Dosimetric Analysis of Local Failure Outcomes and Vertebral Compression Fracture Risk in Single-Fraction Spine Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Metastatic Sarcoma

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Sarcoma spinal metastases (SSM) are particularly difficult to manage given their poor response rates to chemotherapy and their inherent radioresistance. We sought to analyze dosimetric parameters impacting local failure and vertebral compression fracture outcomes in a homogenously treated cohort of patients with SSM treated with single-fraction spine stereotactic radiosurgery (SSRS).

MATERIALS/METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on a cohort of patients with SSM treated with definitive SSRS at a single tertiary institution. 16-24 Gy was delivered to the GTV and 16 Gy uniformly to the CTV. Kaplan-Meier analysis was conducted to assess time to local failure (LF). The log-rank test was utilized to examine group differences. Patients were censored at time of last follow-up or death. Cox proportionate hazards modeling was used to determine hazard ratios (HR) and their respective 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 66 patients with 96 lesions underwent SSRS for SSM. Median follow-up was 17 months (IQR 8-28). Median age was 55 years (IQR 41-63). The most common histological subtype was leiomyosarcoma (41%) followed by liposarcoma (9%). 81 lesions received 24 Gy to the GTV, 12 received 18 Gy and 3 received 16 Gy. Median GTV and CTV volume was 13.6cc (IQR 5-27) and 51.6cc (IQR 30-80) respectively. 27% of patients had Bilsky 1b or greater disease. 16 of 96 lesions demonstrated progression representing a crude local failure rate of 17% with median time to failure of 8 months (IQR 5-18). The 1-year actuarial progression free survival (PFS) was 89% with a median PFS of 13 months (IQR 16-63). Median overall survival (OS) was 15 months (IQR 8-28) from SSRS. 8% of patients developed vertebral compression fractures at a median of 13 months post SSRS (IQR 7-25). Every 1 Gy increase in GTV minimum dose (DMin) across the range (5.8-25cc) was associated with a reduced risk of local failure (HR = 0.875 [95% CI 0.787-0.974], p = 0.01). Stratifying thresholds for GTV DMin, a local control benefit was seen as low as 12 Gy and higher (HR = 0.329 [95% CI 0.11-0.97, p = 0.044) with a significantly greater magnitude benefit seen at 14 Gy (HR = 0.267 [95% CI 0.09-0.77, p = 0.014) and above 15 Gy (HR = 0.091 [95% CI 0.03-0.41], p = 0.0018). There were no other queried variables besides GTV Dmin associated with local control including: GTV: volume, mean, Dmax, D90, CTV: volume, Dmin, Dmean, Dmax, or D90. There was an increased risk of VCF with increasing CTV DMean (HR = 2.4 [95% CI 1.4-4.1], p = 0.002) and CTV D90 (HR = 2.2 [95% CI 1.2-4.0], p = 0.01); however, no association with GTV parameters.

CONCLUSION

This study represents one of the most homogenously treated and the largest cohorts of patients with sarcoma spinal metastases treated with single-fraction SSRS. Despite inherent radioresistance, SSRS confers durable and high rates of local control in SSM without unexpected long-term toxicity rates. Increasing GTV minimum dose is significantly associated with superior local control with no corresponding increased risk of VCF.

MD Anderson Phase III Randomized Preoperative Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) vs. Postoperative SRS for Brain Metastases Trial

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Postoperative stereotactic radiation therapy/radiosurgery (SRT/SRS) is being evaluated in comparison to Preoperative SRT for brain metastases (mets) in a limited number of prospective clinical trials. Our objective is to address the significant knowledge gap concerning the logistics of preoperative SRT in comparison to postoperative SRT in a randomized controlled study.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Patients with brain mets with at least 1 surgically operable met were randomized (1:1) to Preop vs Postop SRT. In this abstract, we present non-primary endpoint data on the trial concept and logistics of treatment for this data safety monitoring board reviewed study. Patients enrolled had 1-2 lesions resected and <15 lesions treated at time of SRT to best reflect the standard population that receive SRT and surgery at our institution.

RESULTS

From 12/2018 to 12/2022, 99 patients with 1-2 operable brain mets were enrolled and randomized to Preop (n = 49) or Postop (n = 50) SRT. Males represented 56% of the cohort compared to females, and <25% were age 18-49 years, while 27%, 29, and 19% respectively were 50-59, 60-69, and > = 70. The most frequent histologies enrolled were lung (29%), renal cell (15%), melanoma (14%), and breast (11%) cancers. The majority of patients (83%) had 1-4 brain mets on their baseline MRI and 91% subsequently had a single lesion resected. Seventy-nine patients completed both SRT and surgery, while 9% received no therapy due to drop out before study therapy initiation. Among patients receiving both therapies in the combined cohort, 68% received a non-invasive stereotactic radiosurgery instrument to the randomized cavity lesion compared to 32% receiving LINAC based SRT. Treatment of the lesion or cavity with single fraction SRT was 51% in the Preop arm vs 31% in the Postop arm. Multi-fraction (3-5 SRT) was 67% in the Postop cohort in contrast to 47% in the Preop cohort. Time from randomization to RT was 5.6 days and 33.7 days in the Preop and Postop cohorts respectively, and for surgery was 10.2 days vs 12.9 days in the Postop vs Preop cohorts. The average time from RT to surgery was 7.3 days in the Preop arm and 23.5 days in the Postop arm (to allow for incisional healing time).

CONCLUSION

In one of the early initiated randomized prospective cohorts of Preop vs Postop SRT, we demonstrated logistical feasibility with an efficient clinical trial workflow for study treatment. Differences in Preop vs Postop logistics reflect clinical practice differences in time-to-treatment. Therapy with various modalities reflected real-world practice and possibly provider preferences in technique when addressing the nature of delineating cavities and changes in cavity volume with regard to fractionation. Independent of the primary outcomes, our data provides insights in the practical management of patients receiving these two modalities of therapy, and further data at the completion of trial will address relevant primary outcomes.