Rachel H Brigell1, Daniel N Cagney2, Allison M Martin1, Luke A Besse1, Paul J Catalano3, Eudocia Q Lee4, Patrick Y Wen4, Paul D Brown5, John G Phillips1, Itai M Pashtan1, Shyam K Tanguturi1, Daphne A Haas-Kogan1, Brian M Alexander1, Ayal A Aizer1. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. dcagney@bwh.harvard.edu. 3. Department of Biostatistics, Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Department of Neuro-Oncology, Dana-Farber / Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Brain metastases can be radiographically cystic or solid. Cystic metastases are associated with a greater intracranial disease burden and poorer oncologic outcomes, but the impact of cystic versus solid appearance on local control after radiation remains unknown. We investigated whether cystic versus solid nature is predictive of local control after management with stereotactic or whole brain radiation (WBRT) and whether the radiation modality utilized is an effect modifier. METHODS: We identified 859 patients with 2211 newly-diagnosed brain metastases managed with upfront stereotactic radiation or WBRT without preceding resection/aspiration at Brigham and Women's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute between 2000 and 2015. Multivariable Cox regression with an interaction term and sandwich covariance matrix was used to quantify local failure. RESULTS: Cystic lesions were more likely to recur than solid ones when managed with stereotactic radiation (HR 2.33, 95% CI 1.32-4.10, p = 0.004) but not WBRT (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62-1.36, p = 0.67), p-interaction = 0.007. 1 year local control rates for cystic versus solid metastases treated with stereotactic radiation were 75% versus 88%, respectively; estimates with WBRT were 76% versus 76%, respectively. However, no significant differences were noted between the two cohorts in post-radiation outcomes including all-cause mortality and neurologic death (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with brain metastases, stereotactic radiation yields improved local control and less morbidity than WBRT, and consequently for many patients the cystic versus solid designation does not impact treatment selection. However, our results suggest that in patients with a large number of cystic brain metastases, a lower threshold to consider WBRT, as opposed to stereotactic radiation, should be employed. If our results can be confirmed, further investigation into the underlying mechanism(s) would be warranted.
PURPOSE:Brain metastases can be radiographically cystic or solid. Cystic metastases are associated with a greater intracranial disease burden and poorer oncologic outcomes, but the impact of cystic versus solid appearance on local control after radiation remains unknown. We investigated whether cystic versus solid nature is predictive of local control after management with stereotactic or whole brain radiation (WBRT) and whether the radiation modality utilized is an effect modifier. METHODS: We identified 859 patients with 2211 newly-diagnosed brain metastases managed with upfront stereotactic radiation or WBRT without preceding resection/aspiration at Brigham and Women's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute between 2000 and 2015. Multivariable Cox regression with an interaction term and sandwich covariance matrix was used to quantify local failure. RESULTS:Cystic lesions were more likely to recur than solid ones when managed with stereotactic radiation (HR 2.33, 95% CI 1.32-4.10, p = 0.004) but not WBRT (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62-1.36, p = 0.67), p-interaction = 0.007. 1 year local control rates for cystic versus solid metastases treated with stereotactic radiation were 75% versus 88%, respectively; estimates with WBRT were 76% versus 76%, respectively. However, no significant differences were noted between the two cohorts in post-radiation outcomes including all-cause mortality and neurologic death (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with brain metastases, stereotactic radiation yields improved local control and less morbidity than WBRT, and consequently for many patients the cystic versus solid designation does not impact treatment selection. However, our results suggest that in patients with a large number of cystic brain metastases, a lower threshold to consider WBRT, as opposed to stereotactic radiation, should be employed. If our results can be confirmed, further investigation into the underlying mechanism(s) would be warranted.
Authors: E Shaw; C Scott; L Souhami; R Dinapoli; R Kline; J Loeffler; N Farnan Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2000-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Alberto Franzin; Alberto Vimercati; Piero Picozzi; Carlo Serra; Silvia Snider; Lorenzo Gioia; Camillo Ferrari da Passano; Angelo Bolognesi; Massimo Giovanelli Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Leslie L Muldoon; Carole Soussain; Kristoph Jahnke; Conrad Johanson; Tali Siegal; Quentin R Smith; Walter A Hall; Kullervo Hynynen; Peter D Senter; David M Peereboom; Edward A Neuwelt Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-06-01 Impact factor: 44.544
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: Ayal A Aizer; Nayan Lamba; Manmeet S Ahluwalia; Kenneth Aldape; Adrienne Boire; Priscilla K Brastianos; Paul D Brown; D Ross Camidge; Veronica L Chiang; Michael A Davies; Leland S Hu; Raymond Y Huang; Timothy Kaufmann; Priya Kumthekar; Keng Lam; Eudocia Q Lee; Nancy U Lin; Minesh Mehta; Michael Parsons; David A Reardon; Jason Sheehan; Riccardo Soffietti; Hussein Tawbi; Michael Weller; Patrick Y Wen Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2022-10-03 Impact factor: 13.029