Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2023
Stereotactic radiosurgery versus whole-brain radiotherapy in patients with 4-10 brain metastases: A nonrandomized controlled trial.
Рандомизированное исследованиеКонтролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bodensohn Raphael, Kaempfel Anna-Lena, Boulesteix Anne-Laure, Orzelek Anna Maria, Corradini Stefanie, Fleischmann Daniel Felix, Forbrig Robert, Garny Sylvia, Hadi Indrawati, Hofmaier Jan, Minniti Giuseppe, Mansmann Ulrich, Pazos Escudero Montserrat, Thon Niklas, Belka Claus, Niyazi Maximilian
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is no randomized evidence comparing whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in the treatment of multiple brain metastases. This prospective nonrandomized controlled single arm trial attempts to reduce the gap until prospective randomized controlled trial results are available.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We included patients with 4-10 brain metastases and ECOG performance status ≤ 2 from all histologies except small-cell lung cancer, germ cell tumors, and lymphoma. The retrospective WBRT-cohort was selected 2:1 from consecutive patients treated within 2012-2017. Propensity-score matching was performed to adjust for confounding factors such as sex, age, primary tumor histology, dsGPA score, and systemic therapy. SRS was performed using a LINAC-based single-isocenter technique employing prescription doses from 15-20Gyx1 at the 80% isodose line. The historical control consisted of equivalent WBRT dose regimens of either 3Gyx10 or 2.5Gyx14.
RESULTS: Patients were recruited from 2017-2020, end of follow-up was July 1st, 2021. 40 patients were recruited to the SRS-cohort and 70 patients were eligible as controls in the WBRT-cohort. Median OS, and iPFS were 10.4 months (95%-CI 9.3-NA) and 7.1 months (95%-CI 3.9-14.2) for the SRS-cohort, and 6.5 months (95%-CI 4.9-10.4), and 5.9 months (95%-CI 4.1-8.8) for the WBRT-cohort, respectively. Differences were non-significant for OS (HR: 0.65; 95%-CI 0.40-1.05; P =.074) and iPFS (P =.28). No grade III toxicities were observed in the SRS-cohort.
CONCLUSION: This trial did not meet its primary endpoint as the OS-improvement of SRS compared to WBRT was non-significant and thus superiority could not be proven. Prospective randomized trials in the era of immunotherapy and targeted therapies are warranted.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We included patients with 4-10 brain metastases and ECOG performance status ≤ 2 from all histologies except small-cell lung cancer, germ cell tumors, and lymphoma. The retrospective WBRT-cohort was selected 2:1 from consecutive patients treated within 2012-2017. Propensity-score matching was performed to adjust for confounding factors such as sex, age, primary tumor histology, dsGPA score, and systemic therapy. SRS was performed using a LINAC-based single-isocenter technique employing prescription doses from 15-20Gyx1 at the 80% isodose line. The historical control consisted of equivalent WBRT dose regimens of either 3Gyx10 or 2.5Gyx14.
RESULTS: Patients were recruited from 2017-2020, end of follow-up was July 1st, 2021. 40 patients were recruited to the SRS-cohort and 70 patients were eligible as controls in the WBRT-cohort. Median OS, and iPFS were 10.4 months (95%-CI 9.3-NA) and 7.1 months (95%-CI 3.9-14.2) for the SRS-cohort, and 6.5 months (95%-CI 4.9-10.4), and 5.9 months (95%-CI 4.1-8.8) for the WBRT-cohort, respectively. Differences were non-significant for OS (HR: 0.65; 95%-CI 0.40-1.05; P =.074) and iPFS (P =.28). No grade III toxicities were observed in the SRS-cohort.
CONCLUSION: This trial did not meet its primary endpoint as the OS-improvement of SRS compared to WBRT was non-significant and thus superiority could not be proven. Prospective randomized trials in the era of immunotherapy and targeted therapies are warranted.