John A Vargo1, Kristie M Sparks2, Rahul Singh3, Geraldine M Jacobson2, Joshua D Hack2, Christopher P Cifarelli3. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, West Virginia University, 1 Medical Center Dr., Morgantown, WV, 26505, USA. jvargo@hsc.wvu.edu. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, West Virginia University, 1 Medical Center Dr., Morgantown, WV, 26505, USA. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Post-operative SRS (stereotactic radiosurgery) for large brain metastases is challenged by risks of radiation necrosis that limit SRS dose. Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) is a potential alternative, however standard dose recommendations are lacking. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty consecutive brain metastases treated with post-operative SRS were retrospectively compared to IORT plans generated for 10-30 Gy in 1 fraction to 0-5 mm by estimating the applicator size and distance from critical organs using pre-operative and post-operative MRI. Additionally, 7 consecutive patients treated with IORT 30 Gy to surface were compared to retrospectively generated SRS plans using the post-operative MRI to 15-20 Gy and 30 Gy in 1 fraction marginal dose. RESULTS: For the 20 resection cavities treated with SRS and retrospectively compared to IORT, IORT from 10 to 30Gy resulted in lower or not significantly different doses to the optic apparatus and brainstem. Comparatively for the 7 patients treated with IORT 30 Gy to retrospective SRS plans to standard 15-20 Gy and 30 Gy marginal dose, IORT resulted in significantly lower doses to the optic apparatus and brainstem. At a median follow-up of 6.2 months, 86% of patients treated with surgery and IORT achieved local control and 0% developed radiographic or symptomatic radiation necrosis. CONCLUSIONS: Critical organ dosimetry for IORT remains generally lower than that achieved with single fraction SRS following resection of large brain metastases. We recommend 30 Gy to surface as the preferred prescription, consistent with the dose recommendation for IORT in glioblastoma used in the ongoing INTRAGO-II phase-III trial. Early clinical outcomes appear promising for surgery and IORT.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Post-operative SRS (stereotactic radiosurgery) for large brain metastases is challenged by risks of radiation necrosis that limit SRS dose. Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) is a potential alternative, however standard dose recommendations are lacking. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty consecutive brain metastases treated with post-operative SRS were retrospectively compared to IORT plans generated for 10-30 Gy in 1 fraction to 0-5 mm by estimating the applicator size and distance from critical organs using pre-operative and post-operative MRI. Additionally, 7 consecutive patients treated with IORT 30 Gy to surface were compared to retrospectively generated SRS plans using the post-operative MRI to 15-20 Gy and 30 Gy in 1 fraction marginal dose. RESULTS: For the 20 resection cavities treated with SRS and retrospectively compared to IORT, IORT from 10 to 30Gy resulted in lower or not significantly different doses to the optic apparatus and brainstem. Comparatively for the 7 patients treated with IORT 30 Gy to retrospective SRS plans to standard 15-20 Gy and 30 Gy marginal dose, IORT resulted in significantly lower doses to the optic apparatus and brainstem. At a median follow-up of 6.2 months, 86% of patients treated with surgery and IORT achieved local control and 0% developed radiographic or symptomatic radiation necrosis. CONCLUSIONS: Critical organ dosimetry for IORT remains generally lower than that achieved with single fraction SRS following resection of large brain metastases. We recommend 30 Gy to surface as the preferred prescription, consistent with the dose recommendation for IORT in glioblastoma used in the ongoing INTRAGO-II phase-III trial. Early clinical outcomes appear promising for surgery and IORT.
Authors: Georgios Pantazis; Michael Trippel; Walter Birg; Christoph B Ostertag; Guido Nikkhah Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2009-05-21 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Brigitta G Baumert; Isabelle Rutten; Cary Dehing-Oberije; Albert Twijnstra; Miranda J M Dirx; Ria M T L Debougnoux-Huppertz; Philippe Lambin; Bela Kubat Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-07-11 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Cameron Brennan; T Jonathan Yang; Patrick Hilden; Zhigang Zhang; Kelvin Chan; Yoshiya Yamada; Timothy A Chan; Stella C Lymberis; Ashwatha Narayana; Viviane Tabar; Philip H Gutin; Åse Ballangrud; Eric Lis; Kathryn Beal Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2014-01-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Robert J Weil; Gaurav G Mavinkurve; Samuel T Chao; Michael A Vogelbaum; John H Suh; Matthew Kolar; Steven A Toms Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2015-01-23 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: A Gabriella Wernicke; Cole B Hirschfeld; Andrew W Smith; Shoshana Taube; Menachem Z Yondorf; Bhupesh Parashar; Lucy Nedialkova; Fridon Kulidzhanov; Samuel Trichter; Albert Sabbas; Rohan Ramakrishna; Susan Pannullo; Theodore H Schwartz Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-06-10 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: David R Raleigh; Zachary A Seymour; Bryan Tomlin; Philip V Theodosopoulos; Mitchel S Berger; Manish K Aghi; Sarah E Geneser; Devan Krishnamurthy; Shannon E Fogh; Penny K Sneed; Michael W McDermott Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Barbara Belletti; Jayant S Vaidya; Sara D'Andrea; Frank Entschladen; Mario Roncadin; Francesca Lovat; Stefania Berton; Tiziana Perin; Ezio Candiani; Sonia Reccanello; Andrea Veronesi; Vincenzo Canzonieri; Mauro G Trovò; Kurt S Zaenker; Alfonso Colombatti; Gustavo Baldassarre; Samuele Massarut Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-03-01 Impact factor: 12.531
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
Authors: Jayant S Vaidya; Frederik Wenz; Max Bulsara; Jeffrey S Tobias; David J Joseph; Mohammed Keshtgar; Henrik L Flyger; Samuele Massarut; Michael Alvarado; Christobel Saunders; Wolfgang Eiermann; Marinos Metaxas; Elena Sperk; Marc Sütterlin; Douglas Brown; Laura Esserman; Mario Roncadin; Alastair Thompson; John A Dewar; Helle M R Holtveg; Steffi Pigorsch; Mary Falzon; Eleanor Harris; April Matthews; Chris Brew-Graves; Ingrid Potyka; Tammy Corica; Norman R Williams; Michael Baum Journal: Lancet Date: 2013-11-11 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: K Steininger; K H Kahl; I Konietzko; C Wolfert; S Motov; P E Krauß; T Bröcheler; M Hadrawa; B Sommer; G Stüben; E Shiban Journal: Neurosurg Rev Date: 2022-07-26 Impact factor: 2.800
Authors: Christopher P Cifarelli; Stefanie Brehmer; John Austin Vargo; Joshua D Hack; Klaus Henning Kahl; Gustavo Sarria-Vargas; Frank A Giordano Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2019-10-25 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Motaz Hamed; Anna-Laura Potthoff; Julian P Layer; David Koch; Valeri Borger; Muriel Heimann; Davide Scafa; Gustavo R Sarria; Jasmin A Holz; Frederic Carsten Schmeel; Alexander Radbruch; Erdem Güresir; Niklas Schäfer; Patrick Schuss; Stephan Garbe; Frank A Giordano; Ulrich Herrlinger; Hartmut Vatter; Leonard Christopher Schmeel; Matthias Schneider Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-03-16 Impact factor: 6.639