Literature DB >> 33622365

Radiation necrosis after a combination of external beam radiotherapy and iodine-125 brachytherapy in gliomas.

Indrawati Hadi1, Daniel Reitz1, Raphael Bodensohn1, Olarn Roengvoraphoj1, Stefanie Lietke2, Maximilian Niyazi1,3, Jörg-Christian Tonn2, Claus Belka1,3, Niklas Thon2, Silke Birgit Nachbichler4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Frequency and risk profile of radiation necrosis (RN) in patients with glioma undergoing either upfront stereotactic brachytherapy (SBT) and additional salvage external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) after tumor recurrence or vice versa remains unknown.
METHODS: Patients with glioma treated with low-activity temporary iodine-125 SBT at the University of Munich between 1999 and 2016 who had either additional upfront or salvage EBRT were included. Biologically effective doses (BED) were calculated. RN was diagnosed using stereotactic biopsy and/or metabolic imaging. The rate of RN was estimated with the Kaplan Meier method. Risk factors were obtained from logistic regression models.
RESULTS: Eighty-six patients (49 male, 37 female, median age 47 years) were included. 38 patients suffered from low-grade and 48 from high-grade glioma. Median follow-up was 15 months after second treatment. Fifty-eight patients received upfront EBRT (median total dose: 60 Gy), and 28 upfront SBT (median reference dose: 54 Gy, median dose rate: 10.0 cGy/h). Median time interval between treatments was 19 months. RN was diagnosed in 8/75 patients. The 1- and 2-year risk of RN was 5.1% and 11.7%, respectively. Tumor volume and irradiation time of SBT, number of implanted seeds, and salvage EBRT were risk factors for RN. Neither of the BED values nor the time interval between both treatments gained prognostic influence.
CONCLUSION: The combination of upfront EBRT and salvage SBT or vice versa is feasible for glioma patients. The risk of RN is mainly determined by the treatment volume but not by the interval between therapies.

Entities:  

Keywords:  External beam radiotherapy; Prognostic factors; Radiation necrosis; Re-irradiation; Stereotactic brachytherapy

Year:  2021        PMID: 33622365      PMCID: PMC7903688          DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01762-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiat Oncol        ISSN: 1748-717X            Impact factor:   3.481


  5 in total

1.  Characterization of pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma: is histology the gold standard?

Authors:  Isaac Melguizo-Gavilanes; Janet M Bruner; Nandita Guha-Thakurta; Kenneth R Hess; Vinay K Puduvalli
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2015-04-18       Impact factor: 4.130

2.  Stereotactic interstitial brachytherapy for the treatment of oligodendroglial brain tumors.

Authors:  Faycal El Majdoub; Clemens Neudorfer; Tobias Blau; Martin Hellmich; Christian Bührle; Martina Deckert; Volker Sturm; Mohammad Maarouf
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2015-08-26       Impact factor: 3.621

3.  Stereotactic brachytherapy using iodine 125 seeds for the treatment of primary and recurrent anaplastic glioma WHO° III.

Authors:  B Suchorska; C Hamisch; H Treuer; K Mahnkopf; R E Lehrke; M Kocher; M I Ruge; J Voges
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2016-07-15       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 4.  Iodine-125 brachytherapy for brain tumours--a review.

Authors:  Silke B Schwarz; Niklas Thon; Katharina Nikolajek; Maximilian Niyazi; Joerg-Christian Tonn; Claus Belka; Friedrich-Wilhelm Kreth
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 3.481

5.  Suspected recurrence of brain metastases after focused high dose radiotherapy: can [18F]FET- PET overcome diagnostic uncertainties?

Authors:  Alexander Romagna; Marcus Unterrainer; Christine Schmid-Tannwald; Matthias Brendel; Jörg-Christian Tonn; Silke Birgit Nachbichler; Alexander Muacevic; Peter Bartenstein; Friedrich-Wilhelm Kreth; Nathalie Lisa Albert
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 3.481

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.