Hassan A Aziz1, Nakul Singh2, James Bena3, Allan Wilkinson4, Arun D Singh1. 1. Department of Ophthalmic Oncology, Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 2. Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio. 3. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Vision loss following episcleral brachytherapy for uveal melanoma is difficult to predict for individual patients. OBJECTIVE: To generate a risk calculator for vision loss following episcleral brachytherapy for uveal melanoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective review of data was conducted at a multispecialty tertiary care center in Cleveland, Ohio. All patients with primary ciliary body or choroidal melanoma treated with iodine 125 or ruthenium 106 episcleral brachytherapy between January 1, 2004, and December 30, 2013, were included. Univariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazards were used to determine the influence of baseline patient factors on vision loss. Kaplan-Meier curves (log-rank analyses) were used to estimate freedom from vision loss. Bootstrap resampling was performed to bias correct this estimate. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Vision loss (to visual acuity [VA] worse than 20/50 and worse than 20/200). RESULTS: A total of 311 patients were included in the study, with a mean (SD) age of 62 (14.7) years at start of treatment and a median follow-up of 36 months (interquartile range, 18-60 months). At presentation, VA was better than or equal to 20/50 in 199 patients (64%) and better than or equal to 20/200 in 289 patients (93%). By Kaplan-Meier analysis, VA less than 20/200 at 3 years was not associated with sex, diabetes, systemic hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia but was associated with history of ocular comorbidities, type of isotope (ruthenium 106 or iodine 125), and initial VA ( >20/50 or <20/50). By multivariable analysis, age (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94-1.00; P = .06), largest basal diameter (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.16-1.34; P = <.001), total radiation dose to the fovea (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; P = .001) and optic disc (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01; P = .005), and initial VA worse than 20/50 (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.20-2.85; P = .005) were predictive of vision loss to a VA of less than 20/200. The concordance index for the full data set was 0.77. Using these data, an online risk calculator was developed to predict vision loss following episcleral brachytherapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The vision prognostication tool presented herein needs to be validated by independent data sets. This tool may improve counseling for patients being evaluated for episcleral brachytherapy. At-risk individuals identified by this tool could be considered for inclusion into trials exploring prevention or treatment of radiation retinopathy and alternative therapies of uveal melanoma.
IMPORTANCE: Vision loss following episcleral brachytherapy for uveal melanoma is difficult to predict for individual patients. OBJECTIVE: To generate a risk calculator for vision loss following episcleral brachytherapy for uveal melanoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective review of data was conducted at a multispecialty tertiary care center in Cleveland, Ohio. All patients with primary ciliary body or choroidal melanoma treated with iodine 125 or ruthenium 106 episcleral brachytherapy between January 1, 2004, and December 30, 2013, were included. Univariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazards were used to determine the influence of baseline patient factors on vision loss. Kaplan-Meier curves (log-rank analyses) were used to estimate freedom from vision loss. Bootstrap resampling was performed to bias correct this estimate. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Vision loss (to visual acuity [VA] worse than 20/50 and worse than 20/200). RESULTS: A total of 311 patients were included in the study, with a mean (SD) age of 62 (14.7) years at start of treatment and a median follow-up of 36 months (interquartile range, 18-60 months). At presentation, VA was better than or equal to 20/50 in 199 patients (64%) and better than or equal to 20/200 in 289 patients (93%). By Kaplan-Meier analysis, VA less than 20/200 at 3 years was not associated with sex, diabetes, systemic hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia but was associated with history of ocular comorbidities, type of isotope (ruthenium 106 or iodine 125), and initial VA ( >20/50 or <20/50). By multivariable analysis, age (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94-1.00; P = .06), largest basal diameter (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.16-1.34; P = <.001), total radiation dose to the fovea (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; P = .001) and optic disc (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01; P = .005), and initial VA worse than 20/50 (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.20-2.85; P = .005) were predictive of vision loss to a VA of less than 20/200. The concordance index for the full data set was 0.77. Using these data, an online risk calculator was developed to predict vision loss following episcleral brachytherapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The vision prognostication tool presented herein needs to be validated by independent data sets. This tool may improve counseling for patients being evaluated for episcleral brachytherapy. At-risk individuals identified by this tool could be considered for inclusion into trials exploring prevention or treatment of radiation retinopathy and alternative therapies of uveal melanoma.
Authors: Hasan Danish; Matthew J Ferris; Ehsan Balagamwala; Jeffrey M Switchenko; Kirtesh R Patel; Maria Choudhary; Caroline Craven; Pia Mendoza; John Suh; Chris Bergstrom; Hans E Grossniklaus; Thomas M Aaberg; Arun Singh; Ian R Crocker; Mohammad K Khan Journal: Melanoma Res Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 3.599
Authors: David Miguel; Jesús María de Frutos-Baraja; Francisco López-Lara; María Antonia Saornil; Ciro García-Alvarez; Pilar Alonso; Patricia Diezhandino Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy Date: 2018-04-30
Authors: David Miguel; Jesús María de Frutos-Baraja; Francisco López-Lara; María Antonia Saornil; Ciro García-Álvarez; Pilar Alonso; Patricia Diezhandino Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy Date: 2018-08-31
Authors: Charlotte A Espensen; Ane L Appelt; Lotte S Fog; Anita B Gothelf; Juliette Thariat; Jens F Kiilgaard Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2019-08-06 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Luca Tagliaferri; Monica Maria Pagliara; Carlotta Masciocchi; Andrea Scupola; Luigi Azario; Gabriela Grimaldi; Rosa Autorino; Maria Antonietta Gambacorta; Antonio Laricchiuta; Luca Boldrini; Vincenzo Valentini; Maria Antonietta Blasi Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy Date: 2017-12-30
Authors: Michelle R Tamplin; Wenxiang Deng; Mona K Garvin; Elaine M Binkley; Daniel E Hyer; John M Buatti; Johannes Ledolter; H Culver Boldt; Randy H Kardon; Isabella M Grumbach Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2021-01-04 Impact factor: 4.799