Jiheon Song1, Saif Aljabab2,3, Lulwah Abduljabbar4, Yolanda D Tseng5, Jason K Rockhill6, James R Fink6, Lynn Chang4, Lia M Halasz5. 1. Division of Radiation Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1J 0C1, Canada. jisong@toh.ca. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, King Saud University, Riyadh, 11564, Saudi Arabia. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Center, 665 Elm Street, Buffalo, NY, 14203, USA. 4. Division of Radiation Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1J 0C1, Canada. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA. 6. Department of Radiology, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy is often used to treat meningioma with adverse features or when unresectable. Proton therapy has advantages over photon therapy in reducing integral dose to the brain. This study compared the incidence of radiological and clinical adverse events after photon versus proton therapy in the treatment of meningioma. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on patients with meningioma treated with proton or photon therapy at two high-volume tertiary cancer centers. Patients with a history of prior radiation therapy (RT) or less than 3 months of follow-up were excluded. Post-RT imaging changes were categorized into abnormal T2 signal intensities (T2 changes) or abnormal T1 post-contrast and T2 signal intensities (T1c+T2 changes) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Clinical outcomes of adverse events and survival were compared between the proton and photon therapies. RESULTS: Among the total of 77 patients, 38 patients received proton therapy and 39 patients received photon therapy. The median age at diagnosis was 55 years and median follow-up was 2.2 years. No significant differences in symptomatic adverse events were observed between the two groups: grade ≥ 2 adverse events were seen in 4 (10.5%) patients in the proton group and 3 (7.7%) patients in the photon group (p = 0.67). The 2-year cumulative incidences of T2 changes were 38.3% after proton therapy and 47.7% after photon therapy (p = 0.53) and the 2-year cumulative incidences of T1c+T2 changes were 26.8% after proton therapy and 5.3% after photon therapy (p = 0.02). One patient experienced grade ≥ 4 adverse event in each group (p = 0.99). Estimated 2-year progression-free survival was 79.5% (proton therapy 76.0% vs. photon therapy 81.3%, p = 0.66) and 2-year overall survival was 89.7% (proton therapy 86.6% vs. photon therapy 89.3%, p = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Following RT, high rates of T2 changes were seen in meningioma patients regardless of treatment modality. Proton therapy was associated with significantly higher rates of T1c+T2 changes compared with photon therapy, but severe adverse events were uncommon in both groups and survival outcomes were comparable between the two groups. Future studies will aim at correlating the MRI changes with models that can be incorporated into RT planning to avoid toxicity.
INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy is often used to treat meningioma with adverse features or when unresectable. Proton therapy has advantages over photon therapy in reducing integral dose to the brain. This study compared the incidence of radiological and clinical adverse events after photon versus proton therapy in the treatment of meningioma. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on patients with meningioma treated with proton or photon therapy at two high-volume tertiary cancer centers. Patients with a history of prior radiation therapy (RT) or less than 3 months of follow-up were excluded. Post-RT imaging changes were categorized into abnormal T2 signal intensities (T2 changes) or abnormal T1 post-contrast and T2 signal intensities (T1c+T2 changes) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Clinical outcomes of adverse events and survival were compared between the proton and photon therapies. RESULTS: Among the total of 77 patients, 38 patients received proton therapy and 39 patients received photon therapy. The median age at diagnosis was 55 years and median follow-up was 2.2 years. No significant differences in symptomatic adverse events were observed between the two groups: grade ≥ 2 adverse events were seen in 4 (10.5%) patients in the proton group and 3 (7.7%) patients in the photon group (p = 0.67). The 2-year cumulative incidences of T2 changes were 38.3% after proton therapy and 47.7% after photon therapy (p = 0.53) and the 2-year cumulative incidences of T1c+T2 changes were 26.8% after proton therapy and 5.3% after photon therapy (p = 0.02). One patient experienced grade ≥ 4 adverse event in each group (p = 0.99). Estimated 2-year progression-free survival was 79.5% (proton therapy 76.0% vs. photon therapy 81.3%, p = 0.66) and 2-year overall survival was 89.7% (proton therapy 86.6% vs. photon therapy 89.3%, p = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Following RT, high rates of T2 changes were seen in meningioma patients regardless of treatment modality. Proton therapy was associated with significantly higher rates of T1c+T2 changes compared with photon therapy, but severe adverse events were uncommon in both groups and survival outcomes were comparable between the two groups. Future studies will aim at correlating the MRI changes with models that can be incorporated into RT planning to avoid toxicity.
Authors: David N Louis; Arie Perry; Guido Reifenberger; Andreas von Deimling; Dominique Figarella-Branger; Webster K Cavenee; Hiroko Ohgaki; Otmar D Wiestler; Paul Kleihues; David W Ellison Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Elizabeth B Claus; Melissa L Bondy; Joellen M Schildkraut; Joseph L Wiemels; Margaret Wrensch; Peter M Black Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: David van Nieuwenhuizen; Martin Klein; Lukas J A Stalpers; Sieger Leenstra; Jan J Heimans; Jaap C Reijneveld Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2007-04-13 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Manish K Aghi; Bob S Carter; Garth R Cosgrove; Robert G Ojemann; Sepideh Amin-Hanjani; Robert L Martuza; William T Curry; Fred G Barker Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Blake E Pearson; James M Markert; Winfield S Fisher; Barton L Guthrie; John B Fiveash; Cheryl A Palmer; Kristen Riley Journal: Neurosurg Focus Date: 2008 Impact factor: 4.047
Authors: Ricardo J Komotar; J Bryan Iorgulescu; Daniel M S Raper; Eric C Holland; Kathryn Beal; Mark H Bilsky; Cameron W Brennan; Viviane Tabar; Jonathan H Sherman; Yoshiya Yamada; Philip H Gutin Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2012-08-24 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Hae Jin Park; Hyun-Cheol Kang; Il Han Kim; Sung-Hye Park; Dong Gyu Kim; Chul-Kee Park; Sun Ha Paek; Hee-Won Jung Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2013-08-15 Impact factor: 4.130