Patient outcomes of whole brain radiotherapy for brain metastases versus leptomeningeal metastases: A retrospective study

Utility of whole brain radiation therapy for leptomeningeal carcinomatosis

BACKGROUND

Although whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) is commonly used as first-line treatment for leptomeningeal carcinomatosis, the prognosis is uncertain despite treatment. Moreover, the benefit of WBRT for leptomeningeal carcinomatosis has not been adequately evaluated. Therefore, this study aimed to clarify the utility of WBRT for leptomeningeal carcinomatosis.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who received WBRT for leptomeningeal carcinomatosis or brain metastasis from solid tumors between January 2008 and July 2017 were retrospectively evaluated. The overall survival, symptom relief, and adverse events were compared between patients with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis and those with brain metastasis after WBRT.

RESULTS

Of the 277 treated patients, 204 patients (22 with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis and 182 with brain metastasis) were included in the study. The median overall survival was 440 days (95% confidence interval [CI] 0-931 days) for patients with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis and 322 days (95% CI 196-448 days) for those with brain metastasis (p = 0.972 on the log-rank test). On evaluating the overall survival of patients with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis, the prognostic factors of performance status 0-1, no extracranial metastasis, and no symptoms at the time of WBRT showed a significant survival advantage on univariate analysis. Among patients with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis, those with headache and nausea often showed improvement while those with depressed levels of consciousness and seizures did not. On comparing all-grade adverse events, vomiting and seizures were more frequent in patients with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis than in those with brain metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

WBRT was generally well tolerated and effective for treating patients with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis.

Radiotherapy in Leptomeningeal Disease: A Systematic Review of Randomized and Non-randomized Trials

Background: Leptomeningeal disease (LMD), also known as neoplastic meningitis, leptomeningeal carcinomatosis, or carcinomatous meningitis, is a rare cancer complication occurring in ~5% of cases and ultimately leads to significant morbidity and mortality. In the modern era, incidence of this condition continues to rise with longer survival of patients with advanced and even metastatic disease due to continued improvements in systemic therapies that are providing prolonged control of distant disease, but with limited effect in the central nervous system (CNS). Typical treatment strategies include optimal systemic therapy for the primary disease, as well as neuroaxis directed therapies, which may include intrathecal chemotherapy (ITC) or radiotherapy (RT). Methods: A systematic review of radiotherapy for LMD was performed. Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched from 1946 to 2018 for clinical trials, retrospective/prospective reviews, and case series with ≥2 human subjects that used radiation therapy techniques in the treatment of LMD. The outcome measures of interest included: characteristics of trial participants, inclusion/exclusion criteria, study type, number of participants, primary cancer histology, type of intervention for LMD, survival results if reported, length of follow up, and study conclusion. Results: Of 547 unique citations, 62 studies met the pre-specified eligibility criteria. These studies included 36 retrospective cohorts, 11 prospective series, 12 case series, and a single citation of guidelines, NCDB analysis, and a randomized control trial. Owing to study heterogeneity, meta-analyses of the endpoint data could not be performed. Conclusions: LMD is a devastating complication of cancer with reported survivals ranging from 2 to 4 months. Based on this systematic review, the recommendation for the treatment of LMD is for multimodality discussion of cases and treatment, including the use of radiotherapy, for LMD. However, with continued advances in systemic therapy as well as imaging advances, the landscape of LMD is evolving rapidly and the role of RT will likely also continue to evolve and advance. There is limited high-quality evidence to guide the optimal use of RT for the treatment of LMD, and there is a great need for prospective, histology specific investigation of the role of radiotherapy for LMD in the era of modern systemic therapies.

Whole brain radiation therapy does not improve the overall survival of EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients with leptomeningeal metastasis

Background

Leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) is a devastating and terminal complication of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), especially in patients harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. The role of whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) in the treatment of EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients with LM is not conclusive. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the therapeutic effect of WBRT in this setting.

Methods

EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients with LM, who had previously received treatment at the Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute from July 2014 to March 2018 were reviewed retrospectively. LM was diagnosed by positive CSF cytology and/or leptomeningeal-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

In total, 51 EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients with LM were eligible for analysis, subdivided into 26 in the WBRT group and 25 in the non-WBRT group. No significant differences were observed in intracranial ORR (15.4% vs. 16%, p = 0.952) and DCR (34.7% vs. 28%, p = 0.611) between the two groups. The median iPFS_LM and OS_LM for the entire cohort were 3.3 months (95% CI: 2.77–3.83) and 12.6 months (95% CI: 9.66–15.54), respectively. No difference in iPFS_LM was observed between the WBRT and non-WBRT groups (median 3.9 vs. 2.8 months; HR = 0.506, p = 0.052). The median OS_LM was 13.6 months in the WBRT group, compared with 5.7 months in the non-WBRT group (HR = 0.454, p = 0.022). Multivariate analyses of OS_LM showed that KPS ≥ 80 at the time of LM diagnosis (HR = 0.428, 95% CI: 0.19–0.94; p = 0.034) and the administration of EGFR-TKIs (HR = 0.258, 95% CI: 0.11–0.58; p = 0.001) were independent predictors of survival, but WBRT (HR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.24–1.01; p = 0.54) was not. Toxicities associated with WBRT or other treatment were rare.

Conclusion

For EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients with LM, WBRT did not improve intracranial treatment response and survival statistically.

Serum tumor marker levels at the development of intracranial metastasis in patients with lung or breast cancer

Background

Intracranial metastasis (IM) is observed in various cancers, including in lung and breast cancer, and its timely diagnosis is required for successful patient treatment. Various tumor serum markers, such as carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), pro-gastrin-releasing peptide (ProGRP), neuron-specific enolase (NSE), and cancer antigen 15-3 (CA15-3), serve not only as prognostic indicators in lung and breast cancer but also as risk factors for IM development. This study is the first to assess a subgroup of cancer patients with IM that did not show elevated serum tumor marker levels.

Methods

This retrospective study included 53 patients with lung or breast cancer in which IM was detected by enhanced brain magnetic resonance imaging between January 2013 and December 2018. IM was classified into three types [parenchymal metastasis (PM), leptomeningeal metastasis and dural metastasis]. Serum CEA level was measured using an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) or chemiluminescent immunoassay. Plasma ProGRP level was measured using a chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA), and the serum NSE level was measured using ECLIA. The serum CA15-3 level was measured using CLEIA. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using Pearson's χ² test and logistic regression analysis, respectively.

Results

Among the total 53 patients, 15 patients (28.3%) did not show elevated serum tumor marker levels. Univariate analysis showed that the patients with PM only significantly correlated with no increasing tumor marker level compared with other IM types (P=0.030), as well as female patients and patients without symptoms (P=0.010 and 0.046, respectively). Multivariate showed that the patients with PM only and female patients significantly correlated with no increasing tumor marker level (P=0.038 and 0.014, respectively).

Conclusions

Our findings describe a subgroup of lung and breast cancer patients with IM that do not show elevated tumor marker levels, indicating the need for the identification of novel indicators for IM or increased monitoring of these patients.