Haemin Chon1, KyoungJun Yoon2, Doheui Lee1,2, Do Hoon Kwon1,2, Young Hyun Cho3,4. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea. 2. Radiosurgery Center, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea. yhyunc@amc.seoul.kr. 4. Radiosurgery Center, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea. yhyunc@amc.seoul.kr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Given recently suggested utility of hypofractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in treating large brain metastases (BMs) > 3 cm, we sought to prospectively control tumor size variable to investigate the efficacy and safety of hypofractionated SRS for medium-sized BMs (2.5 to 3 cm) compared with single-fraction SRS. METHODS: Between 2011 and 2015, a total of 100 patients with newly diagnosed BMs (n = 105) of 2.5 to 3 cm had been treated with either single-fraction (n = 67; median dose 20 Gy) or hypofractionated SRS (n = 38; median cumulative dose 35 Gy in 5 daily fractions). No patients received any prior or upfront whole brain radiotherapy. In each patient, treatment outcome was measured by local tumor control (LTC), overall and progression-free survival (OS and PFS), and the occurrence of radiation necrosis (RN). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 14 months, significant differences were observed between the single-fraction versus hypofractionated SRS groups in the incidence of RN (29.9% vs. 5.3%, P < 0.001) and LTC (1-year LTC rates 66.6% vs. 92.4%, P = 0.028). There were no differences in PFS (median 6 months vs. 6 months, P = 0.381) and OS (median 13 months vs. 18 months, P = 0.239). Treatment-related adverse events ( ≥ grade 2 toxicity by CTCAE ver. 4.0) occurred more frequently in single-fraction group, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (56.3% vs. 36.1%, P = 0.084). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a better safety and efficacy profile of hypofractionated SRS for medium-sized BMs compared with single-fraction SRS. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these results.
PURPOSE: Given recently suggested utility of hypofractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in treating large brain metastases (BMs) > 3 cm, we sought to prospectively control tumor size variable to investigate the efficacy and safety of hypofractionated SRS for medium-sized BMs (2.5 to 3 cm) compared with single-fraction SRS. METHODS: Between 2011 and 2015, a total of 100 patients with newly diagnosed BMs (n = 105) of 2.5 to 3 cm had been treated with either single-fraction (n = 67; median dose 20 Gy) or hypofractionated SRS (n = 38; median cumulative dose 35 Gy in 5 daily fractions). No patients received any prior or upfront whole brain radiotherapy. In each patient, treatment outcome was measured by local tumor control (LTC), overall and progression-free survival (OS and PFS), and the occurrence of radiation necrosis (RN). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 14 months, significant differences were observed between the single-fraction versus hypofractionated SRS groups in the incidence of RN (29.9% vs. 5.3%, P < 0.001) and LTC (1-year LTC rates 66.6% vs. 92.4%, P = 0.028). There were no differences in PFS (median 6 months vs. 6 months, P = 0.381) and OS (median 13 months vs. 18 months, P = 0.239). Treatment-related adverse events ( ≥ grade 2 toxicity by CTCAE ver. 4.0) occurred more frequently in single-fraction group, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (56.3% vs. 36.1%, P = 0.084). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a better safety and efficacy profile of hypofractionated SRS for medium-sized BMs compared with single-fraction SRS. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these results.
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: T Murai; H Ogino; Y Manabe; M Iwabuchi; T Okumura; Y Matsushita; Y Tsuji; H Suzuki; Y Shibamoto Journal: Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) Date: 2013-12-12 Impact factor: 4.126
Authors: Roshan S Prabhu; Robert H Press; Kirtesh R Patel; Danielle M Boselli; James T Symanowski; Scott P Lankford; Robert J McCammon; Benjamin J Moeller; John H Heinzerling; Carolina E Fasola; Anthony L Asher; Ashley L Sumrall; Zachary S Buchwald; Walter J Curran; Hui-Kuo G Shu; Ian Crocker; Stuart H Burri Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-04-11 Impact factor: 7.038
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: Mark E Linskey; David W Andrews; Anthony L Asher; Stuart H Burri; Douglas Kondziolka; Paula D Robinson; Mario Ammirati; Charles S Cobbs; Laurie E Gaspar; Jay S Loeffler; Michael McDermott; Minesh P Mehta; Tom Mikkelsen; Jeffrey J Olson; Nina A Paleologos; Roy A Patchell; Timothy C Ryken; Steven N Kalkanis Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2009-12-04 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Brett H Diamond; Vikram Jairam; Shaharyar Zuberi; Jessie Y Li; Timothy J Marquis; Charles E Rutter; Henry S Park Journal: J Radiosurg SBRT Date: 2021
Authors: Jill S Remick; Emily Kowalski; Rahul Khairnar; Kai Sun; Emily Morse; Hua-Ren R Cherng; Yannick Poirier; Narottam Lamichhane; Stewart J Becker; Shifeng Chen; Akshar N Patel; Young Kwok; Elizabeth Nichols; Pranshu Mohindra; Graeme F Woodworth; William F Regine; Mark V Mishra Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2020-05-28 Impact factor: 3.481