Faculty Bibliography

QUESTION: Should patients with newly-diagnosed metastatic brain tumors undergo stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) compared with other treatment modalities? Target population These recommendations apply to adults with newly diagnosed solid brain metastases amenable to SRS; lesions amenable to SRS are typically defined as measuring less than 3 cm in maximum diameter and producing minimal (less than 1 cm of midline shift) mass effect. Recommendations SRS plus WBRT vs. WBRT alone Level 1 Single-dose SRS along with WBRT leads to significantly longer patient survival compared with WBRT alone for patients with single metastatic brain tumors who have a KPS > or = 70.Level 1 Single-dose SRS along with WBRT is superior in terms of local tumor control and maintaining functional status when compared to WBRT alone for patients with 1-4 metastatic brain tumors who have a KPS > or =70.Level 2 Single-dose SRS along with WBRT may lead to significantly longer patient survival than WBRT alone for patients with 2-3 metastatic brain tumors.Level 3 There is class III evidence demonstrating that single-dose SRS along with WBRT is superior to WBRT alone for improving patient survival for patients with single or multiple brain metastases and a KPS<70 [corrected].Level 4 There is class III evidence demonstrating that single-dose SRS along with WBRT is superior to WBRT alone for improving patient survival for patients with single or multiple brain metastases and a KPS < 70. SRS plus WBRT vs. SRS alone Level 2 Single-dose SRS alone may provide an equivalent survival advantage for patients with brain metastases compared with WBRT + single-dose SRS. There is conflicting class I and II evidence regarding the risk of both local and distant recurrence when SRS is used in isolation, and class I evidence demonstrates a lower risk of distant recurrence with WBRT; thus, regular careful surveillance is warranted for patients treated with SRS alone in order to provide early identification of local and distant recurrences so that salvage therapy can be initiated at the soonest possible time. Surgical Resection plus WBRT vs. SRS +/- WBRT Level 2 Surgical resection plus WBRT, vs. SRS plus WBRT, both represent effective treatment strategies, resulting in relatively equal survival rates. SRS has not been assessed from an evidence-based standpoint for larger lesions (>3 cm) or for those causing significant mass effect (>1 cm midline shift). Level 3: Underpowered class I evidence along with the preponderance of conflicting class II evidence suggests that SRS alone may provide equivalent functional and survival outcomes compared with resection + WBRT for patients with single brain metastases, so long as ready detection of distant site failure and salvage SRS are possible. SRS alone vs. WBRT alone Level 3 While both single-dose SRS and WBRT are effective for treating patients with brain metastases, single-dose SRS alone appears to be superior to WBRT alone for patients with up to three metastatic brain tumors in terms of patient survival advantage.

TARGET POPULATION: This recommendation applies to adults with newly diagnosed brain metastases; however, the recommendation below does not apply to the exquisitely chemosensitive tumors, such as germinomas metastatic to the brain. RECOMMENDATION: Should patients with brain metastases receive chemotherapy in addition to whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT)? Level 1 Routine use of chemotherapy following WBRT for brain metastases has not been shown to increase survival and is not recommended. Four class I studies examined the role of carboplatin, chloroethylnitrosoureas, tegafur and temozolomide, and all resulted in no survival benefit. Two caveats are provided in order to allow the treating physician to individualize decision-making: First, the majority of the data are limited to non small cell lung (NSCLC) and breast cancer; therefore, in other tumor histologies, the possibility of clinical benefit cannot be absolutely ruled out. Second, the addition of chemotherapy to WBRT improved response rates in some, but not all trials; response rate was not the primary endpoint in most of these trials and end-point assessment was non-centralized, non-blinded, and post-hoc. Enrollment in chemotherapy-related clinical trials is encouraged.

QUESTION: Should patients with newly-diagnosed metastatic brain tumors undergo open surgical resection versus whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) and/or other treatment modalities such as radiosurgery, and in what clinical settings? Target population These recommendations apply to adults with a newly diagnosed single brain metastasis amenable to surgical resection. Recommendations Surgical resection plus WBRT versus surgical resection alone Level 1 Surgical resection followed by WBRT represents a superior treatment modality, in terms of improving tumor control at the original site of the metastasis and in the brain overall, when compared to surgical resection alone. Surgical resection plus WBRT versus SRS +/- WBRT Level 2 Surgical resection plus WBRT, versus stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) plus WBRT, both represent effective treatment strategies, resulting in relatively equal survival rates. SRS has not been assessed from an evidence-based standpoint for larger lesions (>3 cm) or for those causing significant mass effect (>1 cm midline shift). Level 3 Underpowered class I evidence along with the preponderance of conflicting class II evidence suggests that SRS alone may provide equivalent functional and survival outcomes compared with resection + WBRT for patients with single brain metastases, so long as ready detection of distant site failure and salvage SRS are possible. Note The following question is fully addressed in the WBRT guideline paper within this series by Gaspar et al. Given that the recommendation resulting from the systematic review of the literature on this topic is also highly relevant to the discussion of the role of surgical resection in the management of brain metastases, this recommendation has been included below. Question Does surgical resection in addition to WBRT improve outcomes when compared with WBRT alone? Target population This recommendation applies to adults with a newly diagnosed single brain metastasis amenable to surgical resection; however, the recommendation does not apply to relatively radiosensitive tumors histologies (i.e., small cell lung cancer, leukemia, lymphoma, germ cell tumors and multiple myeloma). Recommendation Surgical resection plus WBRT versus WBRT alone Level 1 Class I evidence supports the use of surgical resection plus post-operative WBRT, as compared to WBRT alone, in patients with good performance status (functionally independent and spending less than 50% of time in bed) and limited extra-cranial disease. There is insufficient evidence to make a recommendation for patients with poor performance scores, advanced systemic disease, or multiple brain metastases.

QUESTION: Should patients with newly-diagnosed metastatic brain tumors undergo open surgical resection versus whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) and/or other treatment modalities such as radiosurgery, and in what clinical settings? TARGET POPULATION: These recommendations apply to adults with a newly diagnosed single brain metastasis amenable to surgical resection. RECOMMENDATIONS: Surgical resection plus WBRT versus surgical resection alone Level 1 Surgical resection followed by WBRT represents a superior treatment modality, in terms of improving tumor control at the original site of the metastasis and in the brain overall, when compared to surgical resection alone. Surgical resection plus WBRT versus SRS + or - WBRT Level 2 Surgical resection plus WBRT, versus stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) plus WBRT, both represent effective treatment strategies, resulting in relatively equal survival rates. SRS has not been assessed from an evidence-based standpoint for larger lesions (>3 cm) or for those causing significant mass effect (>1 cm midline shift). Level 3 Underpowered class I evidence along with the preponderance of conflicting class II evidence suggests that SRS alone may provide equivalent functional and survival outcomes compared with resection + WBRT for patients with single brain metastases, so long as ready detection of distant site failure and salvage SRS are possible. Note The following question is fully addressed in the WBRT guideline paper within this series by Gaspar et al. Given that the recommendation resulting from the systematic review of the literature on this topic is also highly relevant to the discussion of the role of surgical resection in the management of brain metastases, this recommendation has been included below.

PURPOSE: To analyze the outcomes of gamma knife stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for residual or recurrent craniopharyngiomas and evaluate the factors that optimized the tumor control rates. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 46 patients with craniopharyngiomas underwent 51 SRS procedures at University of Pittsburgh between 1988 and 2007. The median tumor volume was 1.0 cm(3) (range, 0.07-8.0). The median prescription dose delivered to the tumor margin was 13.0 Gy (range, 9-20). The median maximal dose was 26.0 Gy (range, 20-50). The mean follow-up time was 62.2 months (range, 12-232). RESULTS: The overall survival rate after SRS was 97.1% at 5 years. The 3- and 5-year progression-free survival rates (solid tumor control) were both 91.6%. The overall local control rate (for both solid tumor and cyst control) was 91%, 81%, and 68% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. No patients with normal pituitary function developed hypopopituitarism after SRS. Two patients developed homonymous hemianopsia owing to tumor progression after SRS. Among the factors examined, complete radiosurgical coverage was a significant favorable prognostic factor. CONCLUSION: SRS is a safe and effective minimally invasive option for the management of residual or recurrent craniopharyngiomas. Complete radiosurgical coverage of the tumor was associated with better tumor control.

OBJECT: To evaluate the role of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in patients with recurrent or residual intracranial ependymomas after resection and fractionated radiation therapy (RT), the authors assessed overall survival, distant tumor relapse, progression-free survival (PFS), and complications. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed the records of 21 children with ependymomas who underwent SRS for 32 tumors. There were 17 boys and 4 girls with a median age of 6.9 years (range 2.9-17.2 years) in the patient population. All patients underwent resection of an ependymoma followed by cranial or neuraxis (if spinal metastases was confirmed) RT. Eleven patients had adjuvant chemotherapy. Twelve patients had low-grade ependymomas (17 tumors), and 9 patients had anaplastic ependymomas (15 tumors). The median radiosurgical target volume was 2.2 cm(3) (range 0.1-21.4 cm(3)), and the median dose to the tumor margin was 15 Gy (range 9-22 Gy). RESULTS: Follow-up imaging demonstrated therapeutic control in 23 (72%) of 32 tumors at a mean follow-up period of 27.6 months (range 6.1-72.8 months). Progression-free survival after the initial SRS was 78.4%, 55.5%, and 41.6% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. Factors associated with a longer PFS included patients without spinal metastases (p = 0.033) and tumor volumes < 2.2 cm(3) (median tumor volume 2.2 cm(3), p = 0.029). An interval >/= 18 months between RT and SRS was also associated with longer survival (p = 0.035). The distant tumor relapse rate despite RT and SRS was 33.6%, 41.0%, and 80.3% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. Factors associated with a higher rate of distant tumor relapse included patients who had spinal metastases before RT (p = 0.037), a fourth ventricle tumor location (p = 0.002), and an RT to SRS interval < 18 months (p = 0.015). The median survival after SRS was 27.6 months (95% CI 19.33-35.87 months). Overall survival after SRS was 85.2%, 53.2%, and 23.0% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. Adverse radiation effects developed in 2 patients (9.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Stereotactic radiosurgery offers an additional option beyond repeat surgery or RT in pediatric patients with residual or recurrent ependymomas after initial management. Patients with smaller-volume tumors and a later recurrence responded best to radiosurgery.

BACKGROUND: Intracerebral drug delivery using surgically placed microcatheters is a growing area of interest for potential treatment of a wide variety of neurological diseases, including tumors, neurodegenerative disorders, trauma, epilepsy, and stroke. Current catheter placement techniques are limited to straight trajectories. The development of an inexpensive system for flexible percutaneous intracranial navigation may be of significant clinical benefit. OBJECTIVE: Utilizing duty-cycled spinning of a flexible bevel-tipped needle, the authors devised and tested a means of achieving nonlinear trajectories for the navigation of catheters in the brain, which may be applicable to a wide variety of neurological diseases. METHODS: Exploiting the bending tendency of bevel-tipped needles due to their asymmetry, the authors devised and tested a means of generating curvilinear trajectories by spinning a needle with a variable duty cycle (ie, in on-off fashion). The technique can be performed using image guidance, and trajectories can be adjusted intraoperatively via joystick. Fifty-eight navigation trials were performed during cadaver testing to demonstrate the efficacy of the needle-steering system and to test its precision. RESULTS: The needle-steering system achieved a target acquisition error of 2 +/- 1 mm, while demonstrating the ability to reach multiple targets from one burr hole using trajectories of varying curvature. CONCLUSION: The accuracy of the needle-steering system was demonstrated in a cadaveric model. Future studies will determine the safety of the device in vivo.

BACKGROUND: Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) that recurs after surgery can be difficult to manage. OBJECTIVE: To define management outcomes in patients who underwent gamma knife stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSR) after failing 1 or more previous surgical procedures. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed outcomes after GKSR in 193 patients with TN after failed surgery. The median patient age was 70 years (range, 26-93 years). Seventy-five patients had a single operation (microvascular decompression, n=40; glycerol rhizotomy, n=24; radiofrequency rhizotomy, n=11). One hundred eighteen patients underwent multiple operations before GKSR. Patients were evaluated up to 14 years after GKSR. RESULTS: After GKSR, 85% of patients achieved pain relief or improvement (Barrow Neurological Institute grade I-IIIb). Pain recurrence was observed in 73 of 168 patients 6 to 144 months after GKSR (median, 6 years). Factors associated with better long-term pain relief included no relief from the surgical procedure preceding GKSR, pain in a single branch, typical TN, and a single previous failed surgical procedure. Eighteen patients (9.3%) developed new or increased trigeminal sensory dysfunction, and 1 developed deafferentation pain. Patients who developed sensory loss after GKSR had better long-term pain control (Barrow Neurological Institute grade I-IIIb: 86% at 5 years). CONCLUSION: GKSR proved to be safe and moderately effective in the management of TN that recurs after surgery. Development of sensory loss may predict better long-term pain control. The best candidates for GKSR were patients with recurrence after a single failed previous operation and those with typical TN in a single trigeminal nerve distribution.