Predictors of leptomeningeal disease following hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for intact and resected brain metastases.
brain metastases
hypofractionated
leptomeningeal
radiosurgery
radiotherapy
Journal
Neuro-oncology
ISSN: 1523-5866
Titre abrégé: Neuro Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100887420
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 01 2020
11 01 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
15
8
2019
medline:
11
2
2021
entrez:
15
8
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The objective was to evaluate the risk and predictors of developing leptomeningeal disease (LMD) in patients with brain metastases treated with 5-fraction hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HSRT). Patients treated with HSRT for intact brain metastases and/or surgical cavities were reviewed from a prospectively maintained database. Radiographic patterns of LMD were classified as focal classical, diffuse classical, focal nodular, and diffuse nodular. HSRT was delivered, most commonly 30 Gy in 5 fractions, to 320 intracranial lesions (57% intact and 43% surgical cavities) in 235 patients. The median follow-up was 13.4 months (range, 0.8 to 60 mo). LMD developed in 19% of patients with a 1-year LMD rate of 12%. From the diagnosis of LMD, the median overall survival (OS) was 3.8 months (range, 2-20.8 mo). The most common LMD pattern was diffuse nodular (44%). No difference in OS was observed between LMD patterns (P = 0.203). Multivariable analysis identified surgical cavities at significantly higher risk of LMD compared with intact lesions (odds ratio [OR] = 2.30, 95% CI: 1.24, 4.29, P = 0.008). For cavities, radiosensitive tumors (OR = 2.35, 95% CI: 1.04, 5.35, P = 0.041) predicted for LMD, while, for intact metastases, patients receiving treatment with targeted agents or immunotherapy (TA/I) were at lower risk (OR = 0.178, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.79, P = 0.023). Patients who had a brain metastasis resected were at an increased risk of LMD. OS was poor despite treatment of LMD, and no differences in OS based on the pattern of LMD was observed. Treatment with TA/I was observed to be protective against LMD and requires further study.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The objective was to evaluate the risk and predictors of developing leptomeningeal disease (LMD) in patients with brain metastases treated with 5-fraction hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HSRT).
METHODS
Patients treated with HSRT for intact brain metastases and/or surgical cavities were reviewed from a prospectively maintained database. Radiographic patterns of LMD were classified as focal classical, diffuse classical, focal nodular, and diffuse nodular.
RESULTS
HSRT was delivered, most commonly 30 Gy in 5 fractions, to 320 intracranial lesions (57% intact and 43% surgical cavities) in 235 patients. The median follow-up was 13.4 months (range, 0.8 to 60 mo). LMD developed in 19% of patients with a 1-year LMD rate of 12%. From the diagnosis of LMD, the median overall survival (OS) was 3.8 months (range, 2-20.8 mo). The most common LMD pattern was diffuse nodular (44%). No difference in OS was observed between LMD patterns (P = 0.203). Multivariable analysis identified surgical cavities at significantly higher risk of LMD compared with intact lesions (odds ratio [OR] = 2.30, 95% CI: 1.24, 4.29, P = 0.008). For cavities, radiosensitive tumors (OR = 2.35, 95% CI: 1.04, 5.35, P = 0.041) predicted for LMD, while, for intact metastases, patients receiving treatment with targeted agents or immunotherapy (TA/I) were at lower risk (OR = 0.178, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.79, P = 0.023).
CONCLUSIONS
Patients who had a brain metastasis resected were at an increased risk of LMD. OS was poor despite treatment of LMD, and no differences in OS based on the pattern of LMD was observed. Treatment with TA/I was observed to be protective against LMD and requires further study.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31412120
pii: 5550117
doi: 10.1093/neuonc/noz144
pmc: PMC6954436
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
84-93Subventions
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR001863
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Références
J Neurooncol. 2014 Oct;120(1):163-9
pubmed: 25048529
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2012 Sep;138(9):1523-9
pubmed: 22526164
World Neurosurg. 2015 Dec;84(6):1825-31
pubmed: 26283490
JAMA Oncol. 2019 May 1;5(5):703-709
pubmed: 30844036
Neurosurgery. 2016 Aug;79(2):279-85
pubmed: 26528673
Neuro Oncol. 2014 Sep;16(9):1176-85
pubmed: 24867803
Neuro Oncol. 2019 Mar 04;:
pubmed: 30828727
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016 Jul 15;95(4):1142-8
pubmed: 27209508
Neurosurgery. 2019 Nov 1;85(5):632-641
pubmed: 30335175
Front Oncol. 2018 Aug 31;8:342
pubmed: 30234013
Neuro Oncol. 2017 Apr 1;19(4):484-492
pubmed: 28039364
Ann Neurol. 1995 Jul;38(1):51-7
pubmed: 7611725
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Aug;18(8):1040-1048
pubmed: 28687375
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Sep 10;36(26):2702-2709
pubmed: 30059262
Neurosurgery. 2012 Nov;71(5):937-43
pubmed: 22806080
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019 Oct 9;:null
pubmed: 31605786
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Aug;18(8):1049-1060
pubmed: 28687377
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018 Feb 1;100(2):436-442
pubmed: 29157748
Radiother Oncol. 2017 May;123(2):203-208
pubmed: 28390657
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 Dec 1;99(5):1179-1189
pubmed: 28974415
Ochsner J. 2017 Winter;17(4):362-378
pubmed: 29230121
Lancet Oncol. 2009 Nov;10(11):1037-44
pubmed: 19801201
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014 Mar 15;88(4):899-906
pubmed: 24606851
JAMA. 2016 Jul 26;316(4):401-409
pubmed: 27458945
Surg Neurol. 2008 Feb;69(2):181-6; discussion 186
pubmed: 18261647
J Radiosurg SBRT. 2018;5(3):191-200
pubmed: 29988304
Radiother Oncol. 2016 Nov;121(2):217-224
pubmed: 27793446
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1989 Nov-Dec;10(6):1171-9
pubmed: 2512778
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013 Nov 15;87(4):713-8
pubmed: 24054875
Cancer Treat Rev. 2016 Feb;43:83-91
pubmed: 26827696
Lancet Neurol. 2006 May;5(5):443-52
pubmed: 16632315
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013 Jul 15;86(4):623-9
pubmed: 23683828
Breast J. 2018 May;24(3):424-425
pubmed: 29251377
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016 Mar 1;94(3):537-43
pubmed: 26867883
J Clin Neurosci. 2017 Nov;45:252-256
pubmed: 28802798
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996 Feb 1;34(3):647-54
pubmed: 8621289
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2013 Dec;12(6):493-9
pubmed: 23617283