Literature DB >> 29463267

Hippocampus-sparing radiotherapy using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to the primary brain tumor: the result of dosimetric study and neurocognitive function assessment.

Kyung Su Kim1, Chan Woo Wee1, Jin-Yong Seok2, Joo Wan Hong2, Jin-Beom Chung2, Keun-Yong Eom1,2, Jae-Sung Kim1,2, Chae-Yong Kim3, Young Ho Park4, Yu Jung Kim5, In Ah Kim6,7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that hippocampal-sparing radiotherapy via volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) could preserve the neurocognitive function (NCF) of patients with primary brain tumors treated with radiotherapy.
METHODS: We reviewed data from patients with primary brain tumors who underwent hippocampal-sparing brain radiotherapy via VMAT between February 2014 and December 2015. The optimization criteria for the contralateral hippocampus was a maximum dose (Dmax) of less than 17 Gy. For NCF evaluations, the Seoul Verbal Learning Test for total recall, delayed recall, and recognition (SVLT-TR, DR, and Recognition) was performed at baseline and at seven months after radiotherapy.
RESULTS: A total of 26 patients underwent NCF testing seven months after radiotherapy. Their median age was 49.5 years (range 26-77 years), and 14 (53.8%) had grade III/IV tumors. The median Dmax to the contralateral hippocampus was 16.4 Gy (range 3.5-63.4). The median mean dose to the contralateral hippocampus, expressed as equivalent to a 2-Gy dose (EQD2/2), was 7.4 Gy2 (0.7-13.1). The mean relative changes in SVLT-TR, SVLT-DR, and SVLT-Recognition at seven months compared to the baseline were - 7.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], - 19.6% to 4.2%), - 9.2% (95% CI, - 25.4% to 7.0%), and - 3.4% (- 12.7% to 5.8%), respectively. Two patients (7.7%) showed deteriorated NCF in the SVLT-TR and SVLT-DR, and three (11.5%) in the SVLT-Recognition. The mean dose of the left hippocampus and bilateral hippocampi were significantly higher in patients showing deterioration of the SVLT-TR and SVLT-Recognition than in those without deterioration.
CONCLUSIONS: The contralateral hippocampus could be effectively spared in patients with primary brain tumor via VMAT to preserve the verbal memory function. Further investigation is needed to identify those patients who will most benefit from hippocampal-sparing radiotherapy of the primary brain tumor.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Brain radiotherapy; Hippocampus; Neurocognitive function test; Primary brain tumor; Volumetric modulated arc therapy

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29463267      PMCID: PMC5819694          DOI: 10.1186/s13014-018-0975-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiat Oncol        ISSN: 1748-717X            Impact factor:   3.481


Background

Radiotherapy is an integral part of brain cancer treatment. It improves the progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with low-grade glioma and is also a standard treatment after surgery with or without chemotherapy in cases of high-grade glioma. While the tumor itself may affect the neurocognitive function (NCF) of patients, radiotherapy is also associated with declined NCF. In particular, due to the association between the hippocampal neural stem and memory function, radiation therapy of the hippocampal area is associated with deteriorated cognitive and memory functions [1-3]. Effective hippocampal sparing was made possible with the development of sophisticated radiotherapy delivering techniques such as intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) [2, 4, 5]. Hippocampal-sparing whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) for brain metastases was proven to be effective in a recent clinical trial. The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0933 trial enrolled 113 patients with brain metastases treated with hippocampal-sparing WBRT, showing promising results in the preservation of memory function, compared to historical data [6]. However, unlike WBRT, the hippocampal-sparing strategy for the radiotherapy treatment of primary brain tumor has not been thoroughly evaluated. Although the dosimetric feasibility has been reported in a number studies [2, 7–17], to our knowledge, there has been no report on the association between NCF and hippocampal-sparing radiotherapy. Therefore, we report a dosimetric profile of hippocampal-sparing radiotherapy for the treatment of primary brain tumor as well as the change in NCF of the patients.

Methods

Patient Selection

Hippocampal-sparing radiotherapy to the brain was delivered using the volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique between February 2014 and December 2015 at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. A total of 74 patients have received partial brain irradiation for primary brain tumor, 69 of whom agreed to undergo NCF testing at baseline. Among them, 26 patients also underwent NCF testing 7 months after radiotherapy. After obtaining approval from the Institutional Review Board (No. B-1411/276-105), we analyzed the medical records and dosimetric parameters of these patients.

Radiotherapy Simulation

All patients were positioned using a Variable Axis Baseplate ™ (CIVCO Medical Instruments, Kalona, IA, USA). The head was inclined as previously described [18]. The computed tomography (CT) scans were acquired by using a Brilliance CT Big Bore™ CT simulator (Philips, Cleveland, OH, USA) with a slice thickness of 2 mm.

VMAT Plan Technique

All CT images of the patients were fused with their recent magnetic resonance (MR) images. The hippocampus was delineated according to RTOG guidelines [19]. All contours were delineated by the same radiation oncologist (I.A.K) and each delineation was peer-reviewed by K.S.K and J.Y.S. An optimization criterion for the hippocampus was a maximum dose (Dmax) of less than 17 Gy. However, we did not compromise the coverage of the planning target volume (PTV). In cases where the ipsilateral hippocampus was close to the PTV, we tried to meet the dosimetric criteria for the contralateral hippocampus. The brain stem, optic chiasm, and optic apparatus were also delineated. The other organs at risk were prioritized over the hippocampal dose constraint. For primary brain tumors, the clinical target volume (CTV) was calculated with an adequate margin of 1.5 – 2.0 cm from the tumor bed or gross tumor. The prescription dose was 60 Gy to the PTV for high-grade glioma and 40 – 56 Gy for low-grade glioma. The mean dose (Dmean) hippocampus was calculated as equivalent to a 2-Gy dose (EQD2/2) with α/β = 2.

NCF

NCF was assessed using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE); Seoul Verbal Learning Test (SVLT); and Rey Complex Figure Test, and Recognition Trial (RCFT) [20-23]. The SVLT is used to assess the verbal memory system using a list of 12 nouns with four words drawn from each of three semantic categories. The total recall (SVLT-TR) trial is the sum of the three learning trials. The SVLT also includes a 20-min delayed recall trial (SVLT-DR) and a yes/no delayed recognition trial (SVLT-Recognition). This last trial consists of a randomized list of 12 target words and 12 non-target words, six of which are drawn from the same categories as those of the targets. This study was standardized and norms that have been adjusted for age, education, and gender were developed for the elderly Korean population [22]. The NCF test was conducted at baseline and 7 months after radiotherapy. The relative differences were measured as ΔNCF = (NCFB-NCFF)/NCFB, where B = baseline, F = follow-up, and the deterioration in the NCF test from baseline was defined as a z-score drop of 1.5 (drop of 1.5 standard deviations).

Statistical analysis

The doses administered to the bilateral hippocampi and right and left hippocampus of the two groups were compared using Student’s t-tests. P-values less than 0.05 were considered to indicate statistically significant differences. Analyses were performed using PASW Statistics for Windows, Version 18.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).

Results

Patients’ Characteristics

Of the 69 patients who agreed to undergo NCF testing at baseline, 26 also underwent the test 7 months after radiotherapy. Their median age was 49.5 years (range 26-77 years) and 57.7% of the patients were female. Twelve patients (46.2%) had WHO grade I or II tumor, whereas 14 patients (53.8%) had grade III or IV tumor. The median PTV volume was 173.1 cm3 (range 30.3-493.6) and the median prescribed dose was 60 Gy (range 40-60). Concurrent chemotherapy was administered to eight patients (30.8%) diagnosed with glioblastoma (Table 1).
Table 1

Patients’ and tumor characteristics

NumberPercent
Median Age (range)49.5 yrs. (26-77)
Sex
 Male1142.3
 Female1557.7
Diagnosis
 WHO I
  Pituitary adenoma2415.4
  Megingioma1
  Craniopharyngioma1
 WHO II
  Oligodendroglioma3830.8
  Atypical meningioma3
  Diffuse astrocytoma1
  Ependymoma1
 WHO III
  Anaplastic astrocytoma2623.1
  Anaplastic oligodendroglioma2
  Anaplastic meningioma1
  Anaplastic hemangiopericytoma1
 WHO IV
  Glioblastoma7830.8
  Gliosarcoma1
Surgery
 GTR/STR2284.6
 Bx only/No surgery415.4
Concurrent Chemotherapy830.8
Location
 Frontal519.2
 Parietal519.2
 Temporal623.1
 Ocippital13.8
 Temporo-parietal27.7
 Fronto-temporal13.8
 Fronto-Prietal13.8
 Central519.2
Planning Target Volume (PTV)
 Vol(cc)173.1 cm3 (30.3-493.6)
 Prescribed dose60 Gy (40-60)

GTR gross total resection; STR, subtotal resection

Patients’ and tumor characteristics GTR gross total resection; STR, subtotal resection

Dosimetric Analysis

The median doses to 100% of the structure (D100%) and Dmax of the contralateral hippocampus were 7.2 Gy (range 0.6–11.7) and 16.4 Gy (range 3.5–63.4), respectively. The median Dmean expressed in EQD2/2 to the contralateral hippocampus was 7.4 Gy2 (range 0.7–13.1). The ipsilateral hippocampus received a higher dose. In addition, the median Dmax and Dmean (EQD2/2) of the ipsilateral hippocampus were 40.9 Gy (range 5.7–64.3) and 10.3 Gy2 (range 1.0–62.3), respectively. The median values of the maximal doses to the brain stem and optic chiasm were 43.3 Gy (range 0.2–61.5) and 42.5 Gy (range 1.0–57.8), respectively. The other organs at risk could be effectively spared (Table 2).
Table 2

Dosimetric analysis

Dosimetric parametersMedian (range)
Hippocampus
 Contralateral
  Vol(cc)1.8 cm3 (0.9-2.4)
  D100%7.2Gy (0.6-11.7)
  Dmax16.4 Gy (3.5-63.4)
  Dmean12.3 Gy (1.3-19.7)
  Dmean (EQD2/2)7.4 Gy2 (0.7-13.1)
 Ipsilateral
  Vol(cc)1.7 cm3 (0.6-2.3)
  D100%8.4 Gy (0.7-60.0)
  Dmax40.9 Gy (5.7-64.3)
  Dmean15.9 Gy (2.0-60.3)
  Dmean (EQD2/2)10.3 Gy2 (1.0-63.4)
 Bilateral
  Dmean13.4 (1.8-38.3)
  Dmean (EQD2/2)8.3 Gy2 (0.9-31.3)
Optic nerve
 Dmax31.7 Gy (0.5-58.5)
Optic chiasm
 Dmax42.5 Gy (1.0-57.8)
Brain stem
 Dmax43.3 Gy (0.2-61.5)
Eyeballs
 Dmax13.2Gy (0.5-38.1)
Lenses
 Dmax3.5Gy (0.4-14.0)

D dose to 100% volume of the structure, D maximum dose, D mean dose, EQD equivalent 2 Gy dose with α/β = 2

Dosimetric analysis D dose to 100% volume of the structure, D maximum dose, D mean dose, EQD equivalent 2 Gy dose with α/β = 2

NCF Test Results

Of the 26 patients who underwent neurocognitive testing at 7 months, two patients diagnosed with gliosarcoma and glioblastoma had progressive disease before 7 months. The other 24 patients presented with stable disease at 7 months. At the median follow-up of 13.9 months (range 7.0–25.6), the median PFS and overall survival were not reached. At the last follow-up, eight patients had progressed and one patient had died. The NCF test results at baseline and at 7 months for the 26 patients are listed in Table 3 and Fig. 1. The mean relative change of SVLT-TR, SVLT-DR, and SVLT-Recognition at 7 months compared to the baseline were − 7.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], − 19.6% to 4.2%), − 9.2% (95% CI, − 25.4% to 7.0%, after excluding one patient with 0 at baseline), and − 3.4% (− 12.7% to 5.8%), respectively. The patients with deterioration in the tests included two (7.7%) in the SVLT-TR and SVLT-DR and three (11.5%) in the SVLT-Recognition. In regard to the RCFT, 24%, 8%, 8%, and 12% of the patients showed deterioration, respectively.
Table 3

Change of neurocognitive function (NCF) test at seven months from baseline

Mean change from Baseline (%)a95% CIProbability of deteriorationb(%)
MMSE− 1.2− 9.8 to 7.43.8
SVLT-Total recall−7.7−19.6 to 4.27.7
SVLT-Delayed recall−9.2c− 25.4 to 7.0c7.7
SVLT-Recognition−3.4−12.7 to 5.811.5
RCFT-COPY1.8−7.4 to 11.124
RCFT-Immediate recall−8.1−36.2 to 20.08
RCFT-Delayed recall−25.2d− 52.8 to 2.5d8
RCFT-Recognition−3.8−11.2 to 4.012

MMSE Mini-Mental State Examination, SVLT Seoul Verbal Learning Test, RCFT Rey Complex Figure Test and Recognition Trial

aΔNCF = (NCFB-NCFF)/NCFB, Where B = baseline and F = follow-up, (Minus change indicate improved NCF)

bDeterioration in NCF test from baseline defined as drop of z-score 1.5 (drop of 1.5 standard deviation)

cExclusion of one patient with 0 test result at baseline

dExclusion of one patient who could not be assessed at baseline

Fig. 1

Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Seoul Verbal Learning Test (SVLT) score at baseline and at seven months

Change of neurocognitive function (NCF) test at seven months from baseline MMSE Mini-Mental State Examination, SVLT Seoul Verbal Learning Test, RCFT Rey Complex Figure Test and Recognition Trial aΔNCF = (NCFB-NCFF)/NCFB, Where B = baseline and F = follow-up, (Minus change indicate improved NCF) bDeterioration in NCF test from baseline defined as drop of z-score 1.5 (drop of 1.5 standard deviation) cExclusion of one patient with 0 test result at baseline dExclusion of one patient who could not be assessed at baseline Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Seoul Verbal Learning Test (SVLT) score at baseline and at seven months

Hippocampal Dose and Neurocognitive Impairment

We compared the hippocampal dose of the patients with varying NCF test results (Table 4 and Additional file 1: Table S1). We compared the right, left, contralateral, ipsilateral, and bilateral hippocampi mean doses (EQD2/2), respectively. The mean doses of the left hippocampus and bilateral hippocampi were significantly higher in patients with deterioration of SVLT-TR and SVLT-Recognition than in those without deterioration. The bilateral hippocampal mean dose was significantly higher in patients with impaired RCFT-Recognition test results (p = 0.042).
Table 4

Association between hippocampus dose and neurocognitive test deterioration

Mean dose (EQD2/2)
Bilateral hippocampiP valueRight hippocampusP valueLeft hippocampusP value
SVLT-Total recall0.033a0.3980.013a
 No Deterioration (n = 23)10.6 ± 6.515.7 ± 16.811.8 ± 14.1
 Deterioration (n = 3)20.3 ± 11.57.2 ± 1.737.7 ± 27.6
SVLT-Delayed recall0.1150.5580.074
 No Deterioration (n = 24)11.0 ± 6.715.2 ± 16.613.1 ± 15.0
 Deterioration (n = 2)19.8 ± 16.38.2 ± 0.136.0 ± 38.9
SVLT-Recognition0.003a0.4270.001a
 No Deterioration (n = 23)10.2 ± 6.013.8 ± 15.811.1 ± 11.7
 Deterioration (n = 3)23.3 ± 9.421.8 ± 19.543.1 ± 30.9
RCFT-COPY0.4690.2110.261
 No Deterioration (n = 20)11.1 ± 6.616.9 ± 17.712.7 ± 14.9
 Deterioration (n = 6)13.7 ± 10.77.5 ± 3.722.0 ± 24.6
RCFT-Immediate recall0.1560.5130.081
 No Deterioration (n = 24)11.1 ± 6.615.3 ± 16.513.1 ± 15.0
 Deterioration (n = 2)19.0 ± 17.47.4 ± 1.236.0 ± 39.4
RCFT-Delayed recall0.1560.5130.081
 No Deterioration (n = 24)11.1 ± 6.615.3 ± 16.513.1 ± 15.0
 Deterioration (n = 2)19.0 ± 17.47.4 ± 1.235.6 ± 39.4
RCFT-Recognition0.042a0.4060.257
 No Deterioration (n = 23)10.6 ± 6.513.8 ± 16.013.4 ± 15.2
 Deterioration (n = 3)19.9 ± 11.522.1 ± 20.925.8 ± 32.7

Numbers are represented as mean ± SD

SVLT Seoul Verbal Learning Test, RCFT Rey Complex Figure Test and Recognition Trial

aindicate statistical significance by student’s t-test

Association between hippocampus dose and neurocognitive test deterioration Numbers are represented as mean ± SD SVLT Seoul Verbal Learning Test, RCFT Rey Complex Figure Test and Recognition Trial aindicate statistical significance by student’s t-test

Discussion

Numerous studies have assessed the association between the radiation dose to the hippocampus and memory function in patients [24, 25]. Furthermore, the NCF decline in patients treated with WBRT is associated with the hippocampal radiation dose [26, 27]. The recent development of radiotherapy techniques has made hippocampal-sparing radiotherapy possible, which was shown to be efficient in the WBRT in a recent clinical trial [6]. However, there are several considerations when applying the hippocampal-sparing strategy to primary brain tumors. First, compromising the target volume for hippocampal-sparing is not recommended. When treating brain metastases, hippocampal-sparing WBRT has an acceptable risk. Ghia et al. reviewed 100 patients with brain metastasis, reporting that 8% had metastases within 5 mm of the hippocampus [28]. The modest increase in the risk of recurrence could be balanced with salvage stereotactic radiosurgery. However, in primary brain tumor, the safety of compromising the target volume for the hippocampus has not been validated. In high-grade glioma, recurrences are most often located within 2 cm of the original tumor [29]. Moreover, the report that patients with glioblastoma involving the subventricular zone have decreased overall survival and PFS remains controversial [30, 31]. The recently published American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) guidelines for glioblastoma noted that given the absence of published data for the hippocampal-sparing in glioblastoma patients, the panel does not recommend compromising the target coverage for hippocampus protection [32]. Second, the hippocampi have a bilateral structure. In case the ipsilateral hippocampus is close to the target volume, we could at least spare the contralateral hippocampus by using the IMRT technique [8]. However, it is uncertain if this strategy could be beneficial for the preservation of the memory function. Lesion studies indicate that the left and right temporomesial structures are essential for verbal and visuospatial memory, respectively [33, 34]. Patients with left lobe-origin complex partial seizures have abnormalities in verbal memory [35], while those with nondominant foci may have deficits in visuospatial memory, even though this is less established [34]. Jalali et al. reported that radiotherapy doses to the left temporal lobe are predictors of neurocognitive decline [24]. In the current study, we could spare the contralateral hippocampus to the median value of Dmean (EQD2/2) to 7.4 Gy2. Moreover, the left hippocampal dose was significantly associated with SVLT, whereas the right hippocampal dose was not. In regard to the preservation of the verbal memory function, sparing the contralateral hippocampus with the right lobe lesion could be effective. In the current study, the patients had undergone RCFT, which evaluates visuospatial memory. However, we did not observe an association between the deterioration of RCFT results and the radiation dose to the right hippocampus. Further investigation to identify the association between the visuospatial memory function impairment and the radiation dose to the right hippocampus is required. Third, unlike the WBRT, the target region differs among patients undergoing radiotherapy of the primary brain tumor. Therefore, comparisons of the hippocampal dosimetric profile and NCF toxicity are difficult. Several studies reported consistent results with those of our study regarding the dosimetric profile of the hippocampus when applying the hippocampal-sparing strategy using various IMRT techniques for the radiotherapy of the primary brain tumor [2, 7–17]. Pinkham et al. reported the dosimetric feasibility of hippocampal-sparing IMRT in grade II and grade III gliomas. They reported a median mean dose to the contralateral hippocampus of 24.9 Gy (range 5.1–58 Gy) [9]. Marsh and colleagues achieved mean doses of 15.8 Gy and 12 Gy for patients with high-grade and low-grade gliomas, respectively [13]. In regard to other critical structures, we achieved acceptable radiation doses for all vital organs. The memory function deterioration is reportedly 30%–60% eight to 18 months after cranial irradiation for primary brain tumor [36-39]. In the RTOG 0933 trial, the probability of deterioration of the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Delayed Recall score of patients who underwent hippocampal sparing radiotherapy was 17.2% at 6 months [6]. In the current study, the deterioration in the SVLT-DR test was 7.7%. However, direct comparison of this result with those of other studies has limitations. We only analyzed patients who underwent neurocognitive function tests at 7 months; the compliance with this test at 7 months was 38%, whereas the compliance of the NCF test at 6 months in the RTOG 0933 trial was 54%. Second, this study included patients with heterogeneous histology. Rapid progression of WHO IV disease might affect the neurocognitive function test. Of the two patients who progressed before the NCF test at 7 months, one patient with a left hippocampus dose as high as 63.4 Gy EQD2/2 exhibited an NCF test decline. Meanwhile, in patients with less aggressive histology, hippocampus-sparing radiotherapy may be more beneficial. However, the association between the integral dose to normal brain tissue and long-term neurocognitive changes should be carefully investigated in low-grade tumors especially in young patients. Further prospective studies with homogenous disease would clarify the benefit of hippocampal-sparing partial brain irradiation.

Conclusion

We used VMAT to apply hippocampal-sparing radiotherapy to primary brain tumors. The hippocampus could be reasonably spared and NCF tests performed 7 months after radiotherapy showed promising results in the preservation of verbal memory function. The left hippocampal mean dose was associated with the deterioration of the memory function, while the right hippocampal mean dose was not. Further investigation is needed in order to select patients who will most benefit from hippocampal-sparing radiotherapy of the primary brain tumor. Table S1. Association between hippocampus dose and neurocognitive test deterioration. (DOCX 20 kb)
  37 in total

1.  Material specific lateralization of medial temporal lobe function: An fMRI investigation.

Authors:  Marshall A Dalton; Michael Hornberger; Olivier Piguet
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2015-12-23       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  The subventricular zone neural progenitor cell hypothesis in glioblastoma: epiphany, Trojan Horse, or Cheshire fact?

Authors:  Iris C Gibbs; Daphne Haas-Kogan; Stephanie Terezakis; Brian D Kavanagh
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2013-07-15       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  Hippocampal dosimetry predicts neurocognitive function impairment after fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for benign or low-grade adult brain tumors.

Authors:  Vinai Gondi; Bruce P Hermann; Minesh P Mehta; Wolfgang A Tomé
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2011-12-29       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  A phase II trial of high-dose bromodeoxyuridine with accelerated fractionation radiotherapy followed by procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine for glioblastoma multiforme.

Authors:  M D Groves; M H Maor; C Meyers; A P Kyritsis; K A Jaeckle; W K Yung; R E Sawaya; K Hess; J M Bruner; P Peterson; V A Levin
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1999-08-01       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  Survival and failure patterns of high-grade gliomas after three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy.

Authors:  June L Chan; Susan W Lee; Benedick A Fraass; Daniel P Normolle; Harry S Greenberg; Larry R Junck; Stephen S Gebarski; Howard M Sandler
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2002-03-15       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Hippocampal-sparing radiotherapy: the new standard of care for World Health Organization grade II and III gliomas?

Authors:  M B Pinkham; K C Bertrand; S Olson; D Zarate; J Oram; A Pullar; M C Foote
Journal:  J Clin Neurosci       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 1.961

7.  Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery-dementia version (SNSB-D): a useful tool for assessing and monitoring cognitive impairments in dementia patients.

Authors:  Hyun-Jung Ahn; Juhee Chin; Aram Park; Byung Hwa Lee; Mee Kyung Suh; Sang Won Seo; Duk L Na
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2010-06-17       Impact factor: 2.153

8.  Neurocognitive function and progression in patients with brain metastases treated with whole-brain radiation and motexafin gadolinium: results of a randomized phase III trial.

Authors:  Christina A Meyers; Jennifer A Smith; Andrea Bezjak; Minesh P Mehta; James Liebmann; Tim Illidge; Ian Kunkler; Jean-Michel Caudrelier; Peter D Eisenberg; Jacobus Meerwaldt; Ross Siemers; Christian Carrie; Laurie E Gaspar; Walter Curran; See-Chun Phan; Richard A Miller; Markus F Renschler
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-01-01       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Integral dose delivered to normal brain with conventional intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and helical tomotherapy IMRT during partial brain radiotherapy for high-grade gliomas with and without selective sparing of the hippocampus, limbic circuit and neural stem cell compartment.

Authors:  James C Marsh; G Ellis Ziel; Aidnag Z Diaz; Julie A Wendt; Rohit Gobole; Julius V Turian
Journal:  J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2013-04-07       Impact factor: 1.735

10.  Neurocognition in patients with brain metastases treated with radiosurgery or radiosurgery plus whole-brain irradiation: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Eric L Chang; Jeffrey S Wefel; Kenneth R Hess; Pamela K Allen; Frederick F Lang; David G Kornguth; Rebecca B Arbuckle; J Michael Swint; Almon S Shiu; Moshe H Maor; Christina A Meyers
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2009-10-02       Impact factor: 41.316

View more
  9 in total

1.  A Prospective Cohort Study of Neural Progenitor Cell-Sparing Radiation Therapy Plus Temozolomide for Newly Diagnosed Patients With Glioblastoma.

Authors:  Chengcheng Gui; Tracy D Vannorsdall; Lawrence R Kleinberg; Ryan Assadi; Joseph A Moore; Chen Hu; Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa; Kristin J Redmond
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 4.654

2.  Long-term outcomes and late adverse effects of a prospective study on proton radiotherapy for patients with low-grade glioma.

Authors:  Shervin Tabrizi; Beow Y Yeap; Janet C Sherman; Lisa B Nachtigall; Mary K Colvin; Michael Dworkin; Barbara C Fullerton; Juliane Daartz; Trevor J Royce; Kevin S Oh; Tracy T Batchelor; William T Curry; Jay S Loeffler; Helen A Shih
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2019-05-10       Impact factor: 6.280

Review 3.  Memantine in the Prevention of Radiation-Induced Brain Damage: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Claudia Scampoli; Silvia Cammelli; Erika Galietta; Giambattista Siepe; Milly Buwenge; Gabriella Macchia; Francesco Deodato; Savino Cilla; Lidia Strigari; Silvia Chiesa; Alessio Giuseppe Morganti
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-31       Impact factor: 6.575

4.  Optimizing Adjuvant Stereotactic Radiotherapy of Motor-Eloquent Brain Metastases: Sparing the nTMS-Defined Motor Cortex and the Hippocampus.

Authors:  Yvonne Dzierma; Michaela Schuermann; Patrick Melchior; Frank Nuesken; Joachim Oertel; Christian Rübe; Philipp Hendrix
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-02-26       Impact factor: 6.244

5.  Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT): A modern radiotherapy technique - A single institutional experience.

Authors:  Azhar Rashid; Zaeem Ahmad; Muhammad Ali Memon; Abdul Sattar M Hashim
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2021 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.088

6.  Automatic Radiotherapy Planning for Glioblastoma Radiotherapy With Sparing of the Hippocampus and nTMS-Defined Motor Cortex.

Authors:  Michaela Schuermann; Yvonne Dzierma; Frank Nuesken; Joachim Oertel; Christian Rübe; Patrick Melchior
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2022-01-14       Impact factor: 4.003

Review 7.  Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation for Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Controversial Area.

Authors:  Shuyu Xue; Hanqiao Zeng; Shu Yan; Qianmeng Wang; Xiaojing Jia
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-02-07       Impact factor: 6.244

8.  Feasibility of hippocampus-sparing VMAT for newly diagnosed glioblastoma treated by chemoradiation: pattern of failure analysis.

Authors:  Chan Woo Wee; Kyung Su Kim; Chae-Yong Kim; Jung Ho Han; Yu Jung Kim; In Ah Kim
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 3.481

9.  Comparison between flattening filter-free (FFF) and flattened photon beam VMAT plans for the whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing.

Authors:  Tianlong Ji; Lu Sun; Feng Cai; Guang Li
Journal:  Asia Pac J Clin Oncol       Date:  2021-07-31       Impact factor: 1.926

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.