1
|
Ganz JC. Cerebral metastases. PROGRESS IN BRAIN RESEARCH 2022; 268:229-258. [PMID: 35074082 DOI: 10.1016/bs.pbr.2021.10.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
Brain metastases are common and deadly. Over the last 25 years GKNS has been established as an invaluable treatment. It may be used as a primary treatment or after either surgery or WBRT. Patients are assessed using one of a number of available scales. GKNS may be repeated for new metastases and for unresponsive tumors. Prescription doses are usually between 18 and 20Gy. The use of advanced MR techniques to highlight sensitive structures like the hippocampi have extended the efficacy of the treatment. More recently GKNS has been used with different target therapies with improved results. More recently frameless treatments have become more popular in this group of very sick patients. GKNS controls tumors in between 80% and over 95% of cases and may even be used for brainstem tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeremy C Ganz
- Department of Neurosurgery, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Redmond KJ, Gui C, Benedict S, Milano MT, Grimm J, Vargo JA, Soltys SG, Yorke E, Jackson A, El Naqa I, Marks LB, Xue J, Heron DE, Kleinberg LR. Tumor Control Probability of Radiosurgery and Fractionated Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 110:53-67. [PMID: 33390244 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.10.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 64] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2020] [Accepted: 10/25/2020] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE As part of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Working Group on Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy, tumor control probability (TCP) after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (fSRS) for brain metastases was modeled based on pooled dosimetric and clinical data from published English-language literature. METHODS AND MATERIALS PubMed-indexed studies published between January 1995 and September 2017 were used to evaluate dosimetric and clinical predictors of TCP after SRS or fSRS for brain metastases. Eligible studies had ≥10 patients and included detailed dose-fractionation data with corresponding ≥1-year local control (LC) data, typically evaluated as a >20% increase in diameter of the targeted lesion using the pre-SRS diameter as a reference. RESULTS Of 2951 potentially eligible manuscripts, 56 included sufficient dose-volume data for analyses. Accepting that necrosis and pseudoprogression can complicate the assessment of LC, for tumors ≤20 mm, single-fraction doses of 18 and 24 Gy corresponded with >85% and 95% 1-year LC rates, respectively. For tumors 21 to 30 mm, an 18 Gy single-fraction dose was associated with 75% LC. For tumors 31 to 40 mm, a 15 Gy single-fraction dose yielded ∼69% LC. For 3- to 5-fraction fSRS using doses in the range of 27 to 35 Gy, 80% 1-year LC has been achieved for tumors of 21 to 40 mm in diameter. CONCLUSIONS TCP for SRS and fSRS are presented. For small lesions ≤20 mm, single doses of ≈18 Gy appear generally associated with excellent rates of LC; for melanoma, higher doses seem warranted. For larger lesions >20 mm, local control rates appear to be ≈ 70% to 75% with usual doses of 15 to 18 Gy, and in this setting, fSRS regimens should be considered. Greater consistency in reporting of dosimetric and LC data is needed to facilitate future pooled analyses. As systemic and biologic therapies evolve, updated analyses will be needed to further assess the necessity, efficacy, and toxicity of SRS and fSRS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristin J Redmond
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
| | - Chengcheng Gui
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Stanley Benedict
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California at Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento, California
| | - Michael T Milano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York
| | - Jimm Grimm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania
| | - J Austin Vargo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Scott G Soltys
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| | - Ellen Yorke
- Medical Physics Department, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Andrew Jackson
- Medical Physics Department, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Issam El Naqa
- Department of Machine Learning and Radiation Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida
| | - Lawrence B Marks
- Department of Radiation Oncology and the Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
| | - Jinyu Xue
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University, New York, New York
| | - Dwight E Heron
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Bon Secours Mercy Health System, Youngstown, Ohio
| | - Lawrence R Kleinberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Stereotactic irradiation of non-small cell lung cancer brain metastases: evaluation of local and cerebral control in a large series. Sci Rep 2020; 10:11201. [PMID: 32641798 PMCID: PMC7343798 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-68209-6] [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: 08/23/2019] [Accepted: 06/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) of brain metastases (BM) results are often reported in the heterogeneous primitive population. Here, we report our experience in consecutively treated patients who underwent SRT alone for BM from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This retrospective analysis included consecutive patients with no history of cerebral treatment who underwent Cyberknife™ SRT for BM from NSCLC in our institution from 2007 to 2016. One hundred patients were included in the study, with a median follow-up of 33 months (20–64). Mean age was 63 years (SD ± 10); 88% had Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) > 70; 67% had unique BM; 18 patients received single-fraction SRT (20–25 Gy), and 82 received hypo-fractionated SRT (HSRT) (24–36 Gy in 3–5 fractions). We reported a complication rate of 17% (2% of G3-4). Median survival was 10.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.8–13.9]. At 1 year, local and cerebral control rates were respectively 78.7% (95% CI 70–86.5%) and 43% (95% CI 33.5–53%). Thirty patients underwent salvage treatment (whole brain radiation therapy, n = 13; SRT, n = 14; surgery, n = 3). Cyberknife™-based SRT is an effective treatment associated with high local control rate with low morbidity for patients with NSCLC’s BM. Close follow-up is necessary to perform salvage treatment.
Collapse
|
4
|
Wang H, Liu X, Jiang X, Song Y, Wang X, Wang J, Dong Y, Li F, Wu Z, Zhang Y, Yuan Z. Cystic brain metastases had slower speed of tumor shrinkage but similar prognosis compared with solid tumors that underwent radiosurgery treatment. Cancer Manag Res 2019; 11:1753-1763. [PMID: 30858728 PMCID: PMC6387614 DOI: 10.2147/cmar.s188674] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Traditionally, radiosurgery was considered less effective for patients with cystic brain metastases. However, comparisons of prognosis between cystic and solid brain metastases in cancer patients have been seldom reported. We aimed to compare the survival between cystic and solid brain metastases and assess risk factors for overall survival after brain metastases (BMOS) in patients who underwent radiosurgery treatment. Patients and methods The Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate Cox regression analysis were used to compare survival time and evaluate risk factors for BMOS. Results A total of 356 patients (including 498 brain metastases) were analyzed in our study, including 67 patients (67/356, 18.8%) with 75 cystic brain metastases. There is no statistical significance in BMOS between patients with cystic (17 months, range: 3-64 months) and solid (17.5 months, range: 1-65 months) brain metastases (P=0.148). However, the volume of cystic brain metastases decreased more slowly than solid brain metastases (P<0.05). The results indicated that high recursive partitioning analysis classification (P=0.006), large volume of brain metastases (P=0.006), and different primary lesion (especially gastrointestinal tract tumor) (P=0.001) were associated with poor prognosis in patients with brain metastases. Conclusion There is no difference in prognosis and local control between patients with cystic and solid brain metastases who underwent radiosurgery. However, the rate and speed of tumor shrinkage were lower in cystic brain metastases after radiotherapy. Patients with larger brain metastases had shorter survival time, regardless of cystic or solid brain metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hui Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China,
| | - Xiaoye Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China,
| | - Xuechao Jiang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China,
| | - Yongchun Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China,
| | - Xiaoguang Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China,
| | - Jingsheng Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China,
| | - Yang Dong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China,
| | - Fengtong Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China,
| | - Zhiqiang Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China,
| | - Yuhan Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China,
| | - Zhiyong Yuan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China,
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Rava P, Rosenberg J, Jamorabo D, Sioshansi S, DiPetrillo T, Wazer DE, Hepel J. Feasibility and safety of cavity-directed stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases at a high-volume medical center. Adv Radiat Oncol 2016; 1:141-147. [PMID: 28740883 PMCID: PMC5514013 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2016.06.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2016] [Revised: 06/13/2016] [Accepted: 06/15/2016] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective Our objective was to report safety and efficacy of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to the surgical bed following resection of brain metastases. Methods Eighty-seven consecutive patients who underwent cavity-directed SRS to the operative bed for the treatment of brain metastases between 2002 and 2010 were evaluated. SRS required a gadolinium-enhanced, high-resolution, T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for tumor targeting and delivered a median dose of 18 Gy (14-22 Gy) prescribed to encompass the entire resection cavity. Whole brain irradiation was reserved for salvage. Patients were followed every 3 months with clinical examination and magnetic resonance imaging. Overall survival, local and regional recurrence, and factors affecting these outcomes were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses. Results The median imaging follow-up was 7.1 months, with >40% of patients having imaging for ≥1 year. Local control at 1 and 2 years was 82% and 75%, respectively. Cavity recurrence was more common with a tumor diameter >3 cm (P < .020) or resection cavity volume >14 mL (P < .050). One-year local control for tumors <2 cm, 2 cm to 3 cm, and >3 cm were 100%, 86%, and 72%, respectively. Neither subtotal resection nor target margins >2 mm to 3 mm affected local control. The median overall survival was 14.3 months with actuarial 5-year survival of 20%. Actuarial regional central nervous system recurrence was 44% at 1 year. On univariate analysis, only the presence of extracranial disease was associated with survival (P < .001) and central nervous system failure (P < .030). Conclusions Excellent local control is achievable with cavity-directed SRS in well-selected patients, particularly for lesions with diameter <3 cm and resection cavity volumes <14 mL. Long-term survival is possible for select patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul Rava
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, Massachusetts
- Corresponding author. Radiation Oncology, University of Massachusetts, 55 Lake Avenue North, Worcester, MA 01655Radiation OncologyUniversity of Massachusetts55 Lake Avenue NorthWorcesterMA01655
| | - Jennifer Rosenberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, Pennsylvania
| | - Daniel Jamorabo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, Massachusetts
| | - Shirin Sioshansi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, Massachusetts
| | - Thomas DiPetrillo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island
| | - David E. Wazer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island
| | - Jaroslaw Hepel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island
| |
Collapse
|