1
|
Akdemir EY, Gurdikyan S, Rubens M, Abrams KJ, Sidani C, Chaneles MC, Hall MD, Press RH, Wieczorek DJ, Tolakanahalli R, Gutierrez AN, Gal O, La Rosa A, Kutuk T, McDermott MW, Odia Y, Mehta MP, Kotecha R. Efficacy of 3D-TSE sequence-based radiosurgery in prolonging time to distant intracranial failure: A session-wise analysis in a histology-diverse patient cohort. Neuro Oncol 2025; 27:854-864. [PMID: 39492654 PMCID: PMC11889710 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noae232] [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: 07/18/2024] [Indexed: 11/05/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for patients with brain metastases (BM) is associated with a risk of distant intracranial failure (DIF). This study evaluates the impact of integrating dedicated 3D fast/turbo spin echo (3D-TSE) sequences to MPRAGE in BM detection and DIF prolongation in a histology-agnostic patient cohort. METHODS The study population included adults treated with SRS from February 2019 to January 2024 who underwent MPRAGE alone or dual sequence with the addition of 3D-TSE starting from February 2020. Median times to DIF were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS The 216 study patients who underwent 332 SRS courses for 1456 BM imaged with MPRAGE and 3D-TSE (primary cohort) were compared to a control cohort (92 patients, 135 SRS courses, 462 BM). In the session-wise analysis, the median time to DIF between the cohorts was significantly prolonged in the primary vs. control cohorts (11.4 vs. 6.8 months, P = .029), more pronounced in the subgroups with 1-4 metastases (14.7 vs. 8.1 months, P = .008) and with solitary BM (36.4 vs. 10.9 months, P = .001). While patients relapsing on immunotherapy or targeted therapy did not significantly benefit from 3D-TSE (7.2 vs. 5.7 months, P = .280), those who relapsed on chemotherapy or who were off systemic therapy (including synchronous metastases) exhibited a trend toward longer time to DIF with 3D-TSE integration (14.7 vs. 7.9 months, P = .057). CONCLUSIONS Implementing 3D-TSE sequences into SRS practice increases BM detection across all patients and translates into clinical relevance by prolonging time to DIF, particularly in those with limited intracranial disease and those not receiving central nervous system-active agents.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eyub Y Akdemir
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Selin Gurdikyan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Muni Rubens
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA
- Department of Clinical Informatics, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Kevin J Abrams
- Department of Radiology, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Charif Sidani
- Department of Radiology, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | | | - Matthew D Hall
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Robert H Press
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - D Jay Wieczorek
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Ranjini Tolakanahalli
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Alonso N Gutierrez
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Omer Gal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Alonso La Rosa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Tugce Kutuk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Michael W McDermott
- Department of Neurosurgery, Miami Neuroscience Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Yazmin Odia
- Department of Neuro-Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Minesh P Mehta
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Rupesh Kotecha
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
El Shafie RA, Bernhardt D, Welzel T, Schiele A, Schmitt D, Thalmann P, Erdem S, Paul A, Höne S, Lang K, König L, Weykamp F, Adeberg S, Lentz-Hommertgen A, Jäkel C, Bozorgmehr F, Nestle U, Thomas M, Sander A, Kieser M, Debus J, Rieken S. Stereotactic radiosurgery for 1-10 brain metastases to avoid whole-brain radiotherapy: Results of the CYBER-SPACE randomized phase 2 trial. Neuro Oncol 2025; 27:479-491. [PMID: 39340439 PMCID: PMC11812257 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noae201] [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: 07/30/2024] [Indexed: 09/30/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is an emerging alternative to whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) for treating multiple brain metastases (BM), reducing toxicity, and improving tumor control. The CYBER-SPACE trial compared SRS based on either SPACE or MPRAGE MRI sequence for avoiding or delaying WBRT in patients with 1-10 BM. METHODS Patients with 1-10 untreated BM were randomized 1:1 to receive SRS of all lesions based on either SPACE or MPRAGE MRI sequences. If subsequently new BM occurred, SRS was repeated. WBRT was indicated upon occurrence of >10 new BM, leptomeningeal disease, or exhausted SRS-radiotolerance. The primary outcome was freedom from WBRT indication (WBRTi). Secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life. RESULTS A total of 202 patients were randomized; SPACE n = 99, MPRAGE n = 103. Twelve-month WBRTi-free survival was 77.1% (95% CI: 69.5%-83.1%) overall, 78.5% (95% CI: 66.7%-86.5%) for SPACE, and 76.0% (95% CI: 65.2%-83.9%) for MPRAGE (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.43-1.63, P = .590). Patients with 5-10 BM had shorter WBRTi-free survival (HR = 3.13, 95% CI: 1.53-6.40, P = .002). Median OS was 13.1 months overall, 10.5 months for SPACE, and 15.2 months for MPRAGE (HR = 1.10, 95% CI: 0.78-1.56, P = .585). Neurologic death rate was 10.1%. Predictors for longer OS included Karnofsky Performance Status >80% (HR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33-0.77, P = .002) and concurrent immunotherapy (HR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.23-0.52, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS The more sensitive SPACE sequence did not improve outcomes over MPRAGE. SRS with thorough monitoring and immediate re-treatment for new lesions decreases the need for WBRT and achieves low neurologic death rates. SRS should be considered a favorable alternative to WBRT for patients with 1-10 BM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rami A El Shafie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Denise Bernhardt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine and Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Thomas Welzel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Annabella Schiele
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Daniela Schmitt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Paul Thalmann
- Institute of Medical Biometry, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sinem Erdem
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Angela Paul
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Simon Höne
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kristin Lang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Fabian Weykamp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sebastian Adeberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| | - Adriane Lentz-Hommertgen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Cornelia Jäkel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Farastuk Bozorgmehr
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, Thoraxklinik, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Centre Heidelberg (TLRC-H), German Centre for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ursula Nestle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Freiburg University Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kliniken Maria Hilf, Moenchengladbach, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Michael Thomas
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, Thoraxklinik, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- Translational Lung Research Centre Heidelberg (TLRC-H), German Centre for Lung Research (DZL), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Anja Sander
- Institute of Medical Biometry, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Meinhard Kieser
- Institute of Medical Biometry, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany (J.D.)
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stefan Rieken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kutuk T, Zhang Y, Akdemir EY, Yarlagadda S, Tolakanahalli R, Hall MD, La Rosa A, Wieczorek DJJ, Lee YC, Press RH, Appel H, McDermott MW, Odia Y, Ahluwalia MS, Gutierrez AN, Mehta MP, Kotecha R. Comparative evaluation of outcomes amongst different radiosurgery management paradigms for patients with large brain metastasis. J Neurooncol 2024; 169:105-117. [PMID: 38837019 DOI: 10.1007/s11060-024-04706-2] [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: 03/03/2024] [Accepted: 05/02/2024] [Indexed: 06/06/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION This study compares four management paradigms for large brain metastasis (LMB): fractionated SRS (FSRS), staged SRS (SSRS), resection and postoperative-FSRS (postop-FSRS) or preoperative-SRS (preop-SRS). METHODS Patients with LBM (≥ 2 cm) between July 2017 and January 2022 at a single tertiary institution were evaluated. Primary endpoints were local failure (LF), radiation necrosis (RN), leptomeningeal disease (LMD), a composite of these variables, and distant intracranial failure (DIF). Gray's test compared cumulative incidence, treating death as a competing risk with a random survival forests (RSF) machine-learning model also used to evaluate the data. RESULTS 183 patients were treated to 234 LBMs: 31.6% for postop-FSRS, 28.2% for SSRS, 20.1% for FSRS, and 20.1% for preop-SRS. The overall 1-year composite endpoint rates were comparable (21 vs 20%) between nonoperative and operative strategies, but 1-year RN rate was 8 vs 4% (p = 0.012), 1-year overall survival (OS) was 48 vs. 69% (p = 0.001), and 1-year LMD rate was 5 vs 10% (p = 0.052). There were differences in the 1-year RN rates (7% FSRS, 3% postop-FSRS, 5% preop-SRS, 10% SSRS, p = 0.037). With RSF analysis, the out-of-bag error rate for the composite endpoint was 47%, with identified top-risk factors including widespread extracranial disease, > 5 total lesions, and breast cancer histology. CONCLUSION This is the first study to conduct a head-to-head retrospective comparison of four SRS methods, addressing the lack of randomized data in LBM literature amongst treatment paradigms. Despite patient characteristic trends, no significant differences were found in LF, composite endpoint, and DIF rates between non-operative and operative approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tugce Kutuk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
| | - Yanjia Zhang
- TD - Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
| | - Eyub Yasar Akdemir
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
| | - Sreenija Yarlagadda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
| | - Ranjini Tolakanahalli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Matthew D Hall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Alonso La Rosa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
| | - DJay J Wieczorek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Yongsook C Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Robert H Press
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Haley Appel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
| | - Michael W McDermott
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
- Department of Neurosurgery, Miami Neuroscience Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Yazmin Odia
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
- Department of Neuro Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Manmeet S Ahluwalia
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
- Department of Medical Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Alonso N Gutierrez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Minesh P Mehta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Rupesh Kotecha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA.
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Vymazal J, Ryznarova Z, Rulseh AM. Comparison between postcontrast thin-slice T1-weighted 2D spin echo and 3D T1-weighted SPACE sequences in the detection of brain metastases at 1.5 and 3 T. Insights Imaging 2024; 15:73. [PMID: 38483648 PMCID: PMC10940548 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-024-01643-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2023] [Accepted: 02/09/2024] [Indexed: 03/17/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Accurate detection of metastatic brain lesions (MBL) is critical due to advances in radiosurgery. We compared the results of three readers in detecting MBL using T1-weighted 2D spin echo (SE) and sampling perfection with application-optimized contrasts using different flip angle evolution (SPACE) sequences with whole-brain coverage at both 1.5 T and 3 T. METHODS Fifty-six patients evaluated for MBL were included and underwent a standard protocol (1.5 T, n = 37; 3 T, n = 19), including postcontrast T1-weighted SE and SPACE. The rating was performed by three raters in two sessions > six weeks apart. The true number of MBL was determined using all available imaging including follow-up. Intraclass correlations for intra-rater and inter-rater agreement were calculated. Signal intensity ratios (SIR; enhancing lesion, white matter) were determined on a subset of 46 MBL > 4 mm. A paired t-test was used to evaluate postcontrast sequence order and SIR. Reader accuracy was evaluated by the coefficient of determination. RESULTS A total of 135 MBL were identified (mean/subject 2.41, SD 6.4). The intra-rater agreement was excellent for all 3 raters (ICC = 0.97-0.992), as was the inter-rater agreement (ICC = 0.995 SE, 0.99 SPACE). Subjective qualitative ratings were lower for SE images; however, signal intensity ratios were higher in SE sequences. Accuracy was high in all readers for both SE (R2 0.95-0.96) and SPACE (R2 0.91-0.96) sequences. CONCLUSIONS Although SE sequences are superior to gradient echo sequences in the detection of small MBL, they have long acquisition times and frequent artifacts. We show that T1-weighted SPACE is not inferior to standard thin-slice SE sequences in the detection of MBL at both imaging fields. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT Our results show the suitability of 3D T1-weighted turbo spin echo (TSE) sequences (SPACE, CUBE, VISTA) in the detection of brain metastases at both 1.5 T and 3 T. KEY POINTS • Accurate detection of brain metastases is critical due to advances in radiosurgery. • T1-weighted SE sequences are superior to gradient echo in detecting small metastases. • T1-weighted 3D-TSE sequences may achieve high resolution and relative insensitivity to artifacts. • T1-weighted 3D-TSE sequences have been recommended in imaging brain metastases at 3 T. • We found T1-weighted 3D-TSE equivalent to thin-slice SE at 1.5 T and 3 T.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Josef Vymazal
- Department of Radiology, Na Homolce Hospital, Roentgenova 2, Prague, 150 30, Czech Republic
| | - Zuzana Ryznarova
- Department of Radiology, Na Homolce Hospital, Roentgenova 2, Prague, 150 30, Czech Republic
| | - Aaron M Rulseh
- Department of Radiology, Na Homolce Hospital, Roentgenova 2, Prague, 150 30, Czech Republic.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
La Rosa A, Mittauer KE, Bassiri N, Wieczorek DJJ, Lee YC, Rzepczynski AE, Chuong MD, Kutuk T, McAllister NC, Hall MD, Gutierrez AN, Tolakanahalli R, Mehta MP, Kotecha R. Clinical application of an institutional fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (FSRS) program for brain metastases delivered with MRIdian Ⓡ BrainTx™. Med Dosim 2024; 49:263-270. [PMID: 38431501 DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2024.02.001] [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: 09/21/2023] [Revised: 01/16/2024] [Accepted: 02/07/2024] [Indexed: 03/05/2024]
Abstract
Single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or fractionated SRS (FSRS) are well established strategies for patients with limited brain metastases. A broad spectrum of modern dedicated platforms are currently available for delivering intracranial SRS/FSRS; however, SRS/FSRS delivered using traditional CT-based platforms relies on the need for diagnostic MR images to be coregistered to planning CT scans for target volume delineation. Additionally, the on-board image guidance on traditional platforms yields limited inter-fraction and intra-fraction real-time visualization of the tumor at the time of treatment delivery. MR Linacs are capable of obtaining treatment planning MR and on-table MR sequences to enable visualization of the targets and organs-at-risk and may subsequently help identify anatomical changes prior to treatment that may invoke the need for on table treatment adaptation. Recently, an MR-guided intracranial package (MRIdian A3i BrainTxTM) was released for intracranial treatment with the ability to perform high-resolution MR sequences using a dedicated brain coil and cranial immobilization system. The objective of this report is to provide, through the experience of our first patient treated, a comprehensive overview of the clinical application of our institutional program for FSRS adaptive delivery using MRIdian's A3i BrainTx system-highlights include reviewing the imaging sequence selection, workflow demonstration, and details in its delivery feasibility in clinical practice, and dosimetric outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alonso La Rosa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Kathryn E Mittauer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Nema Bassiri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - D Jay J Wieczorek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Yongsook C Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Amy E Rzepczynski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Michael D Chuong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Tugce Kutuk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Nicole C McAllister
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Matthew D Hall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Alonso N Gutierrez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Ranjini Tolakanahalli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Minesh P Mehta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Rupesh Kotecha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Translational Medicine, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Putz F, Bock M, Schmitt D, Bert C, Blanck O, Ruge MI, Hattingen E, Karger CP, Fietkau R, Grigo J, Schmidt MA, Bäuerle T, Wittig A. Quality requirements for MRI simulation in cranial stereotactic radiotherapy: a guideline from the German Taskforce "Imaging in Stereotactic Radiotherapy". Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:1-18. [PMID: 38163834 PMCID: PMC10784363 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02183-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2023] [Accepted: 11/06/2023] [Indexed: 01/03/2024]
Abstract
Accurate Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) simulation is fundamental for high-precision stereotactic radiosurgery and fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy, collectively referred to as stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT), to deliver doses of high biological effectiveness to well-defined cranial targets. Multiple MRI hardware related factors as well as scanner configuration and sequence protocol parameters can affect the imaging accuracy and need to be optimized for the special purpose of radiotherapy treatment planning. MRI simulation for SRT is possible for different organizational environments including patient referral for imaging as well as dedicated MRI simulation in the radiotherapy department but require radiotherapy-optimized MRI protocols and defined quality standards to ensure geometrically accurate images that form an impeccable foundation for treatment planning. For this guideline, an interdisciplinary panel including experts from the working group for radiosurgery and stereotactic radiotherapy of the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO), the working group for physics and technology in stereotactic radiotherapy of the German Society for Medical Physics (DGMP), the German Society of Neurosurgery (DGNC), the German Society of Neuroradiology (DGNR) and the German Chapter of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (DS-ISMRM) have defined minimum MRI quality requirements as well as advanced MRI simulation options for cranial SRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Florian Putz
- Strahlenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
| | - Michael Bock
- Klinik für Radiologie-Medizinphysik, Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Daniela Schmitt
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Christoph Bert
- Strahlenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Oliver Blanck
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Maximilian I Ruge
- Klinik für Stereotaxie und funktionelle Neurochirurgie, Zentrum für Neurochirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
| | - Elke Hattingen
- Institut für Neuroradiologie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Christian P Karger
- Abteilung Medizinische Physik in der Strahlentherapie, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Nationales Zentrum für Strahlenforschung in der Onkologie (NCRO), Heidelberger Institut für Radioonkologie (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Rainer Fietkau
- Strahlenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Johanna Grigo
- Strahlenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Manuel A Schmidt
- Neuroradiologisches Institut, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Tobias Bäuerle
- Radiologisches Institut, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Andrea Wittig
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Shiue K, Sahgal A, Lo SS. Precision Radiation for Brain Metastases With a Focus on Hypofractionated Stereotactic Radiosurgery. Semin Radiat Oncol 2023; 33:114-128. [PMID: 36990629 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2023.01.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/29/2023]
Abstract
There are multiple published randomized controlled trials supporting single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SF-SRS) for patients presenting with 1 to 4 brain metastases, with the benefit of minimizing radiation-induced neurocognitive sequelae as compared to whole brain radiotherapy . More recently, the dogma of SF-SRS as the only means of delivering an SRS treatment has been challenged by hypofractionated SRS (HF-SRS). The ability to deliver 25-35 Gy in 3-5 HF-SRS fractions is a direct consequence of the evolution of radiation technologies to allow image guidance, specialized treatment planning, robotic delivery and/or patient positioning corrections in all 6 degrees-of-freedom, and frameless head immobilization. The intent is to mitigate the potentially devastating complication of radiation necrosis and improve rates of local control for larger metastases. This narrative review provides an overview of outcomes specific to HF-SRS in addition to the more recent developments of staged SRS, preoperative SRS, and hippocampal avoidance-whole brain radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost.
Collapse
|
8
|
Dosimetric Impact of Lesion Number, Size, and Volume on Mean Brain Dose with Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Multiple Brain Metastases. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15030780. [PMID: 36765738 PMCID: PMC9913147 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15030780] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2023] [Revised: 01/23/2023] [Accepted: 01/24/2023] [Indexed: 01/31/2023] Open
Abstract
We evaluated the effect of lesion number and volume for brain metastasis treated with SRS using GammaKnife® ICON™ (GK) and CyberKnife® M6™ (CK). Four sets of lesion sizes (<5 mm, 5-10 mm, >10-15 mm, and >15 mm) were contoured and prescribed a dose of 20 Gy/1 fraction. The number of lesions was increased until a threshold mean brain dose of 8 Gy was reached; then individually optimized to achieve maximum conformity. Across GK plans, mean brain dose was linearly proportional to the number of lesions and total GTV for all sizes. The numbers of lesions needed to reach this threshold for GK were 177, 57, 29, and 10 for each size group, respectively; corresponding total GTVs were 3.62 cc, 20.37 cc, 30.25 cc, and 57.96 cc, respectively. For CK, the threshold numbers of lesions were 135, 35, 18, and 8, with corresponding total GTVs of 2.32 cc, 12.09 cc, 18.24 cc, and 41.52 cc respectively. Mean brain dose increased linearly with number of lesions and total GTV while V8 Gy, V10 Gy, and V12 Gy showed quadratic correlations to the number of lesions and total GTV. Modern dedicated intracranial SRS systems allow for treatment of numerous brain metastases especially for ≤10 mm; clinical evidence to support this practice is critical to expansion in the clinic.
Collapse
|
9
|
Zero Setup Margin Mask versus Frame Immobilization during Gamma Knife ® Icon™ Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14143392. [PMID: 35884453 PMCID: PMC9320023 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14143392] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2022] [Revised: 07/07/2022] [Accepted: 07/11/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
We compared the clinical outcomes of BM treated with mask immobilization with zero-SM (i.e., zero-PTV) to standard zero-SM frame immobilization SRS. Consecutive patients with BM, 0.5−2.0 cm in maximal diameter, treated with single-fraction SRS (22−24 Gy) during March 2019−February 2021 were included. Univariable and multivariable analysis were performed using the Kaplan−Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression. A total of 150 patients with 453 BM met inclusion criteria. A total of 129 (28.5%) lesions were treated with a zero-SM mask immobilization and 324 (71.5%) with zero-SM frame immobilization. Frame immobilization treatments were associated with a higher proportion of gastrointestinal and fewer breast-cancer metastases (p = 0.024), and a higher number of treated lesions per SRS course (median 7 vs. 3; p < 0.001). With a median follow up of 15 months, there was no difference in FFLF between the mask and frame immobilization groups on univariable (p = 0.29) or multivariable analysis (p = 0.518). Actuarial FFLF at 1 year was 90.5% for mask and 92% for frame immobilization (p = 0.272). Radiation necrosis rates at 1 year were 12.5% for mask and 4.1% for frame immobilization (p = 0.502). For BM 0.5−2.0 cm in maximal diameter treated with single-fraction SRS using 22−24 Gy, mask immobilization with zero SM produces comparable clinical outcomes to frame immobilization. The initial findings support omitting a SM when using mask immobilization with this treatment approach on a Gamma Knife® Icon™.
Collapse
|