Aryavarta M S Kumar1,2, Jonathan Miller3, Seth A Hoffer3, David B Mansur3, Michael Coffey3, Simon S Lo4, Andrew E Sloan3, Mitchell Machtay3. 1. Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA. Aryavarta.Kumar@VA.gov. 2. Louis Stokes VA Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA. Aryavarta.Kumar@VA.gov. 3. Seidman Cancer Center, University Hospitals, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA. 4. University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: HSRT directed to large surgical beds in patients with resected brain metastases improves local control while sparing patients the toxicity associated with whole brain radiation. We review our institutional series to determine factors predictive of local failure. METHODS: In a total of 39 consecutive patients with brain metastases treated from August 2011 to August 2016, 43 surgical beds were treated with HSRT in three or five fractions. All treatments were completed on a robotic radiosurgery platform using the 6D Skull tracking system. Volumetric MRIs from before and after surgery were used for radiation planning. A 2-mm PTV margin was used around the contoured surgical bed and resection margins; these were reviewed by the radiation oncologist and neurosurgeon. Lower total doses were prescribed based on proximity to critical structures or if prior radiation treatments were given. Local control in this study is defined as no volumetric MRI evidence of recurrence of tumor within the high dose radiation volume. Statistics were calculated using JMP Pro v13. RESULTS: Of the 43 surgical beds analyzed, 23 were from NSCLC, 5 were from breast, 4 from melanoma, 5 from esophagus, and 1 each from SCLC, sarcoma, colon, renal, rectal, and unknown primary. Ten were treated with three fractions with median dose 24 Gy and 33 were treated with five fractions with median dose 27.5 Gy using an every other day fractionation. There were no reported grade 3 or higher toxicities. Median follow up was 212 days after completion of radiation. 10 (23%) surgical beds developed local failure with a median time to failure of 148 days. All but three patients developed new brain metastases outside of the treated field and were treated with stereotactic radiosurgery, whole brain radiation and/or chemotherapy. Five patients (13%) developed leptomeningeal disease. With a median follow up of 226 days, 30 Gy/5 fx was associated with the best local control (93%) with only 1 local failure. A lower total dose in five fractions (ie 27.5 or 25 Gy) had a local control rate of 70%. For three fraction SBRT, local control was 100% using a dose of 27 Gy in three fractions (follow up was > 600 days) and 71% if 24 Gy in three fractions was used. A higher total biologically equivalent dose (BED10) was statistically significant for improved local control (p = 0.04) with a threshold BED10 ≥ 48 associated with better local control. CONCLUSIONS: HSRT after surgical resection for brain metastasis is well tolerated and has improved local control with BED10 ≥ 48 (30 Gy/5 fx and 27 Gy/3 fx). Additional study is warranted.
INTRODUCTION: HSRT directed to large surgical beds in patients with resected brain metastases improves local control while sparing patients the toxicity associated with whole brain radiation. We review our institutional series to determine factors predictive of local failure. METHODS: In a total of 39 consecutive patients with brain metastases treated from August 2011 to August 2016, 43 surgical beds were treated with HSRT in three or five fractions. All treatments were completed on a robotic radiosurgery platform using the 6D Skull tracking system. Volumetric MRIs from before and after surgery were used for radiation planning. A 2-mm PTV margin was used around the contoured surgical bed and resection margins; these were reviewed by the radiation oncologist and neurosurgeon. Lower total doses were prescribed based on proximity to critical structures or if prior radiation treatments were given. Local control in this study is defined as no volumetric MRI evidence of recurrence of tumor within the high dose radiation volume. Statistics were calculated using JMP Pro v13. RESULTS: Of the 43 surgical beds analyzed, 23 were from NSCLC, 5 were from breast, 4 from melanoma, 5 from esophagus, and 1 each from SCLC, sarcoma, colon, renal, rectal, and unknown primary. Ten were treated with three fractions with median dose 24 Gy and 33 were treated with five fractions with median dose 27.5 Gy using an every other day fractionation. There were no reported grade 3 or higher toxicities. Median follow up was 212 days after completion of radiation. 10 (23%) surgical beds developed local failure with a median time to failure of 148 days. All but three patients developed new brain metastases outside of the treated field and were treated with stereotactic radiosurgery, whole brain radiation and/or chemotherapy. Five patients (13%) developed leptomeningeal disease. With a median follow up of 226 days, 30 Gy/5 fx was associated with the best local control (93%) with only 1 local failure. A lower total dose in five fractions (ie 27.5 or 25 Gy) had a local control rate of 70%. For three fraction SBRT, local control was 100% using a dose of 27 Gy in three fractions (follow up was > 600 days) and 71% if 24 Gy in three fractions was used. A higher total biologically equivalent dose (BED10) was statistically significant for improved local control (p = 0.04) with a threshold BED10 ≥ 48 associated with better local control. CONCLUSIONS: HSRT after surgical resection for brain metastasis is well tolerated and has improved local control with BED10 ≥ 48 (30 Gy/5 fx and 27 Gy/3 fx). Additional study is warranted.
Authors: Kamran A Ahmed; Siriporn Sarangkasiri; Prakash Chinnaiyan; Solmaz Sahebjam; Hsiang-Hsuan Michael Yu; Arnold B Etame; Nikhil G Rao Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Paul D Brown; Stephanie Pugh; Nadia N Laack; Jeffrey S Wefel; Deepak Khuntia; Christina Meyers; Ali Choucair; Sherry Fox; John H Suh; David Roberge; Vivek Kavadi; Soren M Bentzen; Minesh P Mehta; Deborah Watkins-Bruner Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2013-08-16 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Brian J Blonigen; Ryan D Steinmetz; Linda Levin; Michael A Lamba; Ronald E Warnick; John C Breneman Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2009-09-23 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Alexander K Kwon; Steven J Dibiase; Brian Wang; Samuel L Hughes; Barry Milcarek; Yunping Zhu Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jonathan W Lischalk; Eric Oermann; Sean P Collins; Mani N Nair; Vikram V Nayar; Richa Bhasin; Jean-Marc Voyadzis; Sonali Rudra; Keith Unger; Brian T Collins Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2015-10-26 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Hima B Musunuru; Jacob S Witt; Poonam Yadav; David M Francis; Aleksandra Kuczmarska-Haas; Zacariah E Labby; Michael F Bassetti; Steven P Howard; Andrew M Baschnagel Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2019-10-12 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: S Rogers; A Stauffer; N Lomax; S Alonso; B Eberle; S Gomez Ordoñez; T Lazeroms; E Kessler; M Brendel; L Schwyzer; O Riesterer Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2021-09-21 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Sidyarth Garimall; Mihir Shanker; Erin Johns; Trevor Watkins; Sarah Olson; Michael Huo; Matthew C Foote; Mark B Pinkham Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2020-01-06 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Jacob Y Shin; Noah J Mathis; Neil Ari Wijetunga; Divya Yerramilli; Daniel S Higginson; Adam M Schmitt; Daniel R Gomez; Yoshiya J Yamada; Jonathan T Yang Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-02-04
Authors: Rami A El Shafie; Thorsten Dresel; Dorothea Weber; Daniela Schmitt; Kristin Lang; Laila König; Simon Höne; Tobias Forster; Bastian von Nettelbladt; Tanja Eichkorn; Sebastian Adeberg; Jürgen Debus; Stefan Rieken; Denise Bernhardt Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2020-05-08 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Giuseppe Minniti; Maximilian Niyazi; Nicolaus Andratschke; Matthias Guckenberger; Joshua D Palmer; Helen A Shih; Simon S Lo; Scott Soltys; Ivana Russo; Paul D Brown; Claus Belka Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2021-04-15 Impact factor: 3.481