BACKGROUND: Insurers have started to deny reimbursement for routine brain surveillance with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases in favor of symptom-prompted imaging. The authors investigated the clinical and economic impact of symptomatic versus asymptomatic metastases and related these findings to the use of routine brain surveillance. METHODS: Between January 2000 and December 2010, 442 patients underwent upfront SRS for brain metastases. In total, 127 asymptomatic patients and 315 symptomatic patients were included. Medical records were used to determine the presenting symptoms, distant and local brain failure, retreatment, and need for hospital and rehabilitative care. Cost-of-care estimates were based on Medicare payment rates as of January 2013. RESULTS: Symptomatic patients had an increased hazard for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.448) and were more likely to experience neurologic death (42% vs 20%; P < .0001). Relative to asymptomatic patients, symptomatic patients required more craniotomies (43% vs 5%; P < .0001), had more prolonged hospitalization (2 vs 0 days; P < .0001), were more likely to have Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 3 and 4 post-treatment symptoms (24% vs 5%; P < .0001), and required $11,957 more on average to manage per patient. Accounting for all-cause mortality rates and the probability of diagnosis at each follow-up period, the authors estimated that insurers would save an average $1326 per patient by covering routine surveillance MRI after SRS to detect asymptomatic metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who presented with symptomatic brain metastases had worse clinical outcomes and cost more to manage than asymptomatic patients. The current findings argue that routine brain surveillance after radiosurgery has clinical benefits and reduces the cost of care.
BACKGROUND: Insurers have started to deny reimbursement for routine brain surveillance with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases in favor of symptom-prompted imaging. The authors investigated the clinical and economic impact of symptomatic versus asymptomatic metastases and related these findings to the use of routine brain surveillance. METHODS: Between January 2000 and December 2010, 442 patients underwent upfront SRS for brain metastases. In total, 127 asymptomatic patients and 315 symptomatic patients were included. Medical records were used to determine the presenting symptoms, distant and local brain failure, retreatment, and need for hospital and rehabilitative care. Cost-of-care estimates were based on Medicare payment rates as of January 2013. RESULTS: Symptomatic patients had an increased hazard for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.448) and were more likely to experience neurologic death (42% vs 20%; P < .0001). Relative to asymptomatic patients, symptomatic patients required more craniotomies (43% vs 5%; P < .0001), had more prolonged hospitalization (2 vs 0 days; P < .0001), were more likely to have Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 3 and 4 post-treatment symptoms (24% vs 5%; P < .0001), and required $11,957 more on average to manage per patient. Accounting for all-cause mortality rates and the probability of diagnosis at each follow-up period, the authors estimated that insurers would save an average $1326 per patient by covering routine surveillance MRI after SRS to detect asymptomatic metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who presented with symptomatic brain metastases had worse clinical outcomes and cost more to manage than asymptomatic patients. The current findings argue that routine brain surveillance after radiosurgery has clinical benefits and reduces the cost of care.
Authors: E Shaw; C Scott; L Souhami; R Dinapoli; R Kline; J Loeffler; N Farnan Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2000-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Sunit Harris; Michael D Chan; James F Lovato; Thomas L Ellis; Stephen B Tatter; J Daniel Bourland; Michael T Munley; Allan F deGuzman; Edward G Shaw; James J Urbanic; Kevin P McMullen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-02-17 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Courtney A Jensen; Michael D Chan; Thomas P McCoy; J Daniel Bourland; Allan F deGuzman; Thomas L Ellis; Kenneth E Ekstrand; Kevin P McMullen; Michael T Munley; Edward G Shaw; James J Urbanic; Stephen B Tatter Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2010-12-17 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Jason P Sheehan; Chun-Po Yen; James Nguyen; Jessica A Rainey; Kasandra Dassoulas; David J Schlesinger Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2010-03-12 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: R A Patchell; P A Tibbs; W F Regine; R J Dempsey; M Mohiuddin; R J Kryscio; W R Markesbery; K A Foon; B Young Journal: JAMA Date: 1998-11-04 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Kimberly L Johung; Norman Yeh; Neil B Desai; Terence M Williams; Tim Lautenschlaeger; Nils D Arvold; Matthew S Ning; Albert Attia; Christine M Lovly; Sarah Goldberg; Kathryn Beal; James B Yu; Brian D Kavanagh; Veronica L Chiang; D Ross Camidge; Joseph N Contessa Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-10-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Diandra N Ayala-Peacock; Albert Attia; Steve E Braunstein; Manmeet S Ahluwalia; Jaroslaw Hepel; Caroline Chung; Joseph Contessa; Emory McTyre; Ann M Peiffer; John T Lucas; Scott Isom; Nicholas M Pajewski; Rupesh Kotecha; Mark J Stavas; Brandi R Page; Lawrence Kleinberg; Colette Shen; Robert B Taylor; Nasarachi E Onyeuku; Andrew T Hyde; Daniel Gorovets; Samuel T Chao; Christopher Corso; Jimmy Ruiz; Kounosuke Watabe; Stephen B Tatter; Gelareh Zadeh; Veronica L S Chiang; John B Fiveash; Michael D Chan Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2017-08-21 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Yufei Liu; Brian M Alexander; Yu-Hui Chen; Margaret C Horvath; Ayal A Aizer; Elizabeth B Claus; Ian F Dunn; Alexandra J Golby; Mark D Johnson; Scott Friesen; Edward G Mannarino; Matthew Wagar; Fred L Hacker; Nils D Arvold Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Rachel F Shenker; Emory R McTyre; Glen B Taksler; Ralph B D'Agostino; Christina K Cramer; Jimmy Ruiz; Natalie K Alphonse-Sullivan; Michael Farris; Kounosuke Watabe; Fei Xing; Adrian W Laxton; Stephen B Tatter; Michael D Chan Journal: Clin Neurol Neurosurg Date: 2018-11-13 Impact factor: 1.876
Authors: Diandra N Ayala-Peacock; Ann M Peiffer; John T Lucas; Scott Isom; J Griff Kuremsky; James J Urbanic; J Daniel Bourland; Adrian W Laxton; Stephen B Tatter; Edward G Shaw; Michael D Chan Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-02-20 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Emory R McTyre; Adam G Johnson; Jimmy Ruiz; Scott Isom; John T Lucas; William H Hinson; Kounosuke Watabe; Adrian W Laxton; Stephen B Tatter; Michael D Chan Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Brahma D Natarajan; Christel N Rushing; Michael A Cummings; Jessica Ms Jutzy; Kingshuk R Choudhury; Michael J Moravan; Peter E Fecci; Justus Adamson; Steven J Chmura; Michael T Milano; John P Kirkpatrick; Joseph K Salama Journal: J Radiosurg SBRT Date: 2019
Authors: David M Randolph; Emory McTyre; Heidi Klepin; Ann M Peiffer; Diandra Ayala-Peacock; Scott Lester; Adrian W Laxton; Ammoren Dohm; Stephen B Tatter; Edward G Shaw; Michael D Chan Journal: J Radiosurg SBRT Date: 2017
Authors: Ryan T Hughes; Paul J Black; Brandi R Page; John T Lucas; Shadi A Qasem; Kounosuke Watabe; Jimmy Ruiz; Adrian W Laxton; Stephen B Tatter; Waldemar Debinski; Michael D Chan Journal: J Radiosurg SBRT Date: 2016