Tijana Skrepnik1, Srinath Sundararajan2, Haiyan Cui3, Baldassarre Stea1. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Arizona , Tucson, AZ, USA. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, University of Arizona , Tucson AZ, USA. 3. The University of Arizona Cancer Center, Department of Biostatistics, University of Arizona , Tucson AZ, USA.
Abstract
Background: To identify the optimal sequencing and timing of immunotherapy (IT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for melanoma brain metastases (MBMs). Methods: The elapsed days between IT and SRS were correlated with local control (LC), regional brain control (RBC), time to CNS progression (TTPCNS), overall survival (OS), and radiation necrosis (RN). Logistic regression and Cox proportional models were used for statistical analysis. Results: Twenty-five patients with 58 MBMs underwent SRS and IT. Median follow-up was 22.7 mo (3.1-77.9 mo). A median of 2 SRS treatments of 21 Gy (range 16-24 Gy) and 4 cycles of Ipilimumab were delivered. SRS was delivered Before, After or Concurrently with IT in 9, 5, and 11 patients, respectively; 8/25 received SRS ≤30 d of IT and 17/25 were >30 d of IT. Median OS was 35.8 mo, 1- and 2-y OS was 83% and 64%, respectively, and LC was 94.8%. By timing, RBC and TTPCNS were significantly improved when SRS was delivered ≤30 d of IT (75% vs 23.5%, p = 0.03 and median not reached vs 5.7 mo, p = 0.02, respectively). By groups, Concurrent delivery improved TTPCNS (p = 0.04). The rate of RN was 20.7% (12/58 lesions) and RN was associated with improved OS (HR 0.21, p = 0.01). Conclusions: High OS was found for MBM treated with SRS and IT compared to historical reports. A significant association for improved RBC and TTPCNS was found when SRS was delivered concurrently and within 30 d of IT. Occurrence of RN was higher than SRS alone series but significantly associated with improved OS.
Background: To identify the optimal sequencing and timing of immunotherapy (IT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for melanoma brain metastases (MBMs). Methods: The elapsed days between IT and SRS were correlated with local control (LC), regional brain control (RBC), time to CNS progression (TTPCNS), overall survival (OS), and radiation necrosis (RN). Logistic regression and Cox proportional models were used for statistical analysis. Results: Twenty-five patients with 58 MBMs underwent SRS and IT. Median follow-up was 22.7 mo (3.1-77.9 mo). A median of 2 SRS treatments of 21 Gy (range 16-24 Gy) and 4 cycles of Ipilimumab were delivered. SRS was delivered Before, After or Concurrently with IT in 9, 5, and 11 patients, respectively; 8/25 received SRS ≤30 d of IT and 17/25 were >30 d of IT. Median OS was 35.8 mo, 1- and 2-y OS was 83% and 64%, respectively, and LC was 94.8%. By timing, RBC and TTPCNS were significantly improved when SRS was delivered ≤30 d of IT (75% vs 23.5%, p = 0.03 and median not reached vs 5.7 mo, p = 0.02, respectively). By groups, Concurrent delivery improved TTPCNS (p = 0.04). The rate of RN was 20.7% (12/58 lesions) and RN was associated with improved OS (HR 0.21, p = 0.01). Conclusions: High OS was found for MBM treated with SRS and IT compared to historical reports. A significant association for improved RBC and TTPCNS was found when SRS was delivered concurrently and within 30 d of IT. Occurrence of RN was higher than SRS alone series but significantly associated with improved OS.
Authors: Ana P Kiess; Jedd D Wolchok; Christopher A Barker; Michael A Postow; Viviane Tabar; Jason T Huse; Timothy A Chan; Yoshiya Yamada; Kathryn Beal Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Michael A Davies; Ping Liu; Susan McIntyre; Kevin B Kim; Nicholas Papadopoulos; Wen-Jen Hwu; Patrick Hwu; Agop Bedikian Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-10-19 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: David F McDermott; Charles G Drake; Mario Sznol; Toni K Choueiri; John D Powderly; David C Smith; Julie R Brahmer; Richard D Carvajal; Hans J Hammers; Igor Puzanov; F Stephen Hodi; Harriet M Kluger; Suzanne L Topalian; Drew M Pardoll; Jon M Wigginton; Georgia D Kollia; Ashok Gupta; Dan McDonald; Vindira Sankar; Jeffrey A Sosman; Michael B Atkins Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-03-30 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: K M Fife; M H Colman; G N Stevens; I C Firth; D Moon; K F Shannon; R Harman; K Petersen-Schaefer; A C Zacest; M Besser; G W Milton; W H McCarthy; J F Thompson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-04-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Anthony L Asher; Mohammed Ali Alvi; Mohamad Bydon; Nader Pouratian; Ronald E Warnick; James McInerney; Inga S Grills; Jason Sheehan Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2021-01-22 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Pierre-Yves Borius; Jean Régis; Alexandre Carpentier; Michel Kalamarides; Charles Ambroise Valery; Igor Latorzeff Journal: Cancer Metastasis Rev Date: 2021-01-04 Impact factor: 9.264
Authors: Norbert Galldiks; Martin Kocher; Garry Ceccon; Jan-Michael Werner; Anna Brunn; Martina Deckert; Whitney B Pope; Riccardo Soffietti; Emilie Le Rhun; Michael Weller; Jörg C Tonn; Gereon R Fink; Karl-Josef Langen Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2020-01-11 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Shearwood McClelland; Tim Lautenschlaeger; Yong Zang; Nasser H Hanna; Kevin Shiue; Aaron P Kamer; Namita Agrawal; Susannah G Ellsworth; Ryan M Rhome; Gordon A Watson Journal: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother Date: 2020-04-23