(P030) Efficacy of Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) for Brain Metastases: Is There a Difference in Survival Between First and Second Brain Metastatic Event?

Publication
Article
OncologyOncology Vol 30 No 4_Suppl_1
Volume 30
Issue 4_Suppl_1

Despite better performance status noted for patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery for first brain metastatic event compared with second brain metastatic event, no difference in survival was noted.

Shaharyar Ahmad, Royce Brown, Anthony Ricco, Rachelle Lanciano, MD, Luther Brady, MD; Drexel University College of Medicine; Philadelphia CyberKnife; Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University

PURPOSE: To document survival for patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases either at initial presentation or for salvage in conjunction with other known prognostic factors.

METHODS: All patients treated for brain metastasis with SRS (January 2006–October 2013) were reviewed. We identified 150 patients treated for either first brain metastatic event (FBME) or second brain metastatic event (SBME), excluding 14 patients who received SRS for both. Age, gender, primary cancer type, presence of extracranial metastases, number of brain metastases, initial site of metastases, recursive partitioning analysis (RPA), and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) were documented.

RESULTS: Primary cancers included lung (n = 83), breast (n = 20), melanoma (n = 13), and other (n = 34). Patients treated with SRS for FBME were significantly older (63.59 yr vs 58.78 yr; P = .03) with a higher RPA index (38.3% vs 19.5% RPA 3; P = .0002), greater female predominance (61% vs 37%; P = .0035), and more primary melanoma (15.6% vs 1.4%; P = .014) compared with those treated for SBME. There was no significant difference in 1-year (29%) and 2-year (12%–13%) actuarial or median survival (5.95 mo and 6.77 mo, respectively) for patients treated with SRS for FBME vs SBME. A Cox regression model revealed KPS and RPA to be significant at the P < .05 level for survival. Multivariable analysis utilizing manual backward selection considering all factors revealed RPA (P = .007) and KPS (P ≤ .001) to be the only independent prognostic factors for survival. Patients with RPA 1 had a 62% decreased hazard of death vs those with RPA 3, with 1-year survival rates for RPA 1, RPA 2, and RPA 3 patients of 36.5%, 33.3%, and 17.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: Despite better performance status noted for patients treated with SRS for FBME compared with SBME, no difference in survival was noted. Aggressive treatment should be considered for patients with high performance status, regardless of whether they present with FBME or SBME.

Proceedings of the 98th Annual Meeting of the American Radium Society - americanradiumsociety.org

Articles in this issue

(S002) A 15-Year Review of Radiation Therapy for Keloids at Two Institutions
(S003) Single-Fraction Radiation Therapy for the Treatment of Multiple Myeloma Bony Metastases Provides Pain Control and Decreases Time to Chemotherapy
(S001) Prognostic Value of Pretreatment Serum Inflammatory Markers in Patients Receiving Radiation Therapy for Oropharyngeal Cancer
(S004) Trend in Second Malignancy Risk for Head and Neck Cancer With Increased Utilization of IMRT: Analysis of SEER Database
(S005) Comparison of Legal Needs of a Group of Patients With Cancer: Economic and Geographic Factors
(S006) Mission Improvement: Lessons From Initiating a Resident-Led Quality Improvement Project on Smoking Cessation at a County Hospital
(S007) Results of a Phase II Trial Using Cetuximab Plus Docetaxel With Low-Dose Fractionated Radiation for Recurrent Unresectable Locally Advanced Head and Neck Carcinoma
(S008) The Effect of Simulation and Treatment Delays for Patients With Oropharyngeal Cancer Receiving Definitive Radiation Therapy in the Era of Risk Stratification Using Smoking and Human Papilloma Virus Status
(S009) Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy With Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Boost for Unfavorable Prostate Cancer: A Report on Three-Year Toxicity
(S011) Comparative Study Between Ileal Conduit and Indiana Pouch After Cystectomy for Patients With Carcinoma of Urinary Bladder
(S010) Computed Tomography–Assessed Measures of Bone Mineral Density and Muscle Mass as Predictors of Survival in Men With Prostate Cancer
(S012) Quantitative Imaging to Evaluate the Malignant Potential of Pancreatic Cysts
(S013) Spine Stereotactic Radiosurgery With Concurrent Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma
(S014) The Impact of Radiation Therapy on Survival in Surgically Resected, High-Risk Patients With Ampullary Adenocarcinoma: A Population-Based Analysis
(S016) The Impact of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy on Overall Survival in Patients With Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer
Recent Videos
Harmonizing protocols across the health care system may bolster the feasibility of giving bispecifics to those with lymphoma in a community setting.
Although accuracy remains a focus in whole-body MRI testing in patients with Li-Fraumeni syndrome, comfortable testing experiences may ease anxiety.
Subsequent testing among patients in a prospective study may affirm the ability of cfDNA sequencing to detect cancers in those with Li-Fraumeni syndrome.
cfDNA sequencing may allow for more accessible, frequent, and sensitive testing compared with standard surveillance in Li-Fraumeni syndrome.
STX-478 showed efficacy in patients with advanced solid tumors regardless of whether they had kinase domain or helical PI3K mutations.
STX-478 may avoid adverse effects associated with prior PI3K inhibitors that lack selectivity for the mutated protein vs the wild-type protein.
Phase 1 data may show the possibility of rationally designing agents that can preferentially target PI3K mutations in solid tumors.
Funding a clinical trial to further assess liquid biopsy in patients with Li-Fraumeni syndrome may help with detecting cancers early across the board.
Michael J. Hall, MD, MS, FASCO, discusses the need to reduce barriers to care for those with Li-Fraumeni syndrome, including those who live in rural areas.
Related Content