BACKGROUND: Historically, whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) has been the main treatment for brain metastases. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) delivers high-dose focused radiation and is being increasingly utilized to treat brain metastases. The benefit of adding SRS to WBRT is unclear. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 6, 2010. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of WBRT plus SRS versus WBRT alone in the treatment of brain metastases. SEARCH METHODS: In the original review we searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 2, 2009), MEDLINE (1966 to 2009), EMBASE (1980 to 2009), and CancerLit (1975 to 2009) in order to identify trials for inclusion in this review.In this update we searched the following electronic databases in May 2012: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 5, 2012), MEDLINE (2009 to May week 4 2012), and EMBASE (2009 to 2012 week 21) in order to identify trials for inclusion in the review. SELECTION CRITERIA: The review was restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared use of WBRT plus SRS versus WBRT alone for upfront treatment of adult patients with newly diagnosed metastases (single or multiple) in the brain resulting from any primary, extracranial cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The Generic Inverse Variance method, random-effects model in RevMan 5 was used for the meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: A meta-analysis of two trials with a total of 358 participants, found no statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) between WBRT plus SRS and WBRT alone groups (hazard ratio (HR) 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.02). For patients with one brain metastasis median survival was significantly longer in WBRT plus SRS group (6.5 months) versus WBRT group (4.9 months; P = 0.04). Patients in the WBRT plus SRS group had decreased local failure compared to patients who received WBRT alone (HR 0.27; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.52). Furthermore, a statistically significant improvement in performance status scores and decrease in steroid use was seen in the WBRT plus SRS group. Unchanged or improved Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) at 6 months was seen in 43% of patients in the combined therapy group versus only 28% in WBRT group (P = 0.03). Overall, risk of bias in the included studies was unclear. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since the last version of this review no new studies were found that met the inclusion criteria. Given the unclear risk of bias in the included studies, the results of this analysis have to be interpreted with caution. Analysis of all included patients, SRS plus WBRT, did not show a survival benefit over WBRT alone. However, performance status and local control were significantly better in the SRS plus WBRT group. Furthermore, significantly longer OS was reported in the combined treatment group for recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) Class I patients as well as patients with single metastasis.
BACKGROUND: Historically, whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) has been the main treatment for brain metastases. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) delivers high-dose focused radiation and is being increasingly utilized to treat brain metastases. The benefit of adding SRS to WBRT is unclear. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 6, 2010. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of WBRT plus SRS versus WBRT alone in the treatment of brain metastases. SEARCH METHODS: In the original review we searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 2, 2009), MEDLINE (1966 to 2009), EMBASE (1980 to 2009), and CancerLit (1975 to 2009) in order to identify trials for inclusion in this review.In this update we searched the following electronic databases in May 2012: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 5, 2012), MEDLINE (2009 to May week 4 2012), and EMBASE (2009 to 2012 week 21) in order to identify trials for inclusion in the review. SELECTION CRITERIA: The review was restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared use of WBRT plus SRS versus WBRT alone for upfront treatment of adult patients with newly diagnosed metastases (single or multiple) in the brain resulting from any primary, extracranial cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The Generic Inverse Variance method, random-effects model in RevMan 5 was used for the meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: A meta-analysis of two trials with a total of 358 participants, found no statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) between WBRT plus SRS and WBRT alone groups (hazard ratio (HR) 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.02). For patients with one brain metastasis median survival was significantly longer in WBRT plus SRS group (6.5 months) versus WBRT group (4.9 months; P = 0.04). Patients in the WBRT plus SRS group had decreased local failure compared to patients who received WBRT alone (HR 0.27; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.52). Furthermore, a statistically significant improvement in performance status scores and decrease in steroid use was seen in the WBRT plus SRS group. Unchanged or improved Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) at 6 months was seen in 43% of patients in the combined therapy group versus only 28% in WBRT group (P = 0.03). Overall, risk of bias in the included studies was unclear. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since the last version of this review no new studies were found that met the inclusion criteria. Given the unclear risk of bias in the included studies, the results of this analysis have to be interpreted with caution. Analysis of all included patients, SRS plus WBRT, did not show a survival benefit over WBRT alone. However, performance status and local control were significantly better in the SRS plus WBRT group. Furthermore, significantly longer OS was reported in the combined treatment group for recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) Class I patients as well as patients with single metastasis.
Authors: B Li; J Yu; M Suntharalingam; A S Kennedy; P P Amin; Z Chen; R Yin; S Guo; T Han; Y Wang; N Yu; G Song; L Wang Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2000-02-20 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: S N Sanghavi; S S Miranpuri; R Chappell; J M Buatti; P K Sneed; J H Suh; W F Regine; E Weltman; V J King; S J Goetsch; J C Breneman; P W Sperduto; C Scott; S Mabanta; M P Mehta Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2001-10-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: P K Sneed; K R Lamborn; J M Forstner; M W McDermott; S Chang; E Park; P H Gutin; T L Phillips; W M Wara; D A Larson Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1999-02-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: M A Chidel; J H Suh; C A Reddy; S T Chao; M F Lundbeck; G H Barnett Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2000-07-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Toshinori Hasegawa; Douglas Kondziolka; John C Flickinger; Anand Germanwala; L Dade Lunsford Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: David W Andrews; Charles B Scott; Paul W Sperduto; Adam E Flanders; Laurie E Gaspar; Michael C Schell; Maria Werner-Wasik; William Demas; Janice Ryu; Jean-Paul Bahary; Luis Souhami; Marvin Rotman; Minesh P Mehta; Walter J Curran Journal: Lancet Date: 2004-05-22 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Penny K Sneed; John H Suh; Steven J Goetsch; Seema N Sanghavi; Richard Chappell; John M Buatti; William F Regine; Eduardo Weltman; Vernon J King; John C Breneman; Paul W Sperduto; Minesh P Mehta Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-07-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Louis Burt Nabors; Jana Portnow; Mario Ammirati; Henry Brem; Paul Brown; Nicholas Butowski; Marc C Chamberlain; Lisa M DeAngelis; Robert A Fenstermaker; Allan Friedman; Mark R Gilbert; Jona Hattangadi-Gluth; Deneen Hesser; Matthias Holdhoff; Larry Junck; Ronald Lawson; Jay S Loeffler; Paul L Moots; Maciej M Mrugala; Herbert B Newton; Jeffrey J Raizer; Lawrence Recht; Nicole Shonka; Dennis C Shrieve; Allen K Sills; Lode J Swinnen; David Tran; Nam Tran; Frank D Vrionis; Patrick Yung Wen; Nicole R McMillian; Maria Ho Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Marcel A Kamp; Philipp J Slotty; Jan F Cornelius; Hans-Jakob Steiger; Marion Rapp; Michael Sabel Journal: Neurosurg Rev Date: 2016-07-09 Impact factor: 3.042
Authors: Chirag G Patil; Katie Pricola; J Manuel Sarmiento; Sachin K Garg; Andrew Bryant; Keith L Black Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-09-25
Authors: Suresh K Balasubramanian; Mayur Sharma; Vyshak A Venur; Philipp Schmitt; Rupesh Kotecha; Samuel T Chao; John H Suh; Lilyana Angelov; Alireza M Mohammadi; Michael A Vogelbaum; Gene H Barnett; Xuefei Jia; Nathan A Pennell; Manmeet S Ahluwalia Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2020-02-20 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Fabian Finkelmeier; Se-Jong You; Oliver Waidmann; Robert Wolff; Stefan Zeuzem; Oliver Bähr; Jörg Trojan Journal: J Gastrointest Cancer Date: 2016-03
Authors: Martin Kocher; Andrea Wittig; Marc Dieter Piroth; Harald Treuer; Heinrich Seegenschmiedt; Maximilian Ruge; Anca-Ligia Grosu; Matthias Guckenberger Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2014-04-09 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Zoltan Ungvari; Andrej Podlutsky; Danuta Sosnowska; Zsuzsanna Tucsek; Peter Toth; Ferenc Deak; Tripti Gautam; Anna Csiszar; William E Sonntag Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2013-05-20 Impact factor: 6.053