A phase II multi-institutional study assessing simultaneous in-field boost helical tomotherapy for 1-3 brain metastases

Whole-brain radiation therapy plus simultaneous integrated boost for brain metastases from breast cancers

Background

The effect of whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) plus simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in brain metastasis from breast cancers has not been demonstrated.

Method

In this single-center retrospective study, we reviewed consecutive breast cancer patients who developed brain metastasis and were treated with hypofractionated radiation therapy plus WBRT using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)-SIB approaches. We analyzed clinical outcomes, prognostic factors and patterns of treatment failure.

Result

A total of 27 patients were eligible for analysis. Four (14.8%) patients achieved clinical complete response and 14 (51.9%) had partial response of brain lesions. The other nine patients were not evaluated for brain tumor response. The median brain progression-free survival was 8.60 (95% CI [6.43-13.33]) months and the median overall survival was 16.8 (95% CI [13.3-27.7]) months. Three patients had in-field failure, five had out-field failure and two had in-field and out-field failure.

Conclusion

WBRT plus SIB led to improved tumor control and clinical outcome in breast cancer patients with brain metastasis.

Stemness, invasion, and immunosuppression modulation in recurrent glioblastoma using nanotherapy

The recurrent nature of glioblastoma negatively impacts conventional treatment strategies leading to a growing need for nanomedicine. Nanotherapeutics, an approach designed to deliver drugs to specific sites, is experiencing rapid growth and gaining immense popularity. Having potential in reaching the hard-to-reach disease sites, this field has the potential to show high efficacy in combatting glioblastoma progression. The presence of glioblastoma stem cells (GSCs) is a major factor behind the poor prognosis of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). Stemness potential, heterogeneity, and self-renewal capacity, are some of the properties that make GSCs invade across the distant regions of the brain. Despite advances in medical technology and MRI-guided maximal surgical resection, not all GSCs residing in the brain can be removed, leading to recurrent disease. The aggressiveness of GBM is often correlated with immune suppression, where the T-cells are unable to infiltrate the cancer initiating GSCs. Standard of care therapies, including surgery and chemotherapy in combination with radiation therapy, have failed to tackle all the challenges of the GSCs, making it increasingly important for researchers to develop strategies to tackle their growth and proliferation and reduce the recurrence of GBM. Here, we will focus on the advancements in the field of nanomedicine that has the potential to show positive impact in managing glioblastoma tumor microenvironment. This article is categorized under: Therapeutic Approaches and Drug Discovery > Nanomedicine for Oncologic Disease.

Dosimetric comparison between RapidArc and HyperArc in hippocampal-sparing whole-brain radiotherapy with a simultaneous integrated boost

The HyperArc technique is known for generating high-quality radiosurgical treatment plans for intracranial lesions or hippocampal-sparing whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT). However, there is no reported feasibility of using the HyperArc technique in hippocampal-sparing WBRT with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB). This study aimed to compare dosimetric parameters of 2 commercially-available volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy techniques, HyperArc and RapidArc, when using hippocampal-sparing WBRT with a SIB to treat brain metastases. Treatment plans using HyperArc and RapidArc techniques were generated retrospectively for 19 previously treated patients (1 to 3 brain metastases). The planning target volumes for the whole brain (excluding the hippocampal avoidance region; PTVWB) and metastases (PTVmet) were prescribed 25 and 45 Gy, respectively, in 10 fractions. Each plan included homogeneous and inhomogeneous delivery to the PTVmet. Dosimetric parameters for the target (conformity index [CI], homogeneity index [HI], target coverage [D95%]), and nontarget organs at risk were compared for the HyperArc and RapidArc plans. For homogeneous delivery, dosimetric parameters, including mean CI, HI, and target coverage in PTVWB and PTVmet, were superior for HyperArc than RapidArc plans (all p < 0.01). The PTVWB and PTVmet target coverage for HyperArc plans was significantly greater than for RapidArc plans (96.17% vs 93.38%, p < 0.01; 94.02% vs 92.21%, p < 0.01, respectively). HyperArc plans had significantly lower mean hippocampal Dmax and Dmin values than RapidArc plans (Dmax: 15.53 Gy vs, 16.71 Gy, p < 0.01; Dmin: 8.33 Gy vs 8.93 Gy, p < 0.01, respectively). Similarly, inhomogeneous delivery of hyperArc produced a superior target and lower hippocampal dosimetric parameters than RapidArc, except for the HI of PTVmet (all p < 0.01). HyperArc generated superior conformity and target coverage with lower hippocampal doses than RapidArc. HyperArc could be an attractive technique for hippocampal-sparing WBRT with an SIB.

Application of piecewise VMAT technique to whole-brain radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost for multiple metastases

PURPOSE

This study implemented a piecewise volumetric modulated arc therapy (P-VMAT) for realizing whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) for multiple brain metastases (> 40 metastases) with a conventional C-arm linear accelerator.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed 10 patients with multiple brain metastases (40-120 metastases, median 76), who underwent WBRT and SIB using helical tomotherapy (HT). The prescribed doses were 40 Gy/20 f and 60 Gy/20 f for WBRT and SIB, respectively. Corresponding new HT plans were designed with P-VMAT using 7 arcs. For each arc, the collimator was rotated to 45°, and the field width was limited to 2.5 cm with 0.5 cm overlap with adjacent arcs. Thus, each arc covered only one section of the brain target volume. A conventional dual arc VMAT (DA-VMAT) plan was also designed. HT, P-VMAT, and DA-VMAT plans were compared using dose distribution reviews and dosimetric parameters. ArcCHECK phantom measurements were performed for verification of P-VMAT plans.

RESULTS

No significant differences in the mean coverage of the whole-brain target and metastases were observed between HT and P-VMAT (p > 0.05). The conformity index for the whole-brain target improved with P-VMAT compared with HT (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the volume of 44 Gy V₄₄ (110% of prescribed dose for WBRT) received for whole-brain significantly reduced with P-VMAT from 38.2 ± 12.9% to 23.3 ± 9.4% (p < 0.05), and the maximum dose for organs at risks such as the hippocampus, optical nerve, optical chiasm, and spinal cord declined with P-VMAT (p < 0.05). Unlike HT and P-VMAT, DA-VMAT was clinically unacceptable because V₄₄ in the whole-brain was too high (54.7 ± 8.2%). The mean absolute dose gamma passing rate for P-VMAT plans was 97.6 ± 1.1% (3%/3 mm criterion, 10%).

CONCLUSIONS

P-VMAT is favorable for WBRT and SIB for multiple brain metastases. It provides comparable coverage of whole-brain target and SIB, with better conformity, lower V_44, and better dose sparing of organs at risk compared with HT. Furthermore, results show that DA-VMAT fails clinical practice even for a relatively large number of brain metastases with a high degree of plan complexity. The patient specific verification demonstrates the feasibility of P-VMAT for clinical application.

A Phase II Multi-institutional Clinical Trial Assessing Fractionated Simultaneous In-Field Boost Radiotherapy for Brain Oligometastases

Purpose/Objective Published preclinical and phase I clinical trial data suggest that fractionated lesional radiotherapy with 60 Gy in 10 fractions can serve as an alternative approach to single fraction radiosurgical boost for brain oligometastases.  Methods and Materials A phase II clinical trial (NCT01543542) of a total of 60 Gy in 10 fractions of lesional (one to three) radiotherapy (given simultaneously with whole-brain helical tomotherapy with 30 Gy in 10 fractions) was conducted at five institutions. We hypothesized that fractionated radiotherapy would be considered unsuitable if the median overall survival (OS) was degraded by two months or if six-month intracranial control (ICC) and intracranial lesion (ILC) were inferior by 10% compared with the published RTOG 9508 results. Results A total of 87 patients were enrolled over a 4.5-year accrual period. Radiological lesion and extralesional central nervous system progression were documented in 15/87 (17%) and 11/87 (13%) patients, respectively. Median OS for all patients was 5.4 months. Six-month actuarial estimates of ICC and ILC were 78% and 89%, respectively. However, only the ILC estimate achieved statistical significance (p=0.02), demonstrating non-inferiority to the a priori historical controls (OS: p=0.09, ICC=0.31). Two patients developed suspected asymptomatic radionecrosis. Conclusions The phase II estimates of ILC were demonstrated to be non-inferior to the results of the RTOG 9508.

Whole-brain radiotherapy plus sequential or simultaneous integrated boost for the treatment of a limited number of brain metastases in non-small cell lung cancer: A single-institution study

Background

To compare the survival outcomes and neurocognitive dysfunction in non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with brain metastases (BM ≤10) treated by whole‐brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with sequential integrated boost (SEB) or simultaneous integrated boost (SIB).

Materials

Fifty‐two NSCLC patients with a limited number of BMs were retrospectively analyzed. Twenty cases received WBRT+SEB (WBRT: 3 Gy*10 fractions and BMs: 4 Gy*3 fractions; SEB group), and 32 cases received WBRT+SIB (WBRT: 3 Gy*10 fractions and BMs: 4 Gy*10 fractions; SIB group). The survival and mini‐mental state examination (MMSE) scores were compared between the groups.

Results

The cumulative 1‐, 2‐, and 3‐year survival rates in the SEB vs SIB groups were 60.0% vs 47.8%, 41.1% vs 19.1%, and 27.4% vs 0%, respectively. The median survival times in the SEB and SIB groups were 15 and 10 months, respectively. The difference in survival rate was significant (P = .046). Subgroup analysis revealed that 1‐, 2‐, and 3‐year survival rates and median survival time in the SEB group were significantly superior to those of the SIB group, especially for male patients (age <60 years) with 1‐2 BMs (P < .05). The MMSE score of the SEB group at 3 months after radiation was higher than that of the SIB group (P < .05). Nevertheless, WBRT+SEB required a longer treatment time and greater cost (P < .005).

Conclusions

WBRT + SEB results in better survival outcomes than WBRT+SIB, especially for male patients (age <60 years) with 1‐2 BMs. WBRT+SEB also appeared to induce less neurocognitive impairment than WBRT+SIB.

Dosimetric evaluation of four whole brain radiation therapy approaches with hippocampus and inner ear avoidance and simultaneous integrated boost for limited brain metastases

AIMS

To perform a dosimetric evaluation of four different simultaneous integrated boost whole brain radiotherapy modalities with hippocampus and inner ear avoidance in the treatment of limited brain metastases.

METHODS

Computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging data of 10 patients with limited (1-5) brain metastases were used to replan step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (sIMRT), dynamic intensity-modulated radiation therapy (dIMRT), volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and helical tomotherapy (Tomo). The prescribed doses of 40-50 Gy in 10 fractions and 30 Gy in 10 fractions were simultaneously delivered to the metastatic lesions and the whole-brain volume, respectively. The hippocampal dose met the RTOG 0933 criteria for hippocampal avoidance (Dmax ≤17 Gy, D100% ≤10 Gy). The inner ear dose was restrained to Dmean ≤15 Gy. Target coverage (TC), homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), maximum dose (Dmax), minimum dose (Dmin) and dose to organs at risk (OARs) were compared.

RESULTS

All plans met the indicated dose restrictions. The mean percentage of planning target volume of metastases (PTVmets) coverage ranged from 97.1 to 99.4%. For planning target volume of brain (PTVbrain), Tomo provided the lowest average D2% (37.5 ± 2.8 Gy), the highest average D98% (25.2 ± 2.0 Gy), and the best TC (92.6% ± 2.1%) and CI (0.79 ± 0.06). The two fixed gantry IMRT modalities (step and shot, dynamic) provided similar PTVbrain dose homogeneity (both 0.76). Significant differences across the four approaches were observed for the maximum and minimum doses to the hippocampus and the maximum doses to the eyes, lens and optic nerves.

CONCLUSION

All four radiotherapy modalities produced acceptable treatment plans with good avoidance of the hippocampus and inner ear. Tomo obtained satisfactory PTVbrain coverage and the best homogeneity index.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03414944 . Registered 29 January 2018.

Feasibility and Efficacy of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy based on MRI-CT fusion in Patients with Brain Metastases of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

Purpose: To assess the feasibility and therapeutic effects of simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SIB-IMRT) based on the fusion imaging of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) as a dose-intensive technique in patients with brain metastases (BM) of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods and materials: Forty-six NSCLC patients with 1 to 7 brain metastases were enrolled in this retrospective study between November, 2011 and February, 2017. Thirty-one patients (67.4%) had 1-3 metastases (oligometastases), otherwise, more than 3 metastases were seen in only 15 patients (32.6%). GTV (Gross tumor volume) contouring was based on the fusion imaging of MRI-CT, WBRT was prescribed in 37.5 Gy/15 fractions with a simultaneous boost in the metastatic lesions of 52.5 Gy/15 fractions. Results: The median overall survival (OS) and intracranial progression free survival (PFS) for all the patients were 20.0 months and 11.0 months, respectively. The 6-month and 1-year OS were 87.0% and 69.6% respectively, while the 6-month and 1-year PFS were 78.3% and 43.5% respectively. Until the end of the follow-up, 16 patients (34.8%) were alive. No evidence of intracranial progress or recurrence was found in 6 patients (13.0%) during the follow-up. Conclusion: SIB-IMRT with the dose/fractionation based on the fusion imaging of MRI-CT is feasible and safe. It is beneficial to the NSCLC patients with BM and can reduce the overall costs of treatment.

Whole brain radiotherapy with adjuvant or concomitant boost in brain metastasis: dosimetric comparison between helical and volumetric IMRT technique

BACKGROUND

To compare and evaluate the possible advantages related to the use of VMAT and helical IMRT and two different modalities of boost delivering, adjuvant stereotactic boost (SRS) or simultaneous integrated boost (SIB), in the treatment of brain metastasis (BM) in RPA classes I-II patients.

METHODS

Ten patients were treated with helical IMRT, 5 of them with SRS after whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and 5 with SIB. MRI co-registration with planning CT was mandatory and prescribed doses were 30 Gy in 10 fractions (fr) for WBRT and 15Gy/1fr or 45Gy/10fr in SRS or SIB, respectively. For each patient, 4 "treatment plans" (VMAT SRS and SIB, helical IMRT SRS and SIB) were calculated and accepted if PTV boost was included in 95 % isodose and dose constraints of the main organs at risk were respected without major deviations. Homogeneity Index (HI), Conformal Index (CI) and Conformal Number (CN) were considered to compare the different plans. Moreover, time of treatment delivery was calculated and considered in the analysis.

RESULTS

Volume of brain metastasis ranged between 1.43 and 51.01 cc (mean 12.89 ± 6.37 ml) and 3 patients had double lesions. V95% resulted over 95 % in the average for each kind of technique, but the "target coverage" was inadequate for VMAT planning with two sites. The HI resulted close to the ideal value of zero in all cases; VMAT-SIB, VMAT-SRS, Helical IMRT-SIB and Helical IMRT-SRS showed mean CI of 2.15, 2.10, 2.44 and 1.66, respectively (optimal range: 1.5-2.0). Helical IMRT-SRS was related to the best and reliable finding of CN (0.66). The mean of treatment time was 210 s, 467 s, 440 s, 1598 s, respectively, for VMAT-SIB, VMAT-SRS, Helical IMRT-SIB and Helical IMRT-SRS.

CONCLUSIONS

This dosimetric comparison show that helical IMRT obtain better target coverage and respect of CI and CN; VMAT could be acceptable in solitary metastasis. SIB modality can be considered as a good choice for clinical and logistic compliance; literature's preliminary data are confirming also a radiobiological benefit for SIB. Helical IMRT-SRS seems less effective for the long time of treatment compared to other techniques.

Assessment of function and quality of life in a phase II multi-institutional clinical trial of fractionated simultaneous in-field boost radiotherapy for patients with 1-3 metastases

We examined functional outcomes and quality of life of whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with integrated fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy boost (FSRT) for brain metastases treatment. Eighty seven people with 1-3 brain metastases (54/87 lung primary, 42/87 single brain metastases) were enrolled on this Phase II trial of WBRT (30 Gy/10) + simultaneous FSRT, (60 Gy/10). Median overall follow-up and survival was 5.4 months, 6 month actuarial intra-lesional control was 78 %; only 1 patient exhibited grade 4 toxicity (worsened seizures); most treatment related toxicity was grade 1 or 2; 2/87 patients demonstrated asymptomatic radiation necrosis on follow-up imaging. Mean (Min-Max) baseline KPS, Mini Mental Status Exam (MMSE) and FACT-BR quality of life were 83 (70-100), 28 (21-30) and 143 (98-153). Lower baseline MMSE (but not KPS or FACT-Br) was associated with worse survival after adjusting for age, number of metastases, primary and extra-cranial disease status. Crude rates of deterioration (>10 points decrease from baseline for KPS and FACT-Br, MMSE fall to <27) ranged from 26 to 38 % for KPS, 32-59 % for FACT-Br and 0-16 % for MMSE depending on the time-point assessed with higher rates generally noted at earlier time points (≤6 months post-treatment). Using a linear mixed models analysis, significant declines from baseline were noted for KPS and FACT-Br (largest effects at 6 weeks to 3 months) with no significant change in MMSE. The effects on function and quality of life of this integrated treatment of WBRT + simultaneous FSRT were similar to other published series combining WBRT + radiosurgery.

Whole brain radiotherapy plus simultaneous in-field boost with image guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy for brain metastases of non-small cell lung cancer

Background

Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) plus sequential focal radiation boost is a commonly used therapeutic strategy for patients with brain metastases. However, recent reports on WBRT plus simultaneous in-field boost (SIB) also showed promising outcomes. The objective of present study is to retrospectively evaluate the efficacy and toxicities of WBRT plus SIB with image guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT) for inoperable brain metastases of NSCLC.

Methods

Twenty-nine NSCLC patients with 87 inoperable brain metastases were included in this retrospective study. All patients received WBRT at a dose of 40 Gy/20 f, and SIB boost with IG-IMRT at a dose of 20 Gy/5 f concurrent with WBRT in the fourth week. Prior to each fraction of IG-IMRT boost, on-line positioning verification and correction were used to ensure that the set-up errors were within 2 mm by cone beam computed tomography in all patients.

Results

The one-year intracranial control rate, local brain failure rate, and distant brain failure rate were 62.9%, 13.8%, and 19.2%, respectively. The two-year intracranial control rate, local brain failure rate, and distant brain failure rate were 42.5%, 30.9%, and 36.4%, respectively. Both median intracranial progression-free survival and median survival were 10 months. Six-month, one-year, and two-year survival rates were 65.5%, 41.4%, and 13.8%, corresponding to 62.1%, 41.4%, and 10.3% of intracranial progression-free survival rates. Patients with Score Index for Radiosurgery in Brain Metastases (SIR) >5, number of intracranial lesions <3, and history of EGFR-TKI treatment had better survival. Three lesions (3.45%) demonstrated radiation necrosis after radiotherapy. Grades 2 and 3 cognitive impairment with grade 2 radiation leukoencephalopathy were observed in 4 (13.8%) and 4 (13.8%) patients. No dosimetric parameters were found to be associated with these late toxicities. Patients received EGFR-TKI treatment had higher incidence of grades 2–3 cognitive impairment with grade 2 leukoencephalopathy.

Conclusions

WBRT plus SIB with IG-IMRT is a tolerable and effective treatment for NSCLC patients with inoperable brain metastases. However, the results of present study need to be examined by the prospective investigations.

Geometric and dosimetric uncertainties in intracranial stereotatctic treatments for multiple nonisocentric lesions

The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of geometric uncertainties of patient position on treatments of multiple nonisocentric intracranial lesions. The average distance between lesions in patients with multiple targets was determined by a retrospective survey of patients with multiple lesions. Retrospective patient imaging data from fractionated stereotactic patients were used to calculate interfractional and intrafractional patient position uncertainty. Three different immobilization devices were included in the positioning study. The interfractional and intrafractional patient positioning error data were used to calculate the geometric offset of a lesion located at varying distances from the mechanical isocenter for treatments of multiple lesions with a single arc, assuming that no intrafractional position correction is employed during an arc rotation. Dosimetric effects were studied using two representative lesions of two sizes, 6 mm and 13 mm maximum dimensions, and prescribed to 20 Gy and 18 Gy, respectively. Distances between lesions ranged from < 10 mm to 150 mm, which would correspond to a range of isocenter to lesion separations of < 10 mm to 75 mm, assuming an isocenter located at the geometric mean. In the presence of a full six degree of freedom patient correction system, the effects of the intrafractional patient positioning uncertainties were less than 1.8 mm (3.6 mm) for 1σ (2σ) deviations for lesion spacing up to 75 mm assuming a quadratic summation of 1σ and 2σ. Without the benefit of a six DOF correction device, only correcting for three translations, the effects of the intrafractional patient positioning uncertainties were within 3.1 mm (7.2 mm) for 1σ (2σ) deviations for distances up to 75 mm. 1σ and 2σ deviations along all six axes were observed in 3.6% and 0.3%, respectively, of 974 fractions analyzed. Dosimetric effects for 2 mm and 4 mm offsets were most significant for the small lesion with minimum dose (Dmin) decreasing from 20 Gy to 13.6 Gy and 5.7 Gy and volume receiving the prescription (V_20Gy) reducing from 100% to 57% and 16%, respectively. The dosimetric effects on the larger lesion were less pronounced with Dmin reducing from 18 Gy to 17.5 Gy and 14.2 Gy, and V_18Gy reducing from 100% to 98.3% and 85.4%, for 2 mm and 4 mm offsets, respectively. In the 1σ scenario (3.6% of patients) angular uncertainties in patient positioning can introduce 1.0 mm shifts in the location of the lesion position at distances of 75 mm, compared to an isocentric treatment even with a full six DOF correction. Without the ability to correct angular positioning errors, a lesion positioned 75 mm away from the mechanical isocenter can be located in 3.6% of patients > 3.0 mm distant from the planned position. Dosimetric results depend upon the distance from isocenter and the size of the target. Single isocenter treatments for multiple lesions should be considered only when full six DOF corrections can be applied, the intrafractional immobilization precision is well quantified, and a PTV expansion is included for more distant lesions to account for unavoidable residual patient positioning uncertainties.

PACS number: 87.55.Qr, 87.53.Ly, 87.55.D‐

Whole brain radiotherapy for brain metastasis

Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is a mainstay of treatment in patients with both identifiable brain metastases and prophylaxis for microscopic disease. The use of WBRT has decreased somewhat in recent years due to both advances in radiation technology, allowing for a more localized delivery of radiation, and growing concerns regarding the late toxicity profile associated with WBRT. This has prompted the development of several recent and ongoing prospective studies designed to provide Level I evidence to guide optimal treatment approaches for patients with intracranial metastases. In addition to defining the role of WBRT in patients with brain metastases, identifying methods to improve WBRT is an active area of investigation, and can be classified into two general categories: Those designed to decrease the morbidity of WBRT, primarily by reducing late toxicity, and those designed to improve the efficacy of WBRT. Both of these areas of research show diversity and promise, and it seems feasible that in the near future, the efficacy/toxicity ratio may be improved, allowing for a more diverse clinical application of WBRT.

Efficacy and toxicity of whole brain radiotherapy in patients with multiple cerebral metastases from malignant melanoma

BACKGROUND

To retrospectively access outcome and toxicity of whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) in patients with multiple brain metastases (BM) from malignant melanoma (MM).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Results of 87 patients (median age 58 years; 35 female, 52 male) treated by WBRT for BM of MM between 2000 and 2011 were reviewed. Total dose applied was either 30 Gy in 10 fractions (n = 56) or 40 Gy in 20 fractions (n = 31). All but 9 patients suffered from extra-cerebral metastases. Prior surgical resection of BM was performed in 18 patients, salvage stereotactic radiosurgery in 13 patients.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 8 months (range, 0-57 months), the 6- and 12-months overall-(OS) survival rates were 29.2% and 16.5%, respectively. The median OS was 3.5 months. In cerebral follow-up imaging 6 (11) patients showed a complete (partial) remission, while 11 (17) patients had stable disease (intra-cerebral tumor progression). In comparison of total dose, the group treated with 40 Gy in 20 fractions achieved a significant longer OS (p = 0.003, median 3.1 vs. 5.6 months). Furthermore, DS-GPA score (p < 0.001) as well as RPA class (p < 0.001) influenced significantly on OS and patients had a significantly longer OS after surgical resection (p = 0.001, median 3.0 vs. 5.8 months, multivariate p = 0.007). Having extra-cerebral metastases didn't significantly impact on OS (p = 0.21).

CONCLUSION

Treatment of BM from MM with WBRT is tolerated well and some remissions of BM could be achieved. An advantage for higher treatment total doses was seen. However, outcome is non-satisfying, and further improvements in treatment of BM from MM are warranted.