efficacy of hypofractionated Gamma Knife radiosurgery in treating surgical beds of metastatic brain tumors. J Clin Neurosci 2024; 121:105-113. [PMID: 38387112 DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2024.02.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2024] [Revised: 02/01/2024] [Accepted: 02/17/2024] [Indexed: 02/24/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Surgery alone for metastatic brain tumors (METs) often results in local recurrence due to microscopic residual tumor tissue. While stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is commonly used post-surgery, hypofractionation may be required for large surgical beds. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of hypofractionated Gamma Knife radiosurgery (hf-GKRS) for the first time as a post-operative adjuvant therapy. METHODS This retrospective study involved 24 patients (28 surgical beds) who underwent hf-GKRS within four weeks after surgery. The study primarily focused on local control (LC) rate and analyzed distant intracranial failure (DICF), intracranial progression-free survival (PFS), leptomeningeal disease (LMD), overall survival (OS), and radiation necrosis (RN). RESULTS During a median follow-up of 9 months, LC was achieved in 89.3 % of surgical beds. LC estimates at 6, 12, and 24 months were 96.4 %, 82.7 %, and 82.7 %, respectively. DICF was observed in 45.8 % of patients, and LMD was identified in two patients (8.3 %). At the end of the follow-up, 58.3 % of patients were alive, and the median OS was 20 months. RN occurred in only one surgical bed (3.6 %). No grade 5 toxicity was observed. The univariate analysis identified a longer interval to GKRS (HR 11.842, p = 0.042) and a larger treatment volume (HR 1.103, p = 0.037) as significant factors for local failure. CONCLUSIONS hf-GKRS shows potential as an effective and safe adjuvant treatment for surgical beds. It offers an alternative to SRS, SRT, or WBRT, particularly for larger volumes or tumors near critical structures. Further research is needed to confirm these results and optimize treatment approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yavuz Samanci
- Koc University School of Medicine, Department of Neurosurgery, Istanbul, Turkey
| | | | - Gokce Deniz Ardor
- Koc University Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery, Gamma Knife Center, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Ali Haluk Duzkalir
- Koc University Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery, Gamma Knife Center, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - M Orbay Askeroglu
- Koc University Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery, Gamma Knife Center, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Selcuk Peker
- Koc University School of Medicine, Department of Neurosurgery, Istanbul, Turkey.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gutierrez-Valencia E, Kalyvas A, Jamora K, Yang K, Lau R, Khan B, Millar BA, Laperriere N, Conrad T, Berlin A, Weiss J, Li X, Zadeh G, Bernstein M, Kongkham P, Shultz DB. Rate of pachymeningeal failure following adjuvant WBRT vs SRS in patients with brain metastases. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 45:100723. [PMID: 38282910 PMCID: PMC10821534 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2023.100723] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2023] [Revised: 12/28/2023] [Accepted: 12/30/2023] [Indexed: 01/30/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has supplanted whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) as standard-of-care adjuvant treatment following surgery for brain metastasis (BrM). Concomitant with the adoption of adjuvant SRS, a new pattern of failure termed "Pachymeningeal failure" (PMF) has emerged. Methods We reviewed a prospective registry of 264 BrM patients; 145 and 119 were treated adjuvantly with WBRT and SRS, respectively. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify variables correlating to outcomes. Outcomes were calculated using the cumulative incidence (CI) method. Univariate (UVA) and multivariate analyses (MVA) were done to identify factors associated with PMF. Results CI of PMF was 2 % and 18 % at 12 months, and 2 % and 23 % at 24 months for WRBT and SRS, respectively (p < 0.001). The CI of classic leptomeningeal disease (LMD) was 3 % and 4 % at 12 months, and 6 % and 6 % at 24 months for WBRT and SRS, respectively (P = 0.67). On UVA, adjuvant SRS [HR 9.75 (3.43-27.68) (P < 0.001)]; preoperative dural contact (PDC) [HR 6.78 (1.64-28.10) (P = 0.008)]; GPA score [HR 1.64 (1.11-2.42) (P = 0.012)]; and lung EGFR/ALK status [HR 3.11 (1.02-9.45) (P = 0.045)]; were associated with PMF risk. On MVA, adjuvant SRS [HR 8.15 (2.69-24.7) (P < 0.001)]; and PDC [HR 6.28 (1.51-26.1) (P = 0.012)] remained associated with PMF. Conclusions Preoperative dural contact and adjuvant SRS instead of adjuvant WBRT were associated with an increased risk of PMF. Strategies to improve pachymeningeal radiation coverage to sterilize at risk pachymeninges should be investigated.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Enrique Gutierrez-Valencia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Aristotelis Kalyvas
- Division of Neurosurgery, Toronto Western Hospital - University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Kurl Jamora
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Kaiyun Yang
- Division of Neurosurgery, Toronto Western Hospital - University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Ruth Lau
- Division of Neurosurgery, Toronto Western Hospital - University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Benazir Khan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Barbara-Ann Millar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Normand Laperriere
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Tatiana Conrad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Alejandro Berlin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Jessica Weiss
- Department of Biostatistics, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Xuan Li
- Department of Biostatistics, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Gelareh Zadeh
- Division of Neurosurgery, Toronto Western Hospital - University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Mark Bernstein
- Division of Neurosurgery, Toronto Western Hospital - University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Paul Kongkham
- Division of Neurosurgery, Toronto Western Hospital - University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - David B. Shultz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Kübler J, Wester-Ebbinghaus M, Wenz F, Stieler F, Bathen B, Mai SK, Wolff R, Hänggi D, Blanck O, Giordano FA. Postoperative stereotactic radiosurgery and hypofractionated radiotherapy for brain metastases using Gamma Knife and CyberKnife: a dual-center analysis. J Neurosurg Sci 2024; 68:22-30. [PMID: 32031357 DOI: 10.23736/s0390-5616.20.04830-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Postoperative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (hFSRT) to tumor cavities is emerging as a new standard of care after resection of brain metastases. Both Gamma Knife (GK) and CyberKnife (CK) are modalities commonly used for stereotactic radiotherapy, but fractional schemes are not consistent. The objective of this study was to evaluate outcomes in patients receiving postoperative stereotactic radiotherapy of resected brain metastases (BM) using different fractionation schedules and modalities in two large centers. METHODS Patients with newly diagnosed BM who underwent postoperative SRS or hFSRT with either GK or CK at two large cancer centers were retrospectively evaluated. We analyzed local control (LC), regional control (RC) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS From April 14th to May 18th, 2020, 79 patients with 81 resection cavities were treated. Forty-seven patients (59.5%) received GK and 32 patients (40.5%) received CK treatment. Fifty-four cavities (66.7%) were treated with hFSRT and 27 (33.3%) with SRS. The most common hFSRT and SRS scheme was 3x10 Gy and 1x16 Gy, respectively. Median OS was 11.7 months with survival rates of 44.7% at 1 year and 18.5% at 2 years. LC was 83.3% after 1 year. Median time to regional progression was 12.0 months with RC rates of 61.1% at 6 months and 41.0% at 12 months. There was no difference in OS, LC or RC between GK and CK treatments or SRS and hFSRT. CONCLUSIONS Both SRS and hFSRT provide high local control rates in resected BM regardless of the applied modality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jens Kübler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Michael Wester-Ebbinghaus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | | | - Florian Stieler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Bastian Bathen
- Saphir Radiosurgery Center Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Sabine K Mai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Robert Wolff
- Saphir Radiosurgery Center Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Daniel Hänggi
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Oliver Blanck
- Saphir Radiosurgery Center Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Frank A Giordano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany -
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Diehl CD, Giordano FA, Grosu AL, Ille S, Kahl KH, Onken J, Rieken S, Sarria GR, Shiban E, Wagner A, Beck J, Brehmer S, Ganslandt O, Hamed M, Meyer B, Münter M, Raabe A, Rohde V, Schaller K, Schilling D, Schneider M, Sperk E, Thomé C, Vajkoczy P, Vatter H, Combs SE. Opportunities and Alternatives of Modern Radiation Oncology and Surgery for the Management of Resectable Brain Metastases. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:3670. [PMID: 37509330 PMCID: PMC10377800 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15143670] [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: 04/18/2023] [Revised: 07/10/2023] [Accepted: 07/11/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023] Open
Abstract
Postsurgical radiotherapy (RT) has been early proven to prevent local tumor recurrence, initially performed with whole brain RT (WBRT). Subsequent to disadvantageous cognitive sequalae for the patient and the broad distribution of modern linear accelerators, focal irradiation of the tumor has omitted WBRT in most cases. In many studies, the effectiveness of local RT of the resection cavity, either as single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or hypo-fractionated stereotactic RT (hFSRT), has been demonstrated to be effective and safe. However, whereas prospective high-level incidence is still lacking on which dose and fractionation scheme is the best choice for the patient, further ablative techniques have come into play. Neoadjuvant SRS (N-SRS) prior to resection combines straightforward target delineation with an accelerated post-surgical phase, allowing an earlier start of systemic treatment or rehabilitation as indicated. In addition, low-energy intraoperative RT (IORT) on the surgical bed has been introduced as another alternative to external beam RT, offering sterilization of the cavity surface with steep dose gradients towards the healthy brain. This consensus paper summarizes current local treatment strategies for resectable brain metastases regarding available data and patient-centered decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christian D Diehl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, 81675 München, Germany
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, 80336 München, Germany
| | - Frank A Giordano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| | - Anca-L Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center, Medical Faculty, 79106 Freiburg, Germany
| | - Sebastian Ille
- Department of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, 81675 München, Germany
| | - Klaus-Henning Kahl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Augsburg, 86156 Augsburg, Germany
| | - Julia Onken
- Department of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany
- Berlin Institute of Health, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Berlin, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stefan Rieken
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Niedersachsen (CCC-N), 37075 Göttingen, Germany
| | - Gustavo R Sarria
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bonn, University of Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany
| | - Ehab Shiban
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Augsburg, 86156 Augsburg, Germany
| | - Arthur Wagner
- Department of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, 81675 München, Germany
| | - Jürgen Beck
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Freiburg, 79106 Freiburg, Germany
| | - Stefanie Brehmer
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| | - Oliver Ganslandt
- Neurosurgical Clinic, Klinikum Stuttgart, 70174 Stuttgart, Germany
| | - Motaz Hamed
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, 81675 München, Germany
| | - Marc Münter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Stuttgart Katharinenhospital, 70174 Stuttgart, Germany
| | - Andreas Raabe
- Department of Neurosurgery, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland
| | - Veit Rohde
- Department of Neurosurgery, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany
| | - Karl Schaller
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Geneva Medical Center & Faculty of Medicine, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Daniela Schilling
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, 81675 München, Germany
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Matthias Schneider
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany
| | - Elena Sperk
- Mannheim Cancer Center, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
| | - Claudius Thomé
- Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Peter Vajkoczy
- Department of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany
| | - Hartmut Vatter
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, 81675 München, Germany
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, 80336 München, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kotecha R, Ahluwalia MS, Siomin V, McDermott MW. Surgery, Stereotactic Radiosurgery, and Systemic Therapy in the Management of Operable Brain Metastasis. Neurol Clin 2022; 40:421-436. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ncl.2021.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
7
|
Redmond KJ, De Salles AAF, Fariselli L, Levivier M, Ma L, Paddick I, Pollock BE, Regis J, Sheehan J, Suh J, Yomo S, Sahgal A. Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Postoperative Metastatic Surgical Cavities: A Critical Review and International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society (ISRS) Practice Guidelines. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 111:68-80. [PMID: 33891979 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.04.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2020] [Revised: 03/31/2021] [Accepted: 04/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this critical review is to summarize the literature specific to single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and multiple-fraction stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) for postoperative brain metastases resection cavities and to present practice recommendations on behalf of the ISRS. METHODS AND MATERIALS The Medline and Embase databases were used to apply the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach to search for manuscripts reporting SRS/SRT outcomes for postoperative brain metastases tumor bed resection cavities with a search end date of July 20, 2018. Prospective studies, consensus guidelines, and retrospective series that included exclusively postoperative brain metastases and had at minimum 100 patients were considered eligible. RESULTS The Embase search revealed 157 manuscripts, of which 77 were selected for full-text screening. PubMed yielded 55 manuscripts, of which 23 were selected for full text screening. We deemed 8 retrospective series, 1 phase 2 prospective study, 3 randomized controlled trials, and 1 consensus contouring paper appropriate for inclusion. The data suggest that SRS/SRT to surgical cavities with prescription doses of 30 to 50 Gy equivalent effective dose (EQD) 210, 50 to 70 Gy EQD25, and 70 to 90 EQD22 are associated with rates of local control ranging from 60.5% to 91% (median, 80.5%). Randomized data suggest improved local control with single-fraction SRS compared with observation and improved cognitive outcomes compared with whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT). The toxicity of SRS/SRT in the postoperative setting was limited and is reviewed herein. CONCLUSIONS Although randomized data raise concern for poorer local control after resection cavity SRS than WBRT, these findings may be driven by factors such as conservative prescription doses used in the SRS arm. Retrospective studies suggest high rates of local control after single-fraction SRS and hypofractionated SRT for postoperative brain metastases. With a superior neurocognitive profile and no survival disadvantage to withholding WBRT, the ISRS recommends SRS as first-line treatment for eligible postoperative patients. Emerging data suggest that fractionated SRT may provide superior local control compared with single-fraction SRS, in particular, for large tumor cavity volumes/diameters and potentially for patients with a preoperative diameter greater than 2.5 cm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristin J Redmond
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
| | | | - Laura Fariselli
- Department of Neurosurgery, Unit of Radiotherapy, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico C Besta, Milano, Italy
| | - Marc Levivier
- Neurosurgery Service and Gamma Knife Center Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV), Lausanne, Switzerland; Faculty of Biology and Medicine (FBM), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Lijun Ma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Ian Paddick
- Medical Physics Ltd, Queen Square Radiosurgery Centre, London, United Kingdom
| | - Bruce E Pollock
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic School of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Jean Regis
- Aix-Marseille University, INSERM, UMR 1106, Timone University Hospital, Functional Neurosurgery and Radiosurgery Department, Marseille, France
| | - Jason Sheehan
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia
| | - John Suh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussing Cancer Institute Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Shoji Yomo
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Aizawa Comprehensive Cancer Center, Aizawa Hospital, Matsumoto, Japan
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Minniti G, Niyazi M, Andratschke N, Guckenberger M, Palmer JD, Shih HA, Lo SS, Soltys S, Russo I, Brown PD, Belka C. Current status and recent advances in resection cavity irradiation of brain metastases. Radiat Oncol 2021; 16:73. [PMID: 33858474 PMCID: PMC8051036 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01802-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2021] [Accepted: 04/07/2021] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
Despite complete surgical resection brain metastases are at significant risk of local recurrence without additional radiation therapy. Traditionally, the addition of postoperative whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) has been considered the standard of care on the basis of randomized studies demonstrating its efficacy in reducing the risk of recurrence in the surgical bed as well as the incidence of new distant metastases. More recently, postoperative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to the surgical bed has emerged as an effective and safe treatment option for resected brain metastases. Published randomized trials have demonstrated that postoperative SRS to the resection cavity provides superior local control compared to surgery alone, and significantly decreases the risk of neurocognitive decline compared to WBRT, without detrimental effects on survival. While studies support the use of postoperative SRS to the resection cavity as the standard of care after surgery, there are several issues that need to be investigated further with the aim of improving local control and reducing the risk of leptomeningeal disease and radiation necrosis, including the optimal dose prescription/fractionation, the timing of postoperative SRS treatment, and surgical cavity target delineation. We provide a clinical overview on current status and recent advances in resection cavity irradiation of brain metastases, focusing on relevant strategies that can improve local control and minimize the risk of radiation-induced toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giuseppe Minniti
- Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neurosciences, University of Siena, Policlinico Le Scotte, 53100, Siena, Italy. .,IRCCS Neuromed, Pozzilli, IS, Italy.
| | - Maximilian Niyazi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Nicolaus Andratschke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, University of Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, University of Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Joshua D Palmer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Helen A Shih
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Simon S Lo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Scott Soltys
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Ivana Russo
- Radiation Oncology Unit, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Hillman Cancer Center, San Pietro Hospital FBF, Rome, and Villa Maria Hospital, Mirabella, AV, Italy
| | - Paul D Brown
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Eitz KA, Lo SS, Soliman H, Sahgal A, Theriault A, Pinkham MB, Foote MC, Song AJ, Shi W, Redmond KJ, Gui C, Kumar AMS, Machtay M, Meyer B, Combs SE. Multi-institutional Analysis of Prognostic Factors and Outcomes After Hypofractionated Stereotactic Radiotherapy to the Resection Cavity in Patients With Brain Metastases. JAMA Oncol 2020; 6:1901-1909. [PMID: 33057566 PMCID: PMC7563677 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.4630] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2020] [Accepted: 07/20/2020] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE For brain metastases, the combination of neurosurgical resection and postoperative hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HSRT) is an emerging therapeutic approach preferred to the prior practice of postoperative whole-brain radiotherapy. However, mature large-scale outcome data are lacking. OBJECTIVE To evaluate outcomes and prognostic factors after HSRT to the resection cavity in patients with brain metastases. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS An international, multi-institutional cohort study was performed in 558 patients with resected brain metastases and postoperative HSRT treated between December 1, 2003, and October 31, 2019, in 1 of 6 participating centers. Exclusion criteria were prior cranial radiotherapy (including whole-brain radiotherapy) and early termination of treatment. EXPOSURES A median total dose of 30 Gy (range, 18-35 Gy) and a dose per fraction of 6 Gy (range, 5-10.7 Gy) were applied. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end points were overall survival, local control (LC), and the analysis of prognostic factors associated with overall survival and LC. Secondary end points included distant intracranial failure, distant progression, and the incidence of neurologic toxicity. RESULTS A total of 558 patients (mean [SD] age, 61 [0.50] years; 301 [53.9%] female) with 581 resected cavities were analyzed. The median follow-up was 12.3 months (interquartile range, 5.0-25.3 months). Overall survival was 65% at 1 year, 46% at 2 years, and 33% at 3 years, whereas LC was 84% at 1 year, 75% at 2 years, and 71% at 3 years. Radiation necrosis was present in 48 patients (8.6%) and leptomeningeal disease in 73 patients (13.1%). Neurologic toxic events according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 or higher occurred in 16 patients (2.8%) less than 6 months and 24 patients (4.1%) greater than 6 months after treatment. Multivariate analysis identified a Karnofsky Performance Status score of 80% or greater (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46-0.82; P < .001), 22 to 33 days between resection and radiotherapy (HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.07-2.10; P = .02), and a controlled primary tumor (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.90; P = .007) as prognostic factors associated with overall survival. For LC, a single brain metastasis (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.35-0.93; P = .03) and a controlled primary tumor (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.92; P = .02) were significant in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE To date, this cohort study includes one of the largest series of patients with brain metastases and postoperative HSRT and appears to confirm an excellent risk-benefit profile of local HSRT to the resection cavity. Additional studies will help determine radiation dose-volume parameters and provide a better understanding of synergistic effects with systemic and immunotherapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A. Eitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Institute for Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Simon S. Lo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle
| | - Hany Soliman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Aimee Theriault
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Mark. B. Pinkham
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Matthew C. Foote
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Andrew J. Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College & Cancer Center at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Wenyin Shi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College & Cancer Center at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Kristin J. Redmond
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Chenchen Gui
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Aryavarta M. S. Kumar
- Radiation Oncology Service, Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Mitchell Machtay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Institute for Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Gui C, Grimm J, Kleinberg LR, Zaki P, Spoleti N, Mukherjee D, Bettegowda C, Lim M, Redmond KJ. A Dose-Response Model of Local Tumor Control Probability After Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases Resection Cavities. Adv Radiat Oncol 2020; 5:840-849. [PMID: 33083646 PMCID: PMC7557194 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2020.06.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2020] [Revised: 05/09/2020] [Accepted: 06/15/2020] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Recent randomized controlled trials evaluating stereotactic surgery (SRS) for resected brain metastases question the high rates of local control previously reported in retrospective studies. Tumor control probability (TCP) models were developed to quantify the relationship between radiation dose and local control after SRS for resected brain metastases. Methods and Materials Patients with resected brain metastases treated with SRS were evaluated retrospectively. Melanoma, sarcoma, and renal cell carcinoma were considered radio-resistant histologies. The planning target volume (PTV) was the region of enhancement on T1 post-gadolinium magnetic resonance imaging plus a 2-mm uniform margin. The primary outcome was local recurrence, defined as tumor progression within the resection cavity. Cox regression evaluated predictors of local recurrence. Dose-volume histograms for the PTV were obtained from treatment plans and converted to 3-fraction equivalent doses (α/β = 12 Gy). TCP models evaluated local control at 1-year follow-up as a logistic function of dose-volume histogram data. Results Among 150 cavities, 41 (27.3%) were radio-resistant. The median PTV volume was 14.6 mL (range, 1.3-65.3). The median prescription was 21 Gy (range, 15-25) in 3 fractions (range, 1-5). Local control rates at 12 and 24 months were 86% and 82%. On Cox regression, larger cavities (PTV > 12 cm3) predicted increased risk of local recurrence (P = .03). TCP modeling demonstrated relationships between improved 1-year local control and higher radiation doses delivered to radio-resistant cavities. Maximum PTV doses of 30, 35, and 40 Gy predicted 78%, 89%, and 94% local control among all radio-resistant cavities, versus 69%, 79%, and 86% among larger radio-resistant cavities. Conclusions After SRS for resected brain metastases, larger cavities are at greater risk of local recurrence. TCP models suggests that higher radiation doses may improve local control among cavities of radio-resistant histology. Given maximum tolerated doses established for single-fraction SRS, fractionated regimens may be required to optimize local control in large radio-resistant cavities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chengcheng Gui
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Jimm Grimm
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Lawrence Richard Kleinberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Peter Zaki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Nicholas Spoleti
- Bouvé College of Health Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Debraj Mukherjee
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Chetan Bettegowda
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Michael Lim
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Kristin Janson Redmond
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Moravan MJ, Fecci PE, Anders CK, Clarke JM, Salama AKS, Adamson JD, Floyd SR, Torok JA, Salama JK, Sampson JH, Sperduto PW, Kirkpatrick JP. Current multidisciplinary management of brain metastases. Cancer 2020; 126:1390-1406. [PMID: 31971613 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32714] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2019] [Revised: 12/08/2019] [Accepted: 12/19/2019] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Brain metastasis (BM), the most common adult brain tumor, develops in 20% to 40% of patients with late-stage cancer and traditionally are associated with a poor prognosis. The management of patients with BM has become increasingly complex because of new and emerging systemic therapies and advancements in radiation oncology and neurosurgery. Current therapies include stereotactic radiosurgery, whole-brain radiation therapy, surgical resection, laser-interstitial thermal therapy, systemic cytotoxic chemotherapy, targeted agents, and immune-checkpoint inhibitors. Determining the optimal treatment for a specific patient has become increasingly individualized, emphasizing the need for multidisciplinary discussions of patients with BM. Recognizing and addressing the sequelae of BMs and their treatment while maintaining quality of life and neurocognition is especially important because survival for patients with BMs has improved. The authors present current and emerging treatment options for patients with BM and suggest approaches for managing sequelae and disease recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael J Moravan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Peter E Fecci
- Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Carey K Anders
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Jeffrey M Clarke
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
| | - April K S Salama
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Justus D Adamson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Scott R Floyd
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Jordan A Torok
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Joseph K Salama
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - John H Sampson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.,Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology, Minneapolis, Minnesota.,University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - John P Kirkpatrick
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.,Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|