Raj Singh1, Hayden Ansinelli1, Jan Jenkins2, Joanne Davis2, Sanjeev Sharma3,4, John Austin Vargo5. 1. Virginia Commonwealth University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Richmond, VA 23298, USA. 2. The Radiosurgery Society, Sunnyvale, CA 94402, USA. 3. St. Mary's Medical Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntington, WV 25701, USA. 4. Marshall University Joan C. Edwards School of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntington, WV 25701, USA. 5. West Virginia University School of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, Morgantown, WV 26506, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes following stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (fSRS) for vestibular schwannomas (VS). MATERIALS/ METHODS: We identified 64 VS patients from the RSSearch Patient Registry (12 treated with SRS and 52 patients treated with fSRS). Potential factors predictive of local control (LC) and toxicity were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, Cox proportional hazards model, and binary logistic regressions with propensity score weighting. RESULTS: SRS (100%) and fSRS (94.2%) resulted in similar LC (p = 0.33). fSRS was associated with a higher likelihood of experiencing toxicities (42.3% vs. 8.3%; p = 0.054 on time-to-event analysis) that was maintained following a propensity-score weighted binary logistic regression (p = 0.037) and propensity-score weighted Cox regression (p = 0.039; hazard ratio (HR) = 8.85 (95% CI: 1.1 - 70.1)). CONCLUSION: In a multi-institutional analysis, we note equivalent LC but higher toxicity with fSRS compared to SRS for VS.
PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes following stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (fSRS) for vestibular schwannomas (VS). MATERIALS/ METHODS: We identified 64 VS patients from the RSSearch Patient Registry (12 treated with SRS and 52 patients treated with fSRS). Potential factors predictive of local control (LC) and toxicity were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, Cox proportional hazards model, and binary logistic regressions with propensity score weighting. RESULTS: SRS (100%) and fSRS (94.2%) resulted in similar LC (p = 0.33). fSRS was associated with a higher likelihood of experiencing toxicities (42.3% vs. 8.3%; p = 0.054 on time-to-event analysis) that was maintained following a propensity-score weighted binary logistic regression (p = 0.037) and propensity-score weighted Cox regression (p = 0.039; hazard ratio (HR) = 8.85 (95% CI: 1.1 - 70.1)). CONCLUSION: In a multi-institutional analysis, we note equivalent LC but higher toxicity with fSRS compared to SRS for VS.
Authors: D W Andrews; O Suarez; H W Goldman; M B Downes; G Bednarz; B W Corn; M Werner-Wasik; J Rosenstock; W J Curran Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2001-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Bethany M Anderson; Deepak Khuntia; Søren M Bentzen; Heather M Geye; Lori L Hayes; John S Kuo; Mustafa K Baskaya; Behnam Badie; Amar Basavatia; G Mark Pyle; Wolfgang A Tomé; Minesh P Mehta Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2013-10-20 Impact factor: 4.130