Dataset Information

Adjuvant whole-brain radiotherapy versus observation after radiosurgery or surgical resection of one to three cerebral metastases: results of the EORTC 22952-26001 study.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

This European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer phase III trial assesses whether adjuvant whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) increases the duration of functional independence after surgery or radiosurgery of brain metastases.

Patients and methods

Patients with one to three brain metastases of solid tumors (small-cell lung cancer excluded) with stable systemic disease or asymptomatic primary tumors and WHO performance status (PS) of 0 to 2 were treated with complete surgery or radiosurgery and randomly assigned to adjuvant WBRT (30 Gy in 10 fractions) or observation (OBS). The primary end point was time to WHO PS deterioration to more than 2.

Results

Of 359 patients, 199 underwent radiosurgery, and 160 underwent surgery. In the radiosurgery group, 100 patients were allocated to OBS, and 99 were allocated to WBRT. After surgery, 79 patients were allocated to OBS, and 81 were allocated to adjuvant WBRT. The median time to WHO PS more than 2 was 10.0 months (95% CI, 8.1 to 11.7 months) after OBS and 9.5 months (95% CI, 7.8 to 11.9 months) after WBRT (P = .71). Overall survival was similar in the WBRT and OBS arms (median, 10.9 v 10.7 months, respectively; P = .89). WBRT reduced the 2-year relapse rate both at initial sites (surgery: 59% to 27%, P < .001; radiosurgery: 31% to 19%, P = .040) and at new sites (surgery: 42% to 23%, P = .008; radiosurgery: 48% to 33%, P = .023). Salvage therapies were used more frequently after OBS than after WBRT. Intracranial progression caused death in 78 (44%) of 179 patients in the OBS arm and in 50 (28%) of 180 patients in the WBRT arm.

Conclusion

After radiosurgery or surgery of a limited number of brain metastases, adjuvant WBRT reduces intracranial relapses and neurologic deaths but fails to improve the duration of functional independence and overall survival.

SUBMITTER: Kocher M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3058272 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe benefits of adding upfront whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) to surgery or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) when compared to surgery or SRS alone for treatment of brain metastases are unclear.ObjectivesTo compare the efficacy and safety of surgery or SRS plus WBRT with that of surgery or SRS alone for treatment of brain metastases in patients with systemic cancer.Search methodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to May 2013 and annual meeting proceedings of ASCO and ASTRO up to September 2012 for relevant studies.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgery or SRS plus WBRT with surgery or SRS alone for treatment of brain metastases.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors undertook the quality assessment and data extraction. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes include progression free survival (PFS), local and distant intracranial disease progression, neurocognitive function (NF), health related quality of life (HRQL) and neurological adverse events. Hazard ratios (HR), risk ratio (RR), confidence intervals (CI), P-values (P) were estimated with random effects models using Revman 5.1 MAIN RESULTS: We identified five RCTs including 663 patients with one to four brain metastases. The risk of bias associated with lack of blinding was high and impacted to a greater or lesser extent on the quality of evidence for all of the outcomes. Adding upfront WBRT decreased the relative risk of any intracranial disease progression at one year by 53% (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.66, P value < 0.0001, I(2) =34%, Chi(2) P value = 0.21, low quality evidence) but there was no clear evidence of a difference in OS (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.48, P value = 0.47, I(2) = 52%, Chi(2) P value = 0.08, low quality evidence) and PFS (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.10, P value = 0.14, I(2) = 16%, Chi(2) P value = 0.28, low quality evidence). Subgroup analyses showed that the effects on overall survival were similar regardless of types of focal therapy used, number of brain metastases, dose and sequence of WBRT. The evaluation of the impact of upfront WBRT on NF, HRQL and neurological adverse events was limited by the unclear and high risk of reporting, performance and detection bias, and inconsistency in the instruments and methods used to measure and report results across studies.Authors' conclusionsThere is low quality evidence that adding upfront WBRT to surgery or SRS decreases any intracranial disease progression at one year. There was no clear evidence of an effect on overall and progression free survival. The impact of upfront WBRT on neurocognitive function, health related quality of life and neurological adverse events was undetermined due to the high risk of performance and detection bias, and inconsistency in the instruments and methods used to measure and report results across studies.

Project description:PurposeWe aimed to compare Australian health system costs at 12 months for adjuvant whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) treatment after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and/or surgery versus observation among adults with one to three melanoma brain metastases. We hypothesized that treatment with adjuvant WBRT and subsequent healthcare would be more expensive than SRS/surgery alone.MethodsThe analysis was conducted alongside a multicentre, randomized phase III trial. A bespoke cost questionnaire was used to measure healthcare use, including hospitalizations, specialist and primary care visits, imaging, and medicines over 12 months. Mean per-patient costs were calculated based on the quantity of resources used and unit costs, reported in Australian dollars ($AU), year 2018 values. Skewness of cost data was determined using normality tests and censor-adjusted costs reported using the Kaplan-Meier sample average method. The analysis of difference in mean costs at each 2-month time point and at 12 months was performed and checked using Kruskal-Wallis, generalized linear models with gamma distribution and log link, modified Park test, ordinary least squares, and non-parametric bootstrapping.ResultsIn total, 89 patients with similar characteristics at baseline were included in the cost analysis (n = 43 WBRT; n = 46 observation). Hospitalization cost was the main cost, ranging from 63 to 89% of total healthcare costs. The unadjusted 12-monthly cost for WBRT was $AU71,138 ± standard deviation 41,475 and for observation $AU69,848 ± 33,233; p = 0.7426. The censor-adjusted 12-monthly cost for WBRT was $AU90,277 ± 36,274 and $AU82,080 ± 34,411 for observation. There was no significant difference in 2-monthly costs between groups (p > 0.30 for all models).ConclusionsMost costs were related to inpatient hospitalizations associated with disease recurrence. Adding WBRT after local SRS/surgery for patients with one to three melanoma brain metastases did not significantly increase health system costs during the first 12 months.Trial registrationACTRN12607000512426, prospectively registered 14 September 2007.

Project description:ImportanceBrain metastases are a common source of morbidity for patients with cancer, and limited data exist to support the local therapeutic choice between surgical resection and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS).ObjectiveTo evaluate local control of brain metastases among patients treated with SRS vs surgical resection within the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 22952-26001 phase 3 trial.Design, setting, and participantsThis unplanned, exploratory analysis of the international, multi-institutional randomized clinical trial EORTC 22952-26001 (conducted from 1996-2007) was performed from February 9, 2017, through July 25, 2018. The EORTC 22952-26001 trial randomized patients with 1 to 3 brain metastases to whole-brain radiotherapy vs observation after complete surgical resection or before SRS. Patients in the present analysis were stratified but not randomized according to local modality (SRS or surgical resection) and treated per protocol with 1 to 2 brain metastases and tumors with a diameter of no greater than 4 cm.InterventionsSurgical resection or SRS.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was local recurrence of treated lesions. Cumulative incidence of local recurrence was calculated according to modality (surgical resection vs SRS) with competing risk regression to adjust for prognostic factors and competing risk of death.ResultsA total of 268 patients were included in the analysis (66.4% men; median age, 60.7 years [range, 26.9-81.1 years]); 154 (57.5%) underwent SRS and 114 (42.5%) underwent surgical resection. Median follow-up time was 39.9 months (range, 26.0-1982.0 months). Compared with the SRS group, patients undergoing surgical resection had larger metastases (median 28 mm [range, 10-40 mm] vs 20 mm [range, 4-40 mm]; P < .001), more frequently had 1 brain metastasis (112 [98.2%] vs 114 [74.0%]; P < .001), and differed in location (parietal, 21 [18.4%] vs 61 [39.6%]; posterior fossa, 30 [26.3%] vs 12 [7.8%]; P < .001). In adjusted models, local recurrence was similar between the SRS and surgical resection groups (hazard ratio [HR], 1.15; 95% CI, 0.72-1.83). However, when stratified by interval, patients with surgical resection had a much higher risk of early (0-3 months) local recurrence compared with those undergoing SRS (HR, 5.94; 95% CI, 1.72-20.45), but their risk decreased with time (HR for 3-6 months, 1.37 [95% CI, 0.64-2.90]; HR for 6-9 months, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.28-2.00]). At 9 months or longer, the surgical resection group had a lower risk of local recurrence (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14-0.93).Conclusions and relevanceIn this exploratory analysis, local control of brain metastases was similar between SRS and surgical resection groups. Stereotactic radiosurgery was associated with improved early local control of treated lesions compared with surgical resection, although the relative benefit decreased with time.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00002899.

Project description:The role of chemotherapy in high-risk soft tissue sarcoma is controversial. Though many patients undergo initial curative resection, distant metastasis is a frequent event, resulting in 5-year overall survival rates of only 50-60%. Neo-adjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy (CTX) has been applied to achieve pre-operative cytoreduction, assess chemosensitivity, and to eliminate occult metastasis. Here we report on the results of our non-randomized phase II study on neo-adjuvant treatment for high-risk STS.Patients with potentially curative high-risk STS (size ? 5 cm, deep/extracompartimental localization, tumor grades II-III [FNCLCC]) were included. The protocol comprised 4 cycles of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (EIA, etoposide 125 mg/m(2) iv days 1 and 4, ifosfamide 1500 mg/m2 iv days 1 - 4, doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2) day 1, pegfilgrastim 6 mg sc day 5), definitive surgery with intra-operative radiotherapy, adjuvant radiotherapy and 4 adjuvant cycles of EIA.Between 06/2005 and 03/2010 a total of 50 subjects (male = 33, female = 17, median age 50.1 years) were enrolled. Median follow-up was 30.5 months. The majority of primary tumors were located in the extremities or trunk (92%), 6% originated in the abdomen/retroperitoneum. Response by RECIST criteria to neo-adjuvant CTX was 6% CR (n = 3), 24% PR (n = 12), 62% SD (n = 31) and 8% PD (n = 4). Local recurrence occurred in 3 subjects (6%). Distant metastasis was observed in 12 patients (24%). Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at 2 years was 83% and 68%, respectively. Multivariate analysis failed to prove influence of resection status or grade of histological necrosis on OS or DFS. Severe toxicities included neutropenic fever (4/50), cardiac toxicity (2/50), and CNS toxicity (4/50) leading to CTX dose reductions in 4 subjects. No cases of secondary leukemias were observed so far.The current protocol is feasible for achieving local control rates, as well as OS and DFS comparable to previously published data on neo-/adjuvant chemotherapy in this setting. However, the definitive role of chemotherapy remains unclear in the absence of large, randomized trials. Therefore, the current regimen can only be recommended within a clinical study, and a possibly increased risk of secondary leukemias has to be taken into account.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01382030, EudraCT 2004-002501-72.