Wee Loon Ong1,2, Shun Wong1, Hany Soliman1, Sten Myrehaug1, Chia-Lin Tseng1, Jay Detsky1, Zain Husain1, Pejman Maralani1, Lijun Ma3, Simon S Lo4, Arjun Sahgal5. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Alfred Health, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON, M4N3M5, Canada. Arjun.Sahgal@sunnybrook.ca.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is now considered a standard of care treatment option in the management of spine metastases. One of the most feared complications of spine SBRT is radiation myelopathy (RM). METHODS: We provided a narrative review of RM following spine SBRT based on review of the published literature, including data on spinal cord dose constraints associated with the risk of RM, strategies to mitigate the risk, and management options for RM. RESULTS: There are limited published data of cases of RM following spine SBRT with detailed spinal cord dosimetry. The HyTEC report provided recommendations for the point maximal dose (Dmax) for the spinal cord that is associated with a < 5% risk of RM for 1-5 fractions spine SBRT. In the setting of spine SBRT reirradiation after previous conventional external beam radiation therapy (cEBRT), factors associated with RM are: SBRT spinal cord Dmax, cumulative spinal cord Dmax, and the time interval between previous RT and SBRT reirradiation. There are various strategies to mitigate the risk of RM, including accurate delineation of the spinal cord (or thecal sac), strict adherence to the recommended spinal cord dose constraints, and robust treatment immobilisation set-up and delivery. Limited effective treatment options are available for patients who develop RM, and these include corticosteroids, hyperbaric oxygen, and bevacizumab; however, none have been supported by high quality evidence. CONCLUSION: RM is a rare but devastating complication following SBRT for spine metastases. There are strategies to minimise the risk of RM to ensure safe delivery of spine SBRT.
PURPOSE: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is now considered a standard of care treatment option in the management of spine metastases. One of the most feared complications of spine SBRT is radiation myelopathy (RM). METHODS: We provided a narrative review of RM following spine SBRT based on review of the published literature, including data on spinal cord dose constraints associated with the risk of RM, strategies to mitigate the risk, and management options for RM. RESULTS: There are limited published data of cases of RM following spine SBRT with detailed spinal cord dosimetry. The HyTEC report provided recommendations for the point maximal dose (Dmax) for the spinal cord that is associated with a < 5% risk of RM for 1-5 fractions spine SBRT. In the setting of spine SBRT reirradiation after previous conventional external beam radiation therapy (cEBRT), factors associated with RM are: SBRT spinal cord Dmax, cumulative spinal cord Dmax, and the time interval between previous RT and SBRT reirradiation. There are various strategies to mitigate the risk of RM, including accurate delineation of the spinal cord (or thecal sac), strict adherence to the recommended spinal cord dose constraints, and robust treatment immobilisation set-up and delivery. Limited effective treatment options are available for patients who develop RM, and these include corticosteroids, hyperbaric oxygen, and bevacizumab; however, none have been supported by high quality evidence. CONCLUSION: RM is a rare but devastating complication following SBRT for spine metastases. There are strategies to minimise the risk of RM to ensure safe delivery of spine SBRT.
Authors: Sten Myrehaug; Arjun Sahgal; Motohiro Hayashi; Marc Levivier; Lijun Ma; Roberto Martinez; Ian Paddick; Jean Régis; Samuel Ryu; Ben Slotman; Antonio De Salles Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2017-07-14
Authors: Balamurugan A Vellayappan; Samuel T Chao; Matthew Foote; Matthias Guckenberger; Kristin J Redmond; Eric L Chang; Nina A Mayr; Arjun Sahgal; Simon S Lo Journal: Expert Rev Anticancer Ther Date: 2018-07-03 Impact factor: 4.512
Authors: David A Palma; Robert Olson; Stephen Harrow; Stewart Gaede; Alexander V Louie; Cornelis Haasbeek; Liam Mulroy; Michael Lock; George B Rodrigues; Brian P Yaremko; Devin Schellenberg; Belal Ahmad; Gwendolyn Griffioen; Sashendra Senthi; Anand Swaminath; Neil Kopek; Mitchell Liu; Karen Moore; Suzanne Currie; Glenn S Bauman; Andrew Warner; Suresh Senan Journal: Lancet Date: 2019-04-11 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Rachel M Glicksman; Michael C Tjong; Wellington F P Neves-Junior; Daniel E Spratt; Kevin L M Chua; Alireza Mansouri; Melvin L K Chua; Alejandro Berlin; Jeff D Winter; Max Dahele; Ben J Slotman; Mark Bilsky; David B Shultz; Marcos Maldaun; Nicholas Szerlip; Simon S Lo; Yoshiya Yamada; Francisco Emilio Vera-Badillo; Gustavo N Marta; Fabio Y Moraes Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: William A Hall; Liza J Stapleford; Costas G Hadjipanayis; Walter J Curran; Ian Crocker; Hui-Kuo G Shu Journal: Int J Surg Oncol Date: 2011-07-10