1
|
Beydoun HA, Huang S, Beydoun MA, Eid SM, Zonderman AB. Interrupted Time-Series Analysis of Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases Before and After the Affordable Care Act. Cureus 2022; 14:e21338. [PMID: 35186596 PMCID: PMC8849367 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.21338] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was aimed at reducing healthcare costs, improving healthcare quality, and expanding health insurance coverage among uninsured individuals in the United States. We examined trends in the utilization of radiation therapies and stereotactic radiosurgery before and after its implementation among U.S. adults hospitalized with brain metastasis. Interrupted time-series analyses of data on 383,934 Nationwide Inpatient Sample hospitalizations (2005-2010 and 2011-2013) were performed, whereby yearly and quarterly cross-sectional data were evaluated and Affordable Care Act implementation was considered the main exposure variable, stratifying by patient and hospital characteristics. Overall, we observed a declining trend in radiation therapy over time, with an upward shift post-Affordable Care Act. A downward shift in radiation therapy post-Affordable Care Act was observed among Northeastern and rural hospitals, whereas an upward shift was noted among specific patient (females, 18-39 or ≥ 65 years of age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) ≥10, non-elective admissions, Medicare, self-pay, no pay or other insurance) and hospital (Midwestern, Western, non-teaching urban) subgroups. Stereotactic radiosurgery utilization among recipients of radiation therapy increased over time among Hispanics, elective admissions, and rural hospitals, whereas post-Affordable Care Act was associated with increased stereotactic radiosurgery among African-Americans and non-elective admissions and decreased stereotactic radiosurgery among elective admissions, and rural hospitals. Whereas hospitalized adults in the United States utilized less radiation therapy over the nine-year period, utilization of radiation therapy, in general, and stereotactic radiosurgery, in particular, were not consistent among distinct subgroups defined by patient and hospital characteristics, with some traditionally underserved populations more likely to receive healthcare services post-Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act may be helpful at closing the gap in access to technological advances such as stereotactic radiosurgery for treating brain metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hind A Beydoun
- Research Programs, Fort Belvoir Community Hospital, Fort Belvoir, USA
| | - Shuyan Huang
- Research Programs, Fort Belvoir Community Hospital, Fort Belvoir, USA
| | - May A Beydoun
- Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Aging, Baltimore, USA
| | - Shaker M Eid
- Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA
| | - Alan B Zonderman
- Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Aging, Baltimore, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Vogelbaum MA, Brown PD, Messersmith H, Brastianos PK, Burri S, Cahill D, Dunn IF, Gaspar LE, Gatson NTN, Gondi V, Jordan JT, Lassman AB, Maues J, Mohile N, Redjal N, Stevens G, Sulman E, van den Bent M, Wallace HJ, Weinberg JS, Zadeh G, Schiff D. Treatment for Brain Metastases: ASCO-SNO-ASTRO Guideline. J Clin Oncol 2021; 40:492-516. [PMID: 34932393 DOI: 10.1200/jco.21.02314] [Citation(s) in RCA: 300] [Impact Index Per Article: 100.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To provide guidance to clinicians regarding therapy for patients with brain metastases from solid tumors. METHODS ASCO convened an Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of the literature. RESULTS Thirty-two randomized trials published in 2008 or later met eligibility criteria and form the primary evidentiary base. RECOMMENDATIONS Surgery is a reasonable option for patients with brain metastases. Patients with large tumors with mass effect are more likely to benefit than those with multiple brain metastases and/or uncontrolled systemic disease. Patients with symptomatic brain metastases should receive local therapy regardless of the systemic therapy used. For patients with asymptomatic brain metastases, local therapy should not be deferred unless deferral is specifically recommended in this guideline. The decision to defer local therapy should be based on a multidisciplinary discussion of the potential benefits and harms that the patient may experience. Several regimens were recommended for non-small-cell lung cancer, breast cancer, and melanoma. For patients with asymptomatic brain metastases and no systemic therapy options, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) alone should be offered to patients with one to four unresected brain metastases, excluding small-cell lung carcinoma. SRS alone to the surgical cavity should be offered to patients with one to two resected brain metastases. SRS, whole brain radiation therapy, or their combination are reasonable options for other patients. Memantine and hippocampal avoidance should be offered to patients who receive whole brain radiation therapy and have no hippocampal lesions and 4 months or more expected survival. Patients with asymptomatic brain metastases with either Karnofsky Performance Status ≤ 50 or Karnofsky Performance Status < 70 with no systemic therapy options do not derive benefit from radiation therapy.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/neurooncology-guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Stuart Burri
- Levine Cancer Institute at Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC
| | - Dan Cahill
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Ian F Dunn
- Stephenson Cancer Center at the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK
| | - Laurie E Gaspar
- University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO.,University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO
| | - Na Tosha N Gatson
- Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Phoenix, AZ.,Geisinger Neuroscience Institute. Danville, PA
| | - Vinai Gondi
- Northwestern Medicine Cancer Center Warrenville and Proton Center, Warrenville, IL
| | | | | | - Julia Maues
- Georgetown Breast Cancer Advocates, Washington, DC
| | - Nimish Mohile
- University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY
| | - Navid Redjal
- Capital Health Medical Center - Hopewell Campus, Princeton, NJ
| | | | | | - Martin van den Bent
- Brain Tumor Center at Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - David Schiff
- University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, VA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mavroidis P, Pearlstein KA, Moon DH, Xu V, Royce TJ, Weiner AA, Shen CJ, Marks LB, Chera BS, Das SK, Wang K. NTCP modeling and dose-volume correlations for acute xerostomia and dry eye after whole brain radiation. Radiat Oncol 2021; 16:56. [PMID: 33743773 PMCID: PMC7981795 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01786-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2021] [Accepted: 03/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Whole brain radiation (WBRT) may lead to acute xerostomia and dry eye from incidental parotid and lacrimal exposure, respectively. We performed a prospective observational study to assess the incidence/severity of this toxicity. We herein perform a secondary analysis relating parotid and lacrimal dosimetric parameters to normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) rates and associated models. METHODS Patients received WBRT to 25-40 Gy in 10-20 fractions using 3D-conformal radiation therapy without prospective delineation of the parotids or lacrimals. Patients completed questionnaires at baseline and 1 month post-WBRT. Xerostomia was assessed using the University of Michigan xerostomia score (scored 0-100, toxicity defined as ≥ 20 pt increase) and xerostomia bother score (scored from 0 to 3, toxicity defined as ≥ 2 pt increase). Dry eye was assessed using the Subjective Evaluation of Symptom of Dryness (SESoD, scored from 0 to 4, toxicity defined as ≥ 2 pt increase). The clinical data were fitted by the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) and Relative Seriality (RS) NTCP models. RESULTS Of 55 evaluable patients, 19 (35%) had ≥ 20 point increase in xerostomia score, 11 (20%) had ≥ 2 point increase in xerostomia bother score, and 13 (24%) had ≥ 2 point increase in SESoD score. For xerostomia, parotid V10Gy-V20Gy correlated best with toxicity, with AUC 0.68 for xerostomia score and 0.69-0.71 for bother score. The values for the D50, m and n parameters of the LKB model were 22.3 Gy, 0.84 and 1.0 for xerostomia score and 28.4 Gy, 0.55 and 1.0 for bother score, respectively. The corresponding values for the D50, γ and s parameters of the RS model were 23.5 Gy, 0.28 and 0.0001 for xerostomia score and 32.0 Gy, 0.45 and 0.0001 for bother score, respectively. For dry eye, lacrimal V10Gy-V15Gy were found to correlate best with toxicity, with AUC values from 0.67 to 0.68. The parameter values of the LKB model were 53.5 Gy, 0.74 and 1.0, whereas of the RS model were 54.0 Gy, 0.37 and 0.0001, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Xerostomia was most associated with parotid V10Gy-V20Gy, and dry eye with lacrimal V10Gy-V15Gy. NTCP models were successfully created for both toxicities and may help clinicians refine dosimetric goals and assess levels of risk in patients receiving palliative WBRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Panayiotis Mavroidis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, 101 Manning Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7512, USA.
| | - Kevin A Pearlstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, 101 Manning Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7512, USA
| | - Dominic H Moon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, 101 Manning Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7512, USA
| | - Victoria Xu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, 101 Manning Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7512, USA
| | - Trevor J Royce
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, 101 Manning Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7512, USA
| | - Ashley A Weiner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, 101 Manning Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7512, USA
| | - Colette J Shen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, 101 Manning Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7512, USA
| | - Lawrence B Marks
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, 101 Manning Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7512, USA
| | - Bhishamjit S Chera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, 101 Manning Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7512, USA
| | - Shiva K Das
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, 101 Manning Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7512, USA
| | - Kyle Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, 101 Manning Dr., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7512, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Jiang C, Kleber TJ, Switchenko JM, Khan MK. Single institutional outcomes of whole brain radiotherapy for metastatic melanoma brain metastases. Radiat Oncol 2021; 16:31. [PMID: 33557890 PMCID: PMC7871629 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01754-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/06/2020] [Accepted: 01/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The management of melanoma with brain metastases (MBM) is increasingly complex, especially given recent improvements in targeted agents, immunotherapy, and radiotherapy. Whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) is a longstanding radiotherapy technique for which reported patient outcomes and experiences are limited. We sought to report our institutional outcomes for MBM patients receiving WBRT and assess whether other clinical factors impact prognosis. Methods A retrospective review of a single institution database was performed. Patients diagnosed with MBM from 2000 to 2018 treated with WBRT, with or without other systemic treatments, were included. Post-WBRT brain MRI scans were assessed at timed intervals for radiographic response. Clinical and treatment variables associated with overall survival (OS), distant failure-free survival (DFFS), local failure-free survival (LFFS), and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed. Data on radiation-induced side effects, including radionecrosis, hemorrhage, and memory deficits, was also captured. Results 63 patients with MBM were ultimately included in our study. 69% of patients had 5 or more brain metastases at the time of WBRT, and 68% had extracranial disease. The median dose of WBRT was 30 Gy over 10 fractions. Median follow-up was 4.0 months. Patients receiving WBRT had a median OS of 7.0 months, median PFS of 2.2 months, median DFFS of 6.1 months, and median LFFS of 4.9 months. Performance status correlated with OS on both univariate and multivariable analysis. BRAF inhibitor was the only systemic therapy to significantly impact OS on univariate analysis (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.07–0.79, p = 0.019), and this effect extended to multivariable analysis as well. Post-WBRT intralesional hemorrhage decreased DFFS on both univariate and multivariable analysis. Of patients with post-treatment brain scans available, there was a 16% rate of radionecrosis, 32% rate of hemorrhage, and 19% rate of memory deficits. Conclusions Outcomes for MBM patients receiving WBRT indicate that WBRT remains an effective treatment strategy to control intracranial disease. Treatment-related toxicities such as intralesional hemorrhage, necrosis, or neurocognitive side effects are limited. With continued innovations in WBRT technique and systemic therapy development, MBM outcomes may continue to improve. Further trials should evaluate the role of WBRT in the modern context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cecilia Jiang
- Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Troy J Kleber
- Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Jeffrey M Switchenko
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Mohammad K Khan
- Winship Cancer Institute, 1365 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA, 30345, USA. .,Department of Radiation Oncology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Silvestre J, Gosse T, Read P, Gentzler R, Purow B, Asthagiri A, Gaughan E, Dillon PM, Larner JM, Anderson RT, Sheehan JP, Fadul CE. Genesis of Quality Measurements to Improve the Care Delivered to Patients With Brain Metastases. JCO Oncol Pract 2020; 17:e397-e405. [PMID: 32780641 DOI: 10.1200/op.20.00233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE High-value and high-quality health care requires outcome measurements to inform treatment decisions, but, to our knowledge, no standardized measurements exist to evaluate brain metastases (BMs) care. We propose a set of measurements and report on their implementation in the care of patients with BMs. METHODS On the basis of a stakeholders' needs assessment and review of the literature, we identified outcome and process measurements to assess the care of patients with BMs according to treatment modality. Retrospectively, we applied these indicators of care to all patients diagnosed and treated at our institution over 2 years. RESULTS We ascertained 5 outcome and 6 process measurements of relevance in the care of BMs. When applied to 209 patients (89.7%) who received cancer treatment, 77% were alive > 90 days after diagnosis. The proportion alive at 90 days after surgery, whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT), and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) was 82%, 59%, and 81%, respectively. Other performance measurements included 30-day postoperative readmission rate (6%), SRS within 30 days of surgery (79%), use of memantine with WBRT (41%), advance directives within 6 months of diagnosis (53%), and palliative care consultation for patients with poor prognosis or receiving WBRT (45%). Measurements for the 24 patients (10.3%) receiving best supportive care were advance directives documentation (67%) and referral to palliative or hospice care (83%). CONCLUSION We propose a set of measurements to apprise quality improvement efforts, inform treatment decision-making, and to use in evaluation of the performance of interdisciplinary BMs programs. Their refinement can potentially enhance the quality and value of care delivered to patients with BMs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julio Silvestre
- Department of Medicine, Palliative Care Medicine Section, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Tracey Gosse
- Department of Neurology, Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Paul Read
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Ryan Gentzler
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Benjamin Purow
- Department of Neurology, Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Ashok Asthagiri
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Elizabeth Gaughan
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Patrick M Dillon
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA
| | - James M Larner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Roger T Anderson
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Jason P Sheehan
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Camilo E Fadul
- Department of Neurology, Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Wright JM, Ascha M, Wright CH, Smith G, Lagman C, Patel M, Elder TA, Kruchko C, Barnholtz-Sloan JS, Sloan AE. Geographic and temporal variations in the utilization of stereotactic radiosurgery for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer brain metastases from 2010 to 2015: An analysis of the national cancer database. INTERDISCIPLINARY NEUROSURGERY 2020. [DOI: 10.1016/j.inat.2019.100580] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022] Open
|
7
|
Wang K, Pearlstein KA, Moon DH, Mahbooba ZM, Deal AM, Wang Y, Sutton SR, Motley BB, Judy GD, Holmes JA, Sheets NC, Kasibhatla MS, Pacholke HD, Shen CJ, Zagar TM, Marks LB, Chera BS. Assessment of Risk of Xerostomia After Whole-Brain Radiation Therapy and Association With Parotid Dose. JAMA Oncol 2019; 5:221-228. [PMID: 30489607 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.4951] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
Importance Whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) delivers a substantial radiation dose to the parotid glands, but the parotid glands are not delineated for avoidance and xerostomia has never been reported as an adverse effect. Minimizing the toxic effects in patients receiving palliative treatments, such as WBRT, is crucial. Objective To assess whether xerostomia is a toxic effect of WBRT. Design, Setting, and Participants This observational cohort study enrolled patients from November 2, 2015, to March 20, 2018, at 1 academic center (University of North Carolina Hospitals) and 2 affiliated community hospitals (High Point Regional Hospital and University of North Carolina Rex Hospital). Adult patients (n = 100) receiving WBRT for the treatment or prophylaxis of brain metastases were enrolled. Patients who had substantial baseline xerostomia or did not complete WBRT or at least 1 postbaseline questionnaire were prospectively excluded from analysis and follow-up. Patients received 3-dimensional WBRT using opposed lateral fields covering the skull and the C1 or C2 vertebra. Per standard practice, the parotid glands were not prospectively delineated. Main Outcomes and Measures Patients completed the University of Michigan Xerostomia Questionnaire and a 4-point bother score at baseline, immediately after WBRT, at 1 month, at 3 months, and at 6 months. The primary end point was the 1-month xerostomia score, with a hypothesized worsening score of 10 points from baseline. Results Of the 100 patients enrolled, 73 (73%) were eligible for analysis and 55 (55%) were evaluable at 1 month. The 73 patients included 43 women (59%) and 30 men (41%) with a median (range) age of 61 (23-88) years. The median volume of parotid receiving at least 20 Gy (V20Gy) was 47%. The mean xerostomia score was 7 points at baseline and was statistically significantly higher at each assessment period, including 21 points immediately after WBRT (95% CI, 16-26; P < .001), 23 points (95% CI, 16-30; P < .001) at 1 month, 21 points (95% CI, 13-28; P < .001) at 3 months, and 14 points (95% CI, 7-21; P = .03) at 6 months. At 1 month, the xerostomia score increased by 20 points or more in 19 patients (35%). The xerostomia score at 1 month was associated with parotid dose as a continuous variable and was 35 points in patients with parotid V20Gy of 47% or greater, compared with only 9 points in patients with parotid V20Gy less than 47% (P < .001). The proportion of patients who self-reported to be bothered quite a bit or bothered very much by xerostomia at 1 month was 50% in those with parotid V20Gy of 47% or greater, compared with only 4% in those with parotid V20Gy less than 47% (P < .001). At 3 months, this difference was 50% vs 0% (P = .001). Xerostomia was not associated with medication use. Conclusions and Relevance Clinically significant xerostomia occurred by the end of WBRT, appeared to be persistent, and appeared to be associated with parotid dose. The findings from this study suggest that the parotid glands should be delineated for avoidance to minimize these toxic effects in patients who undergo WBRT and often do not survive long enough for salivary recovery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kyle Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Kevin A Pearlstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Dominic H Moon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Zahra M Mahbooba
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Allison M Deal
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center Biostatistics Core, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Yue Wang
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center Biostatistics Core, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Stephanie R Sutton
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Britni B Motley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Gregory D Judy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Jordan A Holmes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Nathan C Sheets
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Mohit S Kasibhatla
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Heather D Pacholke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Colette J Shen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | | | - Lawrence B Marks
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| | - Bhishamjit S Chera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Wang K, Tobillo R, Mavroidis P, Pappafotis R, Pearlstein KA, Moon DH, Mahbooba ZM, Deal AM, Holmes JA, Sheets NC, Kasibhatla MS, Pacholke HD, Royce TJ, Weiner AA, Shen CJ, Zagar TM, Marks LB, Chera BS. Prospective Assessment of Patient-Reported Dry Eye Syndrome After Whole Brain Radiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2019; 105:765-772. [PMID: 31351194 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.07.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2019] [Revised: 06/20/2019] [Accepted: 07/15/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Dry eye is not typically considered a toxicity of whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT). We analyzed dry eye syndrome as part of a prospective study of patient-reported outcomes after WBRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients receiving WBRT to 25 to 40 Gy were enrolled on a study with dry mouth as the primary endpoint and dry eye syndrome as a secondary endpoint. Patients received 3-dimensional WBRT using opposed lateral fields. Per standard practice, lacrimal glands were not prospectively delineated. Patients completed the Subjective Evaluation of Symptom of Dryness (SESoD, scored 0-4, with higher scores representing worse dry eye symptoms) at baseline, immediately after WBRT (EndRT), and at 1 month (1M), 3 months, and 6 months. Patients with baseline SESoD ≥3 (moderate dry eye) were excluded. The endpoints analyzed were ≥1-point and ≥2-point increase in SESoD score at 1M. Lacrimal glands were retrospectively delineated with fused magnetic resonance imaging scans. RESULTS One hundred patients were enrolled, 70 were eligible for analysis, and 54 were evaluable at 1M. Median bilateral lacrimal V20Gy was 79%. At 1M, 17 patients (32%) had a ≥1-point increase in SESoD score, and 13 (24%) a ≥2-point increase. Lacrimal doses appeared to be associated with an increase in SESoD score of both ≥1 point (V10Gy: P = .042, odds ratio [OR] 1.09/%; V20Gy: P = .071, OR 1.03/%) and ≥2 points (V10Gy: P = .038, OR 1.15/%; V20Gy: P = .063, OR 1.04/%). The proportion with increase in dry eye symptoms at 1M for lacrimal V20Gy ≥79% versus <79% was 46% versus 15%, respectively, for ≥1 point SESoD increase (P = .02) and 36% versus 12%, respectively, for ≥2 point SESoD increase (P = .056). CONCLUSIONS Dry eye appears to be a relatively common, dose/volume-dependent acute toxicity of WBRT. Minimization of lacrimal gland dose may reduce this toxicity, and patients should be counseled regarding the existence of this potential side effect and treatments for dry eye.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kyle Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
| | - Rachel Tobillo
- Florida Atlantic University College of Medicine, Boca Raton, Florida
| | - Panayiotis Mavroidis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Ryan Pappafotis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Kevin A Pearlstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Dominic H Moon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Zahra M Mahbooba
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Allison M Deal
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center Biostatistics Core, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Jordan A Holmes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Nathan C Sheets
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Mohit S Kasibhatla
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Heather D Pacholke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Trevor J Royce
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Ashley A Weiner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Colette J Shen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | | | - Lawrence B Marks
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Bhishamjit S Chera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|