| Literature DB >> 36185258 |
Junhyung Kim1, Yukyeng Byeon1, Sang Woo Song1, Young Hyun Cho1, Chang-Ki Hong1, Seok Ho Hong1, Jeong Hoon Kim1, Do Heui Lee1, Ji Eun Park2, Ho Sung Kim2, Young-Hoon Kim1.
Abstract
Objective: A lack of understanding of the clinical course of neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2)-associated vestibular schwannoma (VS) often complicates the decision-making in terms of optimal timing and mode of treatment. We investigated the outcomes of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in this population.Entities:
Keywords: hearing preservation; neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2); stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS); tumor control; vestibular schwannoma (acoustic neuroma)
Year: 2022 PMID: 36185258 PMCID: PMC9523262 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.996186
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 5.738
Figure 1Selection of study subjects. NF2, neurofibromatosis type 2; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; SRS, stereotactic radiosurgery.
Baseline characteristics of the study patients.
|
| |
| Age at treatment (year) | 37 [29, 50] |
| ≥ 30 | 29 (71) |
| Sex | |
| Male | 21 (51) |
| Criteria for NF2 diagnosis | |
| Bilateral VS | 34 (83) |
| Unilateral VS with other multiple tumors | 7 (17) |
| Phenotype | |
| Wishart | 27 (66) |
| Feiling-Gardner | 14 (34) |
| Laterality | |
| Left | 17 (41) |
| Indication for treatment | |
| Primary | |
| Tumor growth | 13 (32) |
| Tumor volume | 21 (51) |
| Adjuvant or secondary (prior surgery) | 7 (17) |
| Hearing function before SRS (Gardner-Robertson grade) | |
| I | 2 (5) |
| II | 8 (20) |
| III | 3 (7) |
| IV or V | 28 (68) |
Values are numbers (%) or a median [range]. Data are given for each treated case. VS, vestibular schwannoma; NF2, neurofibromatosis 2; SRS, stereotactic radiosurgery.
Treatment factors and outcomes.
|
| |
| Maximal extrameatal diameter (cm) | 2.0 [1.1, 2.3] |
| Extrameatal extension (Koos grade) | |
| I | 5 (12) |
| II | 15 (37) |
| III | 16 (39) |
| IV | 5 (12) |
| Target volume (cc) | 3.06 [1.00, 6.00] |
| Number of fractions | |
| Single | 39 (93) |
| Fractionated | 3 (7) |
| Marginal dose (Gy) per fraction | 12.0 [12.0, 12.5] |
| Less than 12.0 | 5 (12) |
| 12.0-13.0 | 35 (86) |
| More than 13.0 | 1 (2) |
| Tumor control | |
| At 12 months | 24 (59) |
| At 24 months (n=36) | 21 (58) |
| At 36 months (n=35) | 26 (74) |
| At 60 months (n=27) | 23 (85) |
| At 120 months (n=11) | 9 (82) |
| Pseudoprogression (n=12) | |
| Peak volume increase (%) | 29.2 [22.4, 36.6] |
| Time-to-peak volume (month) | 17.3 [11.0, 35.4] |
| Hearing preservation (n=10) | |
| Serviceable | 8 (80) |
| Non-serviceable | 2 (20) |
| Other comorbidities | |
| Vestibulopathy | . |
| Facial nerve palsy | . |
| Trigeminal neuralgia | . |
| Symptomatic hydrocephalus (n=33) | 1 (3) |
Values are numbers (%) or a median [range]. Percentages are based on the total number of treated lesions (n=41), unless otherwise specified. VS, vestibular schwannoma; NF2, neurofibromatosis 2.
Figure 2Growth patterns of unirradiated vestibular schwannomas. The relative volume change during the observation period was fitted using linear regression for each case [R2, 0.965 (IQR, 0.937-0.991)]. The volume of unirradiated lesions exponentially expanded with a doubling time of 62.2 (IQR, 30.6-92.3) months, which corresponds to a relative volume increase of 14.0% (IQR, 7.8-27.0%) per year.
Figure 3Tumor volume response patterns following stereotactic radiosurgery.The tumor volumes of the treated lesions showed distinct patterns in several treatment response groups (A). Group I (black) refers to a typical volume response to SRS without significant pseudoprogression. Group II (red) volume responses had early pseudoprogression on the treated side compared to the contralateral untreated side (grey). Group III (blue) showed a slower response to SRS with delayed pseudoprogression. Group IV (purple) showed a failed tumor control with an exponential tumor growth pattern that was similar to untreated lesions (grey). A group I bilateral NF2-associated VS (B–D) showed favorable tumor control on the treated side (left). Notably, however, the contralateral untreated lesion (right) rapidly grew during the same follow-up period. A group III case (E) exhibited a slow treatment response, but successful tumor control over a long-term follow-up. This tumor had delayed pseudoprogression (F) up to three years post-treatment but eventually regressed without further treatment at 10 years (G). A group IV case (H) was resistant to the SRS treatment and consistently grew over three years (I) and thereafter (J).
Figure 4A case with progressive hearing loss during pseudoprogression after stereotactic radiosurgery. A group II case showed a typical tumor volume response pattern with transient volume increase up to 42.5% of initial volume after SRS (A). The patient presented progressive hearing loss during pseudoprogression (yellow box). The follow-up MRI (D, E) showed a significant volume expansion, compared to the pretreatment MRI (B, C). In this case, the increased extent of the intracanalicular part of the tumor was notable as shown in the coronal images (E, arrowheads), which possibly caused cochlear nerve compression in the internal auditory canal.