Faisal S Ali1, Octavio Arevalo2, Soheil Zorofchian3, Anthony Patrizz3, Roy Riascos2, Nitin Tandon3, Angel Blanco3, Leomar Y Ballester4, Yoshua Esquenazi5. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Saint Joseph Hospital, Chicago, IL, USA. 2. Department of Neuroradiology, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX, USA. 3. Vivian L. Smith Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas Health Science Center, McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. 4. Department of Pathology, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. leomar.y.ballester@uth.tmc.edu. 5. Vivian L. Smith Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas Health Science Center, McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. yoshua.esquenazilevy@uth.tmc.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cerebral radiation necrosis (CRN) is a major dose-limiting adverse event of radiotherapy. The incidence rate of RN varies with the radiotherapy modality, total dose, dose fractionation, and the nature of the lesion being targeted. In addition to these known and controllable features, there is a stochastic component to the occurrence of CRN-the genetic profile of the host or the lesion and their role in the development of CRN. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies provide some insight into the genetic mechanisms underlying radiation-induced brain injury. In addition to these incompletely understood host factors, the diagnostic criteria for CRN using structural and functional imaging are also not clear, though multiple structural and functional imaging modalities exist, a combination of which may prove to be the ideal diagnostic imaging approach. As the utilization of novel molecular therapies and immunotherapy increases, the incidence of CNR is expected to increase and its diagnosis will become more challenging. Tissue biopsies can be insensitive and suffer from sampling biases and procedural risks. Liquid biopsies represent a promising, accurate, and non-invasive diagnostic strategy, though this modality is currently in its infancy. A better understanding of the pathogenesis of CRN will expand and optimize the diagnosis and management of CRN by better utilizing existing treatment options including bevacizumab, pentoxifylline, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, and laser interstitial thermal therapy.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cerebral radiation necrosis (CRN) is a major dose-limiting adverse event of radiotherapy. The incidence rate of RN varies with the radiotherapy modality, total dose, dose fractionation, and the nature of the lesion being targeted. In addition to these known and controllable features, there is a stochastic component to the occurrence of CRN-the genetic profile of the host or the lesion and their role in the development of CRN. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies provide some insight into the genetic mechanisms underlying radiation-induced brain injury. In addition to these incompletely understood host factors, the diagnostic criteria for CRN using structural and functional imaging are also not clear, though multiple structural and functional imaging modalities exist, a combination of which may prove to be the ideal diagnostic imaging approach. As the utilization of novel molecular therapies and immunotherapy increases, the incidence of CNR is expected to increase and its diagnosis will become more challenging. Tissue biopsies can be insensitive and suffer from sampling biases and procedural risks. Liquid biopsies represent a promising, accurate, and non-invasive diagnostic strategy, though this modality is currently in its infancy. A better understanding of the pathogenesis of CRN will expand and optimize the diagnosis and management of CRN by better utilizing existing treatment options including bevacizumab, pentoxifylline, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, and laser interstitial thermal therapy.
Authors: E Shaw; R Arusell; B Scheithauer; J O'Fallon; B O'Neill; R Dinapoli; D Nelson; J Earle; C Jones; T Cascino; D Nichols; R Ivnik; R Hellman; W Curran; R Abrams Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Matthew J McGirt; Ketan R Bulsara; Thomas J Cummings; Kent C New; Kenneth M Little; Henry S Friedman; Allan H Friedman Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Paolo Palmisciano; Ali S Haider; Kishore Balasubramanian; Randy S D'Amico; Alla Gabriella Wernicke Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 4.506
Authors: Lorena V Baroni; Daniel Alderete; Palma Solano-Paez; Carlos Rugilo; Candela Freytes; Suzanne Laughlin; Adriana Fonseca; Ute Bartels; Uri Tabori; Eric Bouffet; Annie Huang; Normand Laperriere; Derek S Tsang; David Sumerauer; Martin Kyncl; Barbora Ondrová; Vajiranee S Malalasekera; Jordan R Hansford; Michal Zápotocký; Vijay Ramaswamy Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2020-01-20
Authors: Paolo Palmisciano; Ali S Haider; Chibueze D Nwagwu; Waseem Wahood; Salah G Aoun; Kalil G Abdullah; Tarek Y El Ahmadieh Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2021-07-03 Impact factor: 4.130