1
|
Pratapneni A, Klebaner D, Soltys SG, Rahimy E, Gibbs IC, Chang SD, Li G, Hayden Gephart M, Veeravagu A, Szalkowski GA, Gu X, Wang L, Chuang C, Liu L, Jackson S, Lu R, Skerchak JA, Huang KZ, Wong S, Brown E, Pollom EL. Single- versus multi-fraction spine stereotactic radiosurgery (ALL-STAR) for patients with spinal metastases: a randomized phase III trial protocol. BMC Cancer 2025; 25:323. [PMID: 39984889 PMCID: PMC11846292 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-025-13655-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2024] [Accepted: 02/05/2025] [Indexed: 02/23/2025] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND For patients with spine metastases, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) provides excellent local control and pain response. Despite increasing use of this treatment modality, there is no consensus on the optimal dose and fractionation of spine SRS for efficacy and toxicity. We have initiated a single-center phase III randomized trial that compares two dose regimens with similar biological equivalent dose (BED) to determine the isolated effect of SRS fractionation on local control. METHODS Patients with one to three cervical, thoracic, or lumbar spine metastases spanning no more than two contiguous vertebral levels in need of radiation will be eligible for enrollment. Patients will be assigned 1:1 to receive either 22 Gy in 1 fraction or 28 Gy in 2 fractions. Biased coin randomization will be used to randomly assign patients while balancing the following stratifying variables between the two treatment arms at baseline: gastrointestinal histology (yes/no), paraspinal tissue extension (yes/no), epidural compression (low-/high-grade), and number of sites treated (one to three). The primary endpoint is one-year local control, defined per Spine Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (SPINO) criteria. The secondary endpoints include patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL), pain associated with the treated site, vertebral compression fracture (VCF), and two-year local control. Patients will be followed for these outcomes at one to two weeks, one month, three months, and six months after treatment, and every six months thereafter until 24 months after treatment. While on the study, patients will receive routine co-interventions as clinically indicated. DISCUSSION The studies published thus far comparing the single- and multi-fraction SRS are lacking long-term local control outcomes and are limited by selection bias as well as single-fraction arms with higher BED, which is correlated with improved local control. Our study will isolate the effect of fractionation by comparing one-year local control in patients treated with single- and multi-fraction SRS with equivalent BED. We anticipate that the results of this, as well as secondary endpoints such as pain response, adverse effects, and quality of life will provide much-needed guidance regarding optimal dose and fractionation for both maximizing local control and minimizing toxicity. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION NCT#06173401. Approved by Stanford Scientific Review Committee (study ID: BRN0060) on 9/12/2023 and Stanford Institutional Review Board (study ID: IRB-72248) on 11/14/2023.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aniket Pratapneni
- Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, US.
- University of California, San Francisco, US.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Rong Lu
- Stanford Medicine, Stanford, US
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Chen H, Ghia AJ, Maralani PJ, Bettegowda C, Boriani S, Dea N, Fisher CG, Gasbarrini A, Gokaslan ZL, Laufer I, Lazary A, Reynolds J, Verlaan JJ, Rhines LD, Sahgal A. Advanced Radiotherapy Technologies in Spine Tumors: What the Surgeon Needs to Know. Global Spine J 2025; 15:104S-119S. [PMID: 39801121 PMCID: PMC11726527 DOI: 10.1177/21925682241229665] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/16/2025] Open
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN Narrative review of existing literature. OBJECTIVES Significant technological advancements in radiotherapy planning and delivery have enabled new radiotherapy techniques for the management of spine tumors. The objective of this study was to provide a comprehensive summary of these treatment techniques for practicing spine surgeons. METHODS A narrative review of the existing literature on stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and particle beam therapy (PBT) for the treatment of spine tumors was performed. The characteristics, implementation and evidence supporting these strategies in the management of primary spinal neoplasms were summarized. RESULTS The clinical effectiveness of SBRT for the control and symptom palliation of metastatic spinal tumors are well demonstrated in multiple clinical trials. Risks such as fracture, radiculopathy and plexopathy exist after spine SBRT, necessitating an individualized approach in a well experienced multidisciplinary setting. SBRT should be considered a key component of a well-rounded treatment plan for metastatic spine tumors in combination with surgery, vertebral augmentation, and drug therapy, where indicated, to achieve optimal patient outcomes. Additionally, PBT and SBRT are also leading to promising results for primary spine tumors, though comparative effectiveness studies and prospective clinical trials are required to establish these modalities more formally as alternatives to conventionally fractionated photon radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS SBRT and PBT are emerging as effective and well tolerated treatment options for primary and metastatic spine tumors. Additional investigation is needed to personalize these treatment options and further strengthen these approaches as key components in a multidisciplinary approach to the management of spinal neoplasms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hanbo Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Amol J Ghia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Pejman J Maralani
- Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Chetan Bettegowda
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Stefano Boriani
- Department of Spine Surgery, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy
| | - Nicolas Dea
- Combined Neurosurgical and Orthopaedic Spine Program, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Charles G Fisher
- Combined Neurosurgical and Orthopaedic Spine Program, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | - Ziya L Gokaslan
- Department of Neurosurgery, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Ilya Laufer
- Department of Neurological Surgery, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Aron Lazary
- National Center for Spinal Disorders, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Jeremy Reynolds
- Oxford Spinal Surgery Unit, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, UK
| | - Jorrit-Jan Verlaan
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Laurence D Rhines
- Division of Surgery, Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Aziz K, Koffler D, Vassantachart A, Rattani A, Ankrah NK, Gogineni E, Andraos TY, Sahgal A, Vellayappan B, Dunne EM, Siva S, Moraes FY, Guckenberger M, Lubelski D, Chao S, Combs S, Chang E, Amin AG, Foote M, Gibbs I, Kim M, Palmer J, Lo S, Redmond KJ. Radiosurgery Society Case-Based Guide to Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Challenging Cases of Spinal Metastases. Pract Radiat Oncol 2025; 15:54-68. [PMID: 39233007 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2024.08.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2024] [Revised: 08/11/2024] [Accepted: 08/13/2024] [Indexed: 09/06/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Spinal stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become the standard of care in management of patients with limited sites of metastatic disease, radioresistant histologies, painful vertebral metastases with long life expectancy and cases of reirradiation. Our case-based guidelines aim to assist radiation oncologists in the appropriate utilization of SBRT for common, yet challenging, cases of spinal metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS Cases were selected to include scenarios of large volume sacral disease with nerve entrapment, medically inoperable disease abutting the thecal sac, and local failure after prior SBRT. Relevant literature was reviewed, and areas requiring further investigation were discussed to offer a framework for evidence-based clinical practice. RESULTS Spinal SBRT can be effectively delivered in challenging cases following multidisciplinary discussion by using a methodical approach to patient selection, appropriate dose selection, and adherence to evidence-based dose constraints. CONCLUSIONS The Radiosurgery Society's case-based practice review offers guidance to practicing physicians treating technically challenging SBRT candidate patients with spinal metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Khaled Aziz
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Daniel Koffler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - April Vassantachart
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Keck School of Medicine of University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Abbas Rattani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Nii-Kwanchie Ankrah
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Emile Gogineni
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Therese Y Andraos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Balamurugan Vellayappan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Emma M Dunne
- Department of Radiation Oncology, British Columbia Cancer Agency - Vancouver Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Shankar Siva
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Fabio Y Moraes
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Daniel Lubelski
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Samuel Chao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Center, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Stephanie Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany; Department of Radiation Sciences, Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum Munich, Neuherberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Eric Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Keck School of Medicine of University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Anubhav G Amin
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Matthew Foote
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, ICON Cancer Centre, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Iris Gibbs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| | - Minsun Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Joshua Palmer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Simon Lo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Kristin J Redmond
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
de Almeida RAA, Ghia AJ, Amini B, Wang C, Alvarez-Breckenridge CA, Li J, Rhines LD, Tom MC, North RY, Beckham TH, Tatsui CE. Quantification of MRI Artifacts in Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polyetheretherketone Thoracolumbar Pedicle Screw Constructs prior to Spinal Stereotactic Radiosurgery. Pract Radiat Oncol 2024; 14:103-111. [PMID: 37914081 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2023.10.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2023] [Revised: 10/05/2023] [Accepted: 10/13/2023] [Indexed: 11/03/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Carbon fiber reinforced polyetheretherketone (CFRP) is a nonmetallic material that is a subject of growing interest in the field of spinal instrumentation manufacturing. The radiolucency and low magnetic susceptibility of CFRP has potential to create less interference with diagnostic imaging compared with titanium implants. However, an objective comparison of the image artifact produced by titanium and CFRP implants has not been described. Spinal oncology, particularly after resection of spinal tumors and at the time of spinal stereotactic radiosurgery planning, relies heavily on imaging interpretation for evaluating resection, adjuvant treatment planning, and surveillance. We present a study comparing measurements of postoperative magnetic resonance imaging artifacts between titanium and CFRP pedicle screw constructs in the setting of separation surgery for metastatic disease. METHODS AND MATERIALS The diameter of the signal drop around the screws (pedicle screw artifact) and the diameter of the spinal canal free from artifacts (canal visualization) were measured in consecutive patients who had spinal instrumentation followed by spinal stereotactic radiosurgery in the June 2019 to May 2022 timeframe. The spinal cord presented a shift at the screw level in sagittal images which was also measured (Sagittal Distortion, SagD). RESULTS Fifty patients, corresponding to 356 screws and 183 vertebral levels, were evaluated overall. CFRP produced less artifacts in all the 3 parameters compared with titanium: mean pedicle screw artifact (CFRP = 5.8 mm, Ti = 13.2 mm), canal visualization (CFRP = 19.2 mm, Ti = 15.5 mm), and SagD (CFRP = .5 mm, Ti = 1.9 mm), all P < .001. In practice, these findings translate into better-quality magnetic resonance imaging. CONCLUSIONS The initial perceived advantages are easier evaluation of postoperative imaging, facilitating radiation treatment planning, recurrence detection, and avoidance in repeating a suboptimal computed tomography myelogram. Further clinical studies analyzing long-term outcomes of patients treated with CFRP implants are necessary.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Amol J Ghia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Behrang Amini
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Chenyang Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Jing Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Laurence D Rhines
- Department of Neurosurgery, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Martin C Tom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Robert Y North
- Department of Neurosurgery, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Thomas H Beckham
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Claudio E Tatsui
- Department of Neurosurgery, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Guckenberger M, Andratschke N, Belka C, Bellut D, Cuccia F, Dahele M, Guninski RS, Josipovic M, Mancosu P, Minniti G, Niyazi M, Ricardi U, Munck Af Rosenschold P, Sahgal A, Tsang Y, Verbakel W, Alongi F. ESTRO clinical practice guideline: Stereotactic body radiotherapy for spine metastases. Radiother Oncol 2024; 190:109966. [PMID: 37925107 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109966] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2023] [Accepted: 10/18/2023] [Indexed: 11/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Recent progress in diagnostics and treatment of metastatic cancer patients have improved survival substantially. These developments also affect local therapies, with treatment aims shifting from short-term palliation to long-term symptom or disease control. There is consequently a need to better define the value of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for the treatment of spinal metastases. METHODS This ESTRO clinical practice guideline is based on a systematic literature review conducted according to PRISMA standards, which formed the basis for answering four key questions about the indication and practice of SBRT for spine metastases. RESULTS The analysis of the key questions based on current evidence yielded 22 recommendations and 5 statements with varying levels of endorsement, all achieving a consensus among experts of at least 75%. In the majority, the level of evidence supporting the recommendations and statements was moderate or expert opinion, only, indicating that spine SBRT is still an evolving field of clinical research. Recommendations were established concerning the selection of appropriate patients with painful spine metastases and oligometastatic disease. Recommendations about the practice of spinal SBRT covered technical planning aspects including dose and fractionation, patient positioning, immobilization and image-guided SBRT delivery. Finally, recommendations were developed regarding quality assurance protocols, including description of potential SBRT-related toxicity and risk mitigation strategies. CONCLUSIONS This ESTRO clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations and statements regarding the selection of patients with spinal metastases for SBRT and its safe implementation and practice. Enrollment of patients into well-designed prospective clinical trials addressing clinically relevant questions is considered important.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
| | - N Andratschke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - C Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Munich, Munich, Germany; Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - D Bellut
- University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Department of Neurosurgery, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - F Cuccia
- ARNAS Civico Hospital, Radiation Oncology Unit, Palermo, Italy
| | - M Dahele
- Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology and Cancer Center Amsterdam, de Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - R S Guninski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - M Josipovic
- Department of Oncology, Centre for Cancer and Organ Diseases, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 3B 2200, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - P Mancosu
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Medical Physics Unit, Radiation Oncology department, via Manzoni 56 I-20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - G Minniti
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Anatomical Pathology Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy; IRCCS Neuromed, Pozzilli, IS, Italy
| | - M Niyazi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - U Ricardi
- University of Turin, Department of Oncology, Turin, Italy
| | | | - A Sahgal
- Odette Cancer Center of the Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Toronto, Canada
| | - Y Tsang
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Radiation Medicine Program, Toronto, Canada
| | - Wfar Verbakel
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F Alongi
- Advanced Radiation Department, IRCCS Ospedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria, Negrar-Verona, Italy; University of Brescia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Sherry AD, Maroongroge S, De B, Amini B, Conley AP, Bishop AJ, Wang C, Beckham T, Tom M, Briere T, Li J, Yeboa DN, McAleer MF, North R, Tatsui CE, Rhines LD, Ghia AJ. Management of chordoma and chondrosarcoma with definitive dose-escalated single-fraction spine stereotactic radiosurgery. J Neurooncol 2023; 164:377-386. [PMID: 37667065 PMCID: PMC11917496 DOI: 10.1007/s11060-023-04432-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2023] [Accepted: 08/19/2023] [Indexed: 09/06/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The management of chordoma or chondrosarcoma involving the spine is often challenging due to adjacent critical structures and tumor radioresistance. Spine stereotactic radiosurgery (SSRS) has radiobiologic advantages compared with conventional radiotherapy, though there is limited evidence on SSRS in this population. We sought to characterize the long-term local control (LC) of patients treated with SSRS. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed patients with chordoma or chondrosarcoma treated with dose-escalated SSRS, defined as 24 Gy in 1 fraction to the gross tumor volume. Overall survival (OS) was calculated by Kaplan-Meier functions. Competing risk analysis using the cause-specific hazard function estimated LC time. RESULTS Fifteen patients, including 12 with chordoma and 3 with chondrosarcoma, with 22 lesions were included. SSRS intent was definitive, single-modality in 95% of cases (N = 21) and post-operative in 1 case (5%). After a median censored follow-up time of 5 years (IQR 4 to 8 years), median LC time was not reached (IQR 8 years to not reached), with LC rates of 100%, 100%, and 90% at 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years. The median OS was 8 years (IQR 3 years to not reached). Late grade 3 toxicity occurred after 23% of treatments (N = 5, fracture), all of which were managed successfully with stabilization. CONCLUSION Definitive dose-escalated SSRS to 24 Gy in 1 fraction appears to be a safe and effective treatment for achieving durable local control in chordoma or chondrosarcoma involving the spine, and may hold particular importance as a low-morbidity alternative to surgery in selected cases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander D Sherry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Bldv, Unit 1202, 77030, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sean Maroongroge
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Bldv, Unit 1202, 77030, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Brian De
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Bldv, Unit 1202, 77030, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Behrang Amini
- Department of Musculoskeletal Imaging, Division of Diagnostic Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Anthony P Conley
- Department of Sarcoma Medical Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Andrew J Bishop
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Bldv, Unit 1202, 77030, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Chenyang Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Bldv, Unit 1202, 77030, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Thomas Beckham
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Bldv, Unit 1202, 77030, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Martin Tom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Bldv, Unit 1202, 77030, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Tina Briere
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jing Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Bldv, Unit 1202, 77030, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Debra N Yeboa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Bldv, Unit 1202, 77030, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Mary Frances McAleer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Bldv, Unit 1202, 77030, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Robert North
- Department of Neurosurgery, Division of Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Claudio E Tatsui
- Department of Neurosurgery, Division of Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Laurence D Rhines
- Department of Neurosurgery, Division of Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Amol J Ghia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Bldv, Unit 1202, 77030, Houston, TX, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Guckenberger M, Dahele M, Ong WL, Sahgal A. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Spinal Metastases: Benefits and Limitations. Semin Radiat Oncol 2023; 33:159-171. [PMID: 36990633 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2022.11.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/29/2023]
Abstract
Progress in biological cancer characterization, targeted systemic therapies and multimodality treatment strategies have shifted the goals of radiotherapy for spinal metastases from short-term palliation to long-term symptom control and prevention of compilations. This article gives an overview of the spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) methodology and clinical results of SBRT in cancer patients with painful vertebral metastases, metastatic spinal cord compression, oligometastatic disease and in a reirradiation situation. Outcomes after dose-intensified SBRT are compared with results of conventional radiotherapy and patient selection criteria will be discussed. Though rates of severe toxicity after spinal SBRT are low, strategies to minimize the risk of vertebral compression fracture, radiation induced myelopathy, plexopathy and myositis are summarized, to optimize the use of SBRT in multidisciplinary management of vertebral metastases.
Collapse
|
8
|
Vaccarelli MJ, Krafft SP, Briere TM, Svensson S, Han EY. Evaluation of RayStation's delivered dose and accumulated dose features for spine stereotactic radiotherapy. Med Dosim 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2022.09.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
|
9
|
Radiation myelopathy following stereotactic body radiation therapy for spine metastases. J Neurooncol 2022; 159:23-31. [PMID: 35737172 DOI: 10.1007/s11060-022-04037-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2022] [Accepted: 05/13/2022] [Indexed: 10/17/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is now considered a standard of care treatment option in the management of spine metastases. One of the most feared complications of spine SBRT is radiation myelopathy (RM). METHODS We provided a narrative review of RM following spine SBRT based on review of the published literature, including data on spinal cord dose constraints associated with the risk of RM, strategies to mitigate the risk, and management options for RM. RESULTS There are limited published data of cases of RM following spine SBRT with detailed spinal cord dosimetry. The HyTEC report provided recommendations for the point maximal dose (Dmax) for the spinal cord that is associated with a < 5% risk of RM for 1-5 fractions spine SBRT. In the setting of spine SBRT reirradiation after previous conventional external beam radiation therapy (cEBRT), factors associated with RM are: SBRT spinal cord Dmax, cumulative spinal cord Dmax, and the time interval between previous RT and SBRT reirradiation. There are various strategies to mitigate the risk of RM, including accurate delineation of the spinal cord (or thecal sac), strict adherence to the recommended spinal cord dose constraints, and robust treatment immobilisation set-up and delivery. Limited effective treatment options are available for patients who develop RM, and these include corticosteroids, hyperbaric oxygen, and bevacizumab; however, none have been supported by high quality evidence. CONCLUSION RM is a rare but devastating complication following SBRT for spine metastases. There are strategies to minimise the risk of RM to ensure safe delivery of spine SBRT.
Collapse
|
10
|
Ito K, Nakajima Y, Ikuta S. Stereotactic body radiotherapy for spinal oligometastases: a review on patient selection and the optimal methodology. Jpn J Radiol 2022; 40:1017-1023. [PMID: 35396669 PMCID: PMC9529679 DOI: 10.1007/s11604-022-01277-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2022] [Accepted: 03/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has excellent local control and low toxicity for spinal metastases and is widely performed for spinal oligometastases. However, its additional survival benefit to standard of care, including systemic therapy, is unknown because the results of large-scale randomized controlled trials regarding SBRT for oligometastases have not been reported. Consequently, the optimal patient population among those with spinal oligometastases and the optimal methodology for spine SBRT remain unclear. The present review article discusses two topics: evidence-based optimal patient selection and methodology. The following have been reported to be good prognostic factors: young age, good performance status, slow-growing disease with a long disease-free interval, minimal disease burden, and mild fluorodeoxyglucose accumulation in positron emission tomography. In addition, we proposed four measures as the optimal SBRT method for achieving excellent local control: (i) required target delineation; (ii) recommended dose fraction schedule (20 or 24 Gy in a single fraction for spinal oligometastases and 35 Gy in five fractions for lesions located near the spinal cord); (iii) optimizing dose distribution for the target; (iv) dose constraint options for the spinal cord.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kei Ito
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677 Japan
| | - Yujiro Nakajima
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677 Japan
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Komazawa University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Syuzo Ikuta
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677 Japan
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Dunne E, Liu M, Lo S, Sahgal A. The Changing Landscape for the Treatment of Painful Spinal Metastases: is Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy the New Standard of Care? Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2022; 34:325-331. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2022.02.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2021] [Revised: 01/19/2022] [Accepted: 02/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
12
|
Phase 1 study of spinal cord constraint relaxation with single session spine stereotactic radiosurgery in the primary management of patients with inoperable, previously irradiated metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. NORTH AMERICAN SPINE SOCIETY JOURNAL 2021; 6:100066. [PMID: 35141631 PMCID: PMC8820013 DOI: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2021.100066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2021] [Revised: 04/23/2021] [Accepted: 04/24/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
Background Patients with previously irradiated metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) who are not surgical candidates are at high risk of neurologic deterioration due to disease in the setting of limited treatment options. We seek to establish the feasibility of using salvage spine stereotactic radiosurgery (SSRS) allowing for spinal cord dose constraint relaxation as the primary management of MESCC in inoperable patients monitoring for radiation related toxicity and radiographic local control (LC). Methods Inoperable patients with previously irradiated MESCC were enrolled on this prospective Phase 1 single institution protocol. Single fraction SSRS was delivered to a prescription dose of 18 Gy. Spinal cord constraint relaxation was performed incrementally from an initial allowable Dmax cohort of 8 Gy to 14 Gy in the final planned cohort. Patients were monitored every 3 months with follow-up visits and MRI scans. Results The trial was closed early due to slow accrual. From 2011 to 2014, 11 patients were enrolled of which 9 patients received SSRS. Five patients were in the 8 Gy cord Dmax cohort and 4 in the 10 Gy cord Dmax cohort. The median overall survival (OS) was 11.9 months (95% CI 7.1, 22 months). Of the 9 patients treated with SSRS, 1 died prior to post-SSRS evaluation. Of the remaining 8 patients, 5 experienced a local failure. Three of the five were treated with surgery while two received systemic therapy. Two of the five failures ultimately resulted in loss of neurologic function. The median LC was 9.1 months (95%CI 4.8, 20.1 months). With a median clinical follow-up of 6.8 months, there were no cases of RM. Conclusions Despite the limited life expectancy in this high-risk cohort of patients, strategies to optimize LC are necessary to prevent neurologic deterioration. Larger prospective trials exploring optimal dose/fractionation and cord constraints are required.
Collapse
|
13
|
Bilsky MH, Yamada Y. Editorial. Spinal laser interstitial thermal therapy: a great idea without a great application. J Neurosurg Spine 2021; 34:351-353. [PMID: 33307524 DOI: 10.3171/2020.7.spine201214] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Yoshiya Yamada
- 2Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Soltys SG, Grimm J, Milano MT, Xue J, Sahgal A, Yorke E, Yamada Y, Ding GX, Li XA, Lovelock DM, Jackson A, Ma L, El Naqa I, Gibbs IC, Marks LB, Benedict S. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Spinal Metastases: Tumor Control Probability Analyses and Recommended Reporting Standards. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 110:112-123. [PMID: 33516580 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.11.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2020] [Revised: 11/02/2020] [Accepted: 11/09/2020] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE We sought to investigate the tumor control probability (TCP) of spinal metastases treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in 1 to 5 fractions. METHODS AND MATERIALS PubMed-indexed articles from 1995 to 2018 were eligible for data extraction if they contained SBRT dosimetric details correlated with actuarial 2-year local tumor control rates. Logistic dose-response models of collected data were compared in terms of physical dose and 3-fraction equivalent dose. RESULTS Data were extracted from 24 articles with 2619 spinal metastases. Physical dose TCP modeling of 2-year local tumor control from the single-fraction data were compared with data from 2 to 5 fractions, resulting in an estimated α/β = 6 Gy, and this was used to pool data. Acknowledging the uncertainty intrinsic to the data extraction and modeling process, the 90% TCP corresponded to 20 Gy in 1 fraction, 28 Gy in 2 fractions, 33 Gy in 3 fractions, and (with extrapolation) 40 Gy in 5 fractions. The estimated TCP for common fractionation schemes was 82% at 18 Gy, 90% for 20 Gy, and 96% for 24 Gy in a single fraction, 82% for 24 Gy in 2 fractions, and 78% for 27 Gy in 3 fractions. CONCLUSIONS Spinal SBRT with the most common fractionation schemes yields 2-year estimates of local control of 82% to 96%. Given the heterogeneity in the tumor control estimates extracted from the literature, with variability in reporting of dosimetry data and the definition of and statistical methods of reporting tumor control, care should be taken interpreting the resultant model-based estimates. Depending on the clinical intent, the improved TCP with higher dose regimens should be weighed against the potential risks for greater toxicity. We encourage future reports to provide full dosimetric data correlated with tumor local control to allow future efforts of modeling pooled data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Scott G Soltys
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
| | - Jimm Grimm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania; Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Michael T Milano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York
| | - Jinyu Xue
- Department of Radiation Oncology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, New York
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Center, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Ellen Yorke
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Yoshiya Yamada
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - George X Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - X Allen Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
| | - D Michael Lovelock
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Andrew Jackson
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Lijun Ma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Issam El Naqa
- Machine Learning Department, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida
| | - Iris C Gibbs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| | - Lawrence B Marks
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Lineberger Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Stanley Benedict
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California at Davis, Sacramento, California
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Zeng KL, Sahgal A, Husain ZA, Myrehaug S, Tseng CL, Detsky J, Sarfehnia A, Ruschin M, Campbell M, Foster M, Das S, Lipsman N, Bjarnason GA, Atenafu EG, Maralani PJ, Soliman H. Local control and patterns of failure for "Radioresistant" spinal metastases following stereotactic body radiotherapy compared to a "Radiosensitive" reference. J Neurooncol 2021; 152:173-182. [PMID: 33453002 DOI: 10.1007/s11060-020-03691-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2020] [Accepted: 12/30/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The concept of a radioresistant (RR) phenotype has been challenged with use of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). We compared outcomes following SBRT to RR spinal metastases to a radiosensitive cohort. METHODS Renal cell, melanoma, sarcoma, gastro-intestinal, and thyroid spinal metastases were identified as RR and prostate cancer (PCA) as radiosensitive. The primary endpoint was MRI-based local failure (LF). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and vertebral compression fracture (VCF). RESULTS From a prospectively maintained database of 1394 spinal segments in 605 patients treated with spine SBRT, 173 patients/395 RR spinal segments were compared to 94 patients/185 PCA segments. Most received 24-28 Gy in 2 fractions (68.9%) and median follow-up was 15.5 months (range, 1.4-84.2 months). 1- and 2-year LF rates were 19.2% and 22.4% for RR metastases, respectively, which were significantly greater (p < 0.001) than PCA (3.2% and 8.4%, respectively). Epidural disease (HR: 2.47, 95% CI 1.65-3.71, p < 0.001) and RR histology (HR: 2.41, 95% CI 1.45-3.99, p < 0.001) predicted for greater LF. Median OS was 17.4 and 61.0 months for RR and PCA cohorts, respectively. Lung/liver metastases, polymetastatic disease and epidural disease predicted for worse OS. 2-year VCF rates were ~ 13% in both cohorts. Coverage of the CTV V90 (clinical target volume receiving 90% of prescription dose) by ≥ 87% (HR: 2.32, 95% CI 1.29-4.18, p = 0.005), no prior spine radiotherapy (HR: 1.96, 95% CI 1.09-3.55, p = 0.025), and a greater Spinal Instability Neoplasia Score (p = 0.013) predicted for VCF. CONCLUSIONS Higher rates of LF were observed after spine SBRT in RR metastases. Optimization strategies include dose escalation and aggressive management of epidural disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Liang Zeng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada
| | - Zain A Husain
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada
| | - Sten Myrehaug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada
| | - Chia-Lin Tseng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada
| | - Jay Detsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada
| | - Arman Sarfehnia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada
| | - Mark Ruschin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada
| | - Mikki Campbell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada
| | - Monica Foster
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada
| | - Sunit Das
- Division of Neurosurgery, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Nir Lipsman
- Division of Neurosurgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Georg A Bjarnason
- Division of Medical Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Eshetu G Atenafu
- Department of Biostatistics, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Pejman Jabehdar Maralani
- Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Hany Soliman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Diao K, Song J, Thall PF, McGinnis GJ, Boyce-Fappiano D, Amini B, Brown PD, Yeboa DN, Bishop AJ, Li J, Briere TM, Tatsui CE, Rhines LD, Chang EL, Ghia AJ. Low risk of radiation myelopathy with relaxed spinal cord dose constraints in de novo, single fraction spine stereotactic radiosurgery. Radiother Oncol 2020; 152:49-55. [PMID: 32745668 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.07.050] [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: 04/29/2020] [Revised: 07/23/2020] [Accepted: 07/29/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Spine stereotactic radiosurgery (SSRS) offers high rates of local control in a critical anatomic area by delivering precise, ablative doses of radiation for treatment of spine metastases. However, the dose tolerance of the spinal cord (SC) after SSRS with relation to radiation myelopathy (RM) is not well-described. MATERIALS AND METHODS We reviewed patients who underwent single fraction, de novo SSRS from 2012-2017 and received >12 Gy Dmax to the SC, defined using MRI-CT fusion without PRV expansion. The standard SC constraint was D0.01cc ≤ 12 Gy. Local control was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Bayesian analysis was used to compute posterior probabilities for RM. RESULTS A total of 146 SSRS treatments among 132 patients were included. The median SC Dmax was 12.6 Gy (range, 12.1-17.1 Gy). The SC Dmax was >12 and <13 Gy for 109 (75%) treatments, ≥13 and <14 Gy for 28 (19%) treatments, and ≥14 Gy for 9 (6%) treatments. The 1-year local control rate was 94%. With a median follow-up time of 42 months, there were zero (0) RM events observed. Assuming a prior 4.3% risk of RM, the true rate of RM for SC Dmax of ≤14 Gy was computed as <1% with 98% probability. CONCLUSION In one of the largest series of patients treated with single fraction, de novo SSRS, there were no cases of RM observed with a median follow-up of 42 months. These data support safe relaxation of MRI-defined SC dose up to D0.01cc ≤ 12 Gy, which corresponds to <1% risk of RM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin Diao
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States.
| | - Juhee Song
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
| | - Peter F Thall
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
| | - Gwendolyn J McGinnis
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
| | - David Boyce-Fappiano
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
| | - Behrang Amini
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
| | - Paul D Brown
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, United States
| | - Debra N Yeboa
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
| | - Andrew J Bishop
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
| | - Jing Li
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
| | - Tina M Briere
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
| | - Claudio E Tatsui
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
| | - Lawrence D Rhines
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
| | - Eric L Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Keck School of Medicine of USC, United States
| | - Amol J Ghia
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Sandhu N, Benson KRK, Kumar KA, Eyben RV, Chang DT, Gibbs IC, Hancock SL, Meola A, Chang SD, Li G, Hayden-Gephart M, Soltys SG, Pollom EL. Local control and toxicity outcomes of stereotactic radiosurgery for spinal metastases of gastrointestinal origin. J Neurosurg Spine 2020; 33:87-94. [PMID: 32114530 DOI: 10.3171/2020.1.spine191260] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2019] [Accepted: 01/07/2020] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Colorectal cancer (CRC) and other gastrointestinal (GI) cancers are believed to have greater radioresistance than other histologies. The authors report local control and toxicity outcomes of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to spinal metastases from GI primary cancers. METHODS A retrospective single-center review was conducted of patients with spinal metastases from GI primary cancers treated with SRS from 2004 to 2017. Patient demographics and lesion characteristics were summarized using medians, interquartile ranges (IQRs), and proportions. Local failure (LF) was estimated using the cumulative incidence function adjusted for the competing risk of death and compared using Gray's test for equality. Multivariable analyses were conducted using Cox proportional hazard models, adjusting for death as a competing risk, on a per-lesion basis. Patients were stratified in the Cox model to account for repeated measures for clustered outcomes. Median survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS A total of 74 patients with 114 spine lesions were included in our analysis. The median age of the cohort was 62 years (IQR 53-70 years). Histologies included CRC (46%), hepatocellular carcinoma (19%), neuroendocrine carcinoma (13%), pancreatic carcinoma (12%), and other (10%). The 1- and 2-year cumulative incidence rates of LF were 24% (95% confidence interval [CI] 16%-33%) and 32% (95% CI 23%-42%), respectively. Univariable analysis revealed that older age (p = 0.015), right-sided primary CRCs (p = 0.038), and single fraction equivalent dose (SFED; α/β = 10) < 20 Gy (p = 0.004) were associated with higher rates of LF. The 1-year cumulative incidence rates of LF for SFED < 20 Gy10 versus SFED ≥ 20 Gy10 were 35% and 7%, respectively. After controlling for gross tumor volume and prior radiation therapy to the lesion, SFED < 20 Gy10 remained independently associated with worse LF (hazard ratio 2.92, 95% CI 1.24-6.89, p = 0.014). Toxicities were minimal, with pain flare observed in 6 patients (8%) and 15 vertebral compression fractures (13%). CONCLUSIONS Spinal metastases from GI primary cancers have high rates of LF with SRS at a lower dose. This study found that SRS dose is a significant predictor of failure and that prescribed SFED ≥ 20 Gy10 (biological equivalent dose ≥ 60 Gy10) is associated with superior local control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Kiran A Kumar
- Departments of1Radiation Oncology and
- 3UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | | | | | | | | | - Antonio Meola
- 2Neurosurgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California; and
| | - Steven D Chang
- 2Neurosurgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California; and
| | - Gordon Li
- 2Neurosurgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California; and
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Zhuang H, Zhuang H, Lang N, Liu J. Precision Stereotactic Radiotherapy for Spinal Tumors: Mechanism, Efficacy, and Issues. Front Oncol 2020; 10:826. [PMID: 32528894 PMCID: PMC7256655 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.00826] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2020] [Accepted: 04/28/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR/SBRT) is a revolutionary technique for tumor therapy. Its advantages are especially beneficial for the treatment spinal tumors. It has a wide range of indications in radiotherapy alone and in preoperative and postoperative treatments for spinal tumor. The mechanism of stereotactic radiotherapy for spinal tumors is special, and completely different from traditional radiotherapy. Compared with traditional radiotherapy, SBRT creates more DNA double-strand breaks, leads to less DNA damage repair, and also has anti-vascular effects, in situ vaccine effects and abscopal effect. In the present study, the literature regarding SABR for the treatment of spinal tumors is summarized, and we reviewed characteristics of SABR and spinal tumors, as well as the clinical efficacy and toxicity of SABR in treating spinal tumors. In addition, we proposed several issues around the SABR treatment of spinal tumor, the standard of treatment dose, and the post-treatment follow-up. We also made predictions with respect to future management of spinal tumors, SABR development, multi-modality integration between SABR and other treatments, and other future development trends, thereby providing future research directions as a contribution to the field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hongqing Zhuang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Hongxia Zhuang
- Department of Hematology, Weifang People's Hospital, Weifang, China
| | - Ning Lang
- Department of Radiology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Jiandong Liu
- Orthopedic Department, No. 971 Hospital of Navy, Qingdao, China
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Lin LC, Jiang GL, Ohri N, Wang Z, Lu JJ, Garg M, Guha C, Wu X. Evaluating dosimetric constraints for carbon ion radiotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Radiat Oncol 2020; 15:101. [PMID: 32381042 PMCID: PMC7204055 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-020-01515-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2020] [Accepted: 03/13/2020] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To identify a safe carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) regimen for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). METHODS We generated treatment plans for 13 consecutive, unselected patients who were treated for LAPC with CIRT at our center using three dose and fractionation schedules: 4.6 GyRBE × 12, 4.0 GyRBE × 14, and 3.0 GyRBE × 17. We tested the ability to meet published dose constraints for the duodenum, stomach, and small bowel as a function of dose schedule and distance between the tumor and organs at risk. RESULTS Using 4.6 GyRBE × 12 and 4.0 GyRBE × 14, critical (high-dose) constraints could only reliably be achieved when target volumes were not immediately adjacent to organs at risk. Critical constraints could be met in all cases using 3.0 GyRBE × 17. Low-dose constraints could not uniformly be achieved using any dose schedule. CONCLUSION While selected patients with LAPC may be treated safely with a CIRT regimen of 4.6 GyRBE × 12, our dosimetric analyses indicate that a more conservative schedule of 3.0 GyRBE × 17 may be required to safely treat a broader population of LAPC patients, including those with large tumors and tumors that approach gastrointestinal organs at risk. The result of this work was used to guide an ongoing clinical trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lien-Chun Lin
- Department of Medical Physics, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Fudan University Cancer Hospital, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Proton and Heavy Ion Radiation Therapy, 4365 Kangxin Road, Shanghai, 201318, China
| | - Guo-Liang Jiang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Fudan University Cancer Hospital, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Proton and Heavy Ion Radiation Therapy, Shanghai, China
| | - Nitin Ohri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, 111 E 210th St, Bronx, NY, 10467, USA
| | - Zheng Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Fudan University Cancer Hospital, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Proton and Heavy Ion Radiation Therapy, Shanghai, China
| | - Jiade J Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Fudan University Cancer Hospital, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Proton and Heavy Ion Radiation Therapy, Shanghai, China
| | - Madhur Garg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, 111 E 210th St, Bronx, NY, 10467, USA
| | - Chandan Guha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, 111 E 210th St, Bronx, NY, 10467, USA.
| | - Xiaodong Wu
- Department of Medical Physics, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Fudan University Cancer Hospital, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Proton and Heavy Ion Radiation Therapy, 4365 Kangxin Road, Shanghai, 201318, China.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Schaub SK, Tseng YD, Chang EL, Sahgal A, Saigal R, Hofstetter CP, Foote M, Ko AL, Yuh WTC, Mossa-Basha M, Mayr NA, Lo SS. Strategies to Mitigate Toxicities From Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Spine Metastases. Neurosurgery 2020; 85:729-740. [PMID: 31264703 DOI: 10.1093/neuros/nyz213] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2018] [Accepted: 02/24/2019] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Improvements in systemic therapy are translating into more patients living longer with metastatic disease. Bone is the most common site of metastasis, where spinal lesions can result in significant pain impacting quality of life and possible neurological dysfunction resulting in a decline in performance status. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) of the spine has emerged as a promising technique to provide durable local control, palliation of symptoms, control of oligoprogressive sites of disease, and possibly augment the immune response. SBRT achieves this by delivering highly conformal radiation therapy to allow for dose escalation due to a steep dose gradient from the planning target volume to nearby critical organs at risk. In our review, we provide an in-depth review and expert commentary regarding seminal literature that defined clinically meaningful toxicity endpoints with actionable dosimetric limits and/or clinical management strategies to mitigate toxicity potentially attributable to SBRT of the spine. We placed a spotlight on radiation myelopathy (de novo, reirradiation after conventional external beam radiation therapy or salvage after an initial course of spinal SBRT), plexopathy, vertebral compression fracture, pain flare, esophageal toxicity, myositis, and safety regarding combination with concurrent targeted or immune therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie K Schaub
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Yolanda D Tseng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Eric L Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Rajiv Saigal
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Christoph P Hofstetter
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Matthew Foote
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Australia
| | - Andrew L Ko
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - William T C Yuh
- Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Mahmud Mossa-Basha
- Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Nina A Mayr
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Simon S Lo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
|
22
|
Moraes FY, Chen X, Yan M, Spratt DE, Redmond K, Jackson WC, Yamada YJ. Evolving Role of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in the Management of Spine Metastases: Defining Dose and Dose Constraints. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2020; 31:167-189. [PMID: 32147009 DOI: 10.1016/j.nec.2019.12.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
When treating solid tumor spine metastases, stereotactic high-dose-per-fraction radiation, given in a single fraction or in a hypofractionated approach, has proved to be a highly effective and safe therapeutic option for any tumor histology, in the setting of de novo therapy, as salvage treatment of local progression after previous radiation, and in the postoperative setting. There are variations in practice based on the clinical presentation, goals of therapy, as well as institutional preferences. As a biologically potent therapy, a thoughtful and careful attention to detail with patient selection, treatment planning, and delivery is crucial for treatment success.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fabio Y Moraes
- Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Xuguang Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Michael Yan
- Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Daniel E Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Kristen Redmond
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - William C Jackson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Yoshiya Josh Yamada
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Llorente R, Spieler BO, Victoria J, Takita C, Yechieli R, Ford JC, Brown K, Samuels MA, Mellon EA. MRI-guided stereotactic ablative radiation therapy of spinal bone metastases: a preliminary experience. Br J Radiol 2020; 93:20190655. [PMID: 31670569 PMCID: PMC6948084 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20190655] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2019] [Revised: 10/11/2019] [Accepted: 10/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE MRI provides clear visualization of spinal cord, tumor, and bone for patient positioning and verification during MRI-guided radiotherapy (MRI-RT). Therefore, we wished to evaluate spine stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) feasibility with MRI-RT. Given dosimetric limitations of first generation Co-60 MRI-RT, we then evaluated improvements by newer linear accelerator (linac) MRI-RT. METHODS Nine spinal metastases were treated with Co-60 MRI-RT. Seven received a single 16 Gy fraction, and two received three fractions totaling 24 or 30 Gy. After replanning with linac MRI-RT software, comparisons of organ at risk and dose spillage objectives between Co-60 and linac plans were performed. RESULTS Spinal cord and cauda equina dose constraints were met in all Co-60 cases. Treatments were delivered successfully with real-time imaging during treatment and no treatment-related toxicities. While limits for dose spillage into surrounding soft tissues were not achieved due to the limitations of the Co-60 system, this could be corrected with linac MRI-RT delivery. CONCLUSIONS MRI-RT SABR of spinal metastases is feasible with Co-60 MRI-RT. Dose delivery is improved by linac MRI-RT. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE This is the first report of MRI-RT for SABR of spinal metastases. The enhanced visualization of anatomy by MRI may facilitate RT dose escalation for spine SABR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ricardo Llorente
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, United States
| | - Benjamin O Spieler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, United States
| | | | - Cristiane Takita
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, United States
| | - Raphael Yechieli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, United States
| | - John C Ford
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, United States
| | - Karen Brown
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, United States
| | - Michael A Samuels
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, United States
| | - Eric A Mellon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, United States
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Low incidence of late failure and toxicity after spine stereotactic radiosurgery: Secondary analysis of phase I/II trials with long-term follow-up. Radiother Oncol 2019; 138:80-85. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.06.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2019] [Revised: 04/15/2019] [Accepted: 06/02/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
|
25
|
Ryu S. In Regard to Dunne and Liu. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2019; 104:463-464. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.02.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2019] [Revised: 01/02/2019] [Accepted: 02/06/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
|
26
|
Sahgal A. In Reply to Ryu. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2019; 104:465-466. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.02.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2019] [Revised: 01/18/2019] [Accepted: 02/06/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
|
27
|
Redmond KJ, Lo SFL. In Reply to Ryu. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2019; 104:464-465. [PMID: 31047629 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.02.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2019] [Revised: 01/25/2019] [Accepted: 02/06/2019] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Kristin J Redmond
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Sheng-Fu Larry Lo
- Department of Neurological Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Mesko S, Deegan BJ, D'Souza NM, Ghia AJ, Chapman BV, Amini B, McAleer MF, Wang XA, Brown PD, Tatsui CE, Rhines L, Li J. Spine Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Metastatic Pheochromocytoma. Cureus 2019; 11:e4742. [PMID: 31355101 PMCID: PMC6649891 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.4742] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: Despite aggressive primary treatment, up to 13.5% of patients diagnosed with pheochromocytoma may develop metastases, most often affecting the axial skeleton. Given that systemic therapy options are often inadequate, local therapy remains the cornerstone of palliation for these patients. Historically poor responses to standard fractionated radiotherapy have led to the consideration of stereotactic radiosurgery as an option to overcome potential radioresistance and provide durable local control of these tumors. Here we report our institutional experience in treating spine metastases from pheochromocytoma with spine stereotactic radiosurgery (SSRS). Methods and materials: Our clinical databases were retrospectively reviewed for patients with metastatic pheochromocytoma treated with SSRS from 2000-2017. Seven patients with 16 treated metastatic spinal lesions were identified. Local control was evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Pain and symptom data were assessed to evaluate toxicity using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.03. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess local control and overall survival (OS). Results: Median follow-up for treated lesions was 11 months (range 2.2 - 70.8). Most lesions were treated to a dose of 27 Gy in three fractions (62.5%). Other fractionation schemes included 24 Gy in one fraction (25%), 16 Gy in one fraction (6.3%), and 18 Gy in three fractions (6.3%). Treatment sites included the cervical spine (18.8%), thoracic spine (37.5%), lumbar spine (31.3%), and sacrum (12.5%). The crude local control rate was 93.7%, with one thoracic spine lesion progressing 20.7 months after treatment with 24 Gy in one fraction. Kaplan-Meier OS rates at 1 and 2 years after SSRS were 71.4% and 42.9%, respectively. Most common toxicities included acute grade 1-2 pain and fatigue. There was one case of vertebral fracture in a cervical spine lesion treated to 27 Gy in three fractions, which was managed non-surgically. Conclusion: Very few studies have explored the use of SSRS in metastatic pheochromocytoma. Our data suggest this modern radiation modality is effective, safe, and provides durable local control to palliate symptoms and potentially limit further metastatic seeding. Larger patient numbers and longer follow-up will further define the role of SSRS as a treatment option in these patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shane Mesko
- Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Brian J Deegan
- Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Neil M D'Souza
- Radiation Oncology, Mays Cancer Center, University of Texas, San Antonio, USA
| | - Amol J Ghia
- Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Bhavana V Chapman
- Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Behrang Amini
- Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Mary Frances McAleer
- Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Xin A Wang
- Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | | | - Claudio E Tatsui
- Neurosurgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Laurence Rhines
- Neurosurgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Jing Li
- Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Kim YJ, Kim JH, Kim K, Kim HJ, Chie EK, Shin KH, Wu HG, Kim IH. The Feasibility of Spinal Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Spinal Metastasis with Epidural Cord Compression. Cancer Res Treat 2019; 51:1324-1335. [PMID: 30699497 PMCID: PMC6790856 DOI: 10.4143/crt.2018.653] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2018] [Accepted: 01/28/2019] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness and safety of spinal stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in treating spinal metastasis with epidural spinal cord compression (ESCC). Materials and Methods During 2013-2016, 149 regions of spinal metastasis in 105 patients treated with singlefraction (12-24 Gy) spinal SRS were reviewed. Cord compression of Bilsky grade 2 (with visible cerebrospinal fluid [CSF]) or 3 (no visible CSF) was defined as ESCC. Local progression (LP) and vertebral compression fracture (VCF) rates after SRS were evaluated using multivariate competing-risk regression analysis. RESULTS The 1-year cumulative incidences of LP for Bilsky grades 0 (n=80), 1 (n=39), 2 (n=21), and 3 (n=9) were 3.0%, 8.4%, 0%, and 24.9%, respectively. Bilsky grade 2 ESCC did not significantly increase the LP rate (no LP for grade 2). The 1-year cumulative incidences of VCF for Bilsky grades 0, 1, 2, and 3 were 6.6%, 5.2%, 17.1%, and 12.1%, respectively. ESCC may increase VCF risk (subhazard ratio [SHR] for grade 2, 5.368; p=0.035; SHR for grade 3, 2.215; p=0.460). Complete or partial pain response rates after SRS were 79%, 78%, 53%, and 63% for Bilsky grades 0, 1, 2, and 3, respectively (p=0.008). No neurotoxicity of grade ≥ 3 was observed. CONCLUSION Spinal SRS for spinal metastasis with Bilsky grade 2 ESCC did not increase the LP rate, was not associated with severe neurotoxicity, and showed moderate VCF and pain response rates. Bilsky grade 3 had a high LP rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yi-Jun Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.,Center for Precision Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jin Ho Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kyubo Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hak Jae Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Eui Kyu Chie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.,Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kyung Hwan Shin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.,Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hong-Gyun Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.,Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea.,Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
| | - Il Han Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.,Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea.,Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|