Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Trigeminal neuralgia affects approximately 2% of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and often shows higher rates of pain recurrence after treatment. Previous studies on the effectiveness of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for trigeminal neuralgia did not consider the different MS subtypes, including remitting relapsing (RRMS), primary progressive (PPMS), and secondary progressive (SPMS). Our objective was to investigate how MS subtypes are related to pain control (PC) rates after SRS. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective multicenter analysis of prospectively collected databases. Pain status was assessed using the Barrow National Institute Pain Intensity Scales. Time to recurrence was estimated through the Kaplan-Meier method and compared groups using log-rank tests. Logistic regression was used to calculate the odds ratio (OR). RESULTS:Two hundred and fifty-eight patients, 135 (52.4%) RRMS, 30 (11.6%) PPMS, and 93 (36%) SPMS, were included from 14 institutions. In total, 84.6% of patients achieved initial pain relief, with a median time of 1 month; 78.7% had some degree of pain recurrence with a median time of 10.2 months for RRMS, 8 months for PPMS, 8.1 months for SPMS (P = .424). Achieving Barrow National Institute-I after SRS was a predictor for longer periods without recurrence (P = .028). Analyzing PC at the last available follow-up and comparing with RRMS, PPMS was less likely to have PC (OR = 0.389; 95% CI 0.153-0.986; P = .047) and SPMS was more likely (OR = 2.0; 95% CI 0.967-4.136; P = .062). A subgroup of 149 patients did not have other procedures apart from SRS. The median times to recurrence in this group were 11.1, 9.8, and 19.6 months for RRMS, PPMS, and SPMS, respectively (log-rank, P = .045). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study is the first to investigate the relationship between MS subtypes and PC after SRS, and our results provide preliminary evidence that subtypes may influence pain outcomes, with PPMS posing the greatest challenge to pain management.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To study the clinical, imaging, and survival outcomes in patients with motor cortex brain metastases treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). METHODS:Imaging and clinical data were obtained from our prospective patient registry. Tumor volumes were obtained from serial imaging data. RESULTS:The outcomes of 208 patients with metastases involving the motor cortex who underwent SRS between 2012 and 2021 were analyzed. A total of 279 metastases (0.01 cm3-12.18 cm3, mean 0.74 cm3) were irradiated. The SRS margin dose varied from 10 to 20 Gy (mean 16.9 Gy). The overall tumor control rate was 97.8%. Perilesional edema was noted in 69 (25%) tumors at presentation. Adverse radiation effects (ARE) were noted in 6% of all tumors but were symptomatic in only 1.4%. Median time to appearance of symptomatic ARE was 8 months. Edema without ARE was observed in 13%. New focal seizures were noted in 5 patients (2%) and new generalized seizures in 1 patient (0.3%). Thirty-six patients (17%) presented with motor deficits. At final follow-up, 32 (85%) were improved or unchanged, 13 (41%) had a normal examination, 10 (31%) had mild deficits, and 9 (28%) still had moderate deficits. New remote brain metastases were found in 31% of patients at a median of 8 months. After treatment, the Karnofsky performance score distribution of the population showed an overall right shift and a median survival of 10 months. Patients with incidentally found brain metastases had significantly better survival than those presenting with deficits (median 13 vs 9 months) (P = .048). Absence of a neurological deficit, recursive partitioning analysis Class I and II, and dose >18 Gy were each associated with a significant survival advantage. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:SRS for motor cortex metastases is safe in most patients and effective in providing tumor control. Patients treated before neurological deficits develop show better outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Median survival for all patients with breast cancer with brain metastases (BCBMs) has increased in the era of targeted therapy (TT) and with improved local control of intracranial tumors using stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and surgical resection. However, detailed characterization of the patients with long-term survival in the past 5 years remains sparse. The aim of this article is to characterize patients with BCBM who achieved long-term survival and identify factors associated with the uniquely better outcomes and to find predictors of mortality for patients with BCBM. METHODS:We reviewed 190 patients with breast cancer with 931 brain tumors receiving SRS who were followed at our institution with prospective data collection between 2012 and 2022. We analyzed clinical, molecular, and imaging data to assess relationship to outcomes and tumor control. RESULTS:The median overall survival from initial SRS and from breast cancer diagnosis was 25 months (95% CI 19-31 months) and 130 months (95% CI 100-160 months), respectively. Sixteen patients (17%) achieved long-term survival (survival ≥5 years from SRS), 9 of whom are still alive. Predictors of long-term survival included HER2+ status ( P = .041) and treatment with TT ( P = .046). A limited number of patients (11%) died of central nervous system (CNS) causes. A predictor of CNS-related death was the development of leptomeningeal disease after SRS ( P = .025), whereas predictors of non-CNS death included extracranial metastases at first SRS ( P = .017), triple-negative breast cancer ( P = .002), a Karnofsky Performance Status of <80 at first SRS ( P = .002), and active systemic disease at last follow-up ( P = .001). Only 13% of patients eventually needed whole brain radiotherapy. Among the long-term survivors, none died of CNS progression. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients with BCBM can achieve long-term survival. The use of TT and HER2+ disease are associated with long-term survival. The primary cause of death was extracranial disease progression, and none of the patients living ≥5 years died of CNS-related disease.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Spine surgery has advanced in concert with our deeper understanding of its elements. Narrowly focused bibliometric analyses have been conducted previously, but never on the entire corpus of the field. Using big data and bibliometrics, we appraised the entire corpus of spine surgery publications to study the evolution of the specialty as a scholarly field since 1900. METHODS:We queried Web of Science for all contents from 13 major publications dedicated to spine surgery. We next queried by topic [topic = (spine OR spinal OR vertebrae OR vertebral OR intervertebral OR disc OR disk)]; these results were filtered to include articles published by 49 other publications that were manually determined to contain pertinent articles. Articles, along with their metadata, were exported. Statistical and bibliometric analyses were performed using the Bibliometrix R package and various Python packages. RESULTS:Eighty-five thousand five hundred articles from 62 journals and 134 707 unique authors were identified. The annual growth rate of publications was 2.78%, with a surge after 1980, concurrent with the growth of specialized journals. International coauthorship, absent before 1970, increased exponentially with the formation of influential spine study groups. Reference publication year spectroscopy allowed us to identify 200 articles that comprise the historical roots of modern spine surgery and each of its subdisciplines. We mapped the emergence of new topics and saw a recent lexical evolution toward outcomes- and patient-centric terms. Female and minority coauthorship has increased since 1990, but remains low, and disparities across major publications persist. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The field of spine surgery was borne from pioneering individuals who published their findings in a variety of journals. The renaissance of spine surgery has been powered by international collaboration and is increasingly outcomes focused. While spine surgery is gradually becoming more diverse, there is a clear need for further promotion and outreach to under-represented populations.

Over the past generation, outcome measures in spine care have evolved from a reliance on clinician-reported assessment toward recognizing the importance of the patient's perspective and the wide incorporation of patient-reported outcomes (PROs). While patient-reported outcomes are now considered an integral component of outcomes assessments, they cannot wholly capture the state of a patient's functionality. There is a clear need for quantitative and objective patient-centered outcome measures. The pervasiveness of smartphones and wearable devices in modern society, which passively collect data related to health, has ushered in a new era of spine care outcome measurement. The patterns emerging from these data, so-called "digital biomarkers," can accurately describe characteristics of a patient's health, disease, or recovery state. Broadly, the spine care community has thus far concentrated on digital biomarkers related to mobility, although the researcher's toolkit is anticipated to expand in concert with advancements in technology. In this review of the nascent literature, we describe the evolution of spine care outcome measurements, outline how digital biomarkers can supplement current clinician-driven and patient-driven measures, appraise the present and future of the field in the modern era, as well as discuss present limitations and areas for further study, with a focus on smartphones (see Supplemental Digital Content , http://links.lww.com/NEU/D809 , for a similar appraisal of wearable devices).

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:With the diminishing use of whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), there is increasing debate regarding the maximum number of brain metastases that should be treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). In patients with >10-15 lesions, some groups are proposing a new approach - selected-lesion SRS (SL-SRS) - where only a subset of intracranial lesions are chosen for irradiation. This study is an initial look into this practice. METHODS:This is a cross-sectional exploratory survey study. A survey of 19 questions was created by the International Radiosurgery Research Foundation (IRRF) using open-ended and multiple-choice style questions on SL-SRS practices and indications with the goal of qualitatively understanding how SL-SRS is being implemented worldwide. The survey was distributed to physicians in the United States (US) and internationally who are members of the IRRF and who perform SRS frequently. Ten out of 50 IRRF institutions provided responses reflecting the practices of 16 physicians. RESULTS:SL-SRS is being performed at 8/10 institutions. The most common reasons for using SL-SRS included patients with prior WBRT, patients with progressing systemic disease with central nervous system (CNS)-penetrating or immunotherapies available, specific requests from medical oncology, and cooperative studies using this approach. Lesion size was cited as the most important factor when choosing to irradiate any single lesion. The majority of respondents reported 30 mm and 40 mm as size cutoffs (by largest dimension) for treatment of a lesion in eloquent and non-eloquent locations, respectively. Eloquence of lesion location and attributable symptoms were also considered important. Progression of untreated lesions was the most common reason reported for bringing patients back for additional treatment. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The responses to this survey show that SL-SRS is being used, allowing for small/asymptomatic brain metastases to be left safely unirradiated. It is currently used in patients who have >10-15 lesions with prior WBRT, those with progression of extracranial disease but with acceptable systemic treatment options, and those with poor functional status. The incorporation of this new approach into clinical trials should be considered for the safe study of the efficacy of new CNS-penetrating systemic therapies.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC represent a unique subset of lung cancer patients with distinct clinical and molecular characteristics. Previous studies have shown a higher incidence of brain metastases (BM) in this subgroup of patients, and neurologic death has been reported to be as high as 40% and correlates with leptomeningeal disease (LMD). METHODS:Between 2012 and 2021, a retrospective review of our prospective registry identified 606 patients with BM from NSCLC, with 170 patients having an EGFR mutation. Demographic, clinical, radiographic, and treatment characteristics were correlated to the incidence of LMD and survival. RESULTS:LMD was identified in 22.3% of patients (n = 38) at a median follow-up of 19 (2-98) months from initial SRS. Multivariate regression analysis showed targeted therapy and a cumulative number of metastases as significant predictors of LMD (p = 0.034, HR = 0.44), (p = .04, HR = 1.02). The median survival time after SRS of the 170 patients was 24 months (CI 95% 19.1-28.1). In a multivariate Cox regression analysis, RPA, exon 19 deletion, and osimertinib treatment were significant predictors of overall survival. The cumulative incidence of neurological death at 2 and 4 years post initial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) was 8% and 11%, respectively, and correlated with LMD. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The study shows that current-generation targeted therapy for EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients may prevent the development and progression of LMD, leading to improved survival outcomes. Nevertheless, LMD is associated with poor outcomes and neurologic death, making innovative strategies to treat LMD essential.

BACKGROUND:Clival chordomas are challenging because of their proximity to critical neurovascular structures. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has been proven effective with minimal adverse effects. OBJECTIVE:To compare the outcomes of histologically confirmed primary clival chordomas in adults who underwent SRS alone (SRS group) vs SRS after fractionated radiotherapy (FRT+SRS group). METHODS:We collected patient data from 10 institutions affiliated with the International Radiosurgery Research Foundation. We evaluated overall survival, tumor control, and freedom from additional treatment (FFAT). RESULTS:Fifty-seven (77%) patients were included in the SRS group and 17 (23%) in the FRT+SRS group. The median radiological follow-up was 48 months (IQR, 24-85) in the SRS group and 36 months (IQR, 25-41) in the FRT+SRS group. During the follow-up, 8 SRS and 2 FRT+SRS patients died ( P = .80). The groups had comparable 10-year overall survival (SRS: 76% vs FRT+SRS: 80%; logrank test, P = .75) and tumor control rates (SRS: 34% vs FRT+SRS: 45%; logrank test, P = .29). The SRS group had a superior 10-year FFAT rate (40%) compared with FRT+SRS (23%; logrank test, P = .02). This finding persisted in the multivariate analysis of the Cox proportional hazards illustrating a 2.40-fold increase in the relative risk of requiring additional treatment among the FRT+SRS group ( P = .04). CONCLUSION:Adjuvant FRT with subsequent boost SRS did not provide superior overall survival or tumor control compared with patients who underwent adjuvant SRS alone. Further studies are required to refine management guidelines among adults with clival chordomas.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Dose selection for brain metastases stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) classically has been based on tumor diameter with a reduction of dose in the settings of prior brain irradiation, larger tumor volumes, and critical brain location. However, retrospective series have shown local control rates to be suboptimal with reduced doses. We hypothesized that lower doses could be effective for specific tumor biologies with concomitant systemic therapies. This study aims to report the local control (LC) and toxicity when using low-dose SRS in the era of modern systemic therapy. METHODS:We reviewed 102 patients with 688 tumors managed between 2014 and 2021 who had low-margin dose radiosurgery, defined as ≤14 Gy. Tumor control was correlated with demographic, clinical, and dosimetric data. RESULTS:The main primary cancer types were lung in 48 (47.1%), breast in 31 (30.4%), melanoma in 8 (7.8%), and others in 15 patients (11.7%). The median tumor volume was 0.037cc (0.002-26.31 cm3), and the median margin dose was 14 Gy (range 10-14). The local failure (LF) cumulative incidence at 1 and 2 years was 6% and 12%, respectively. On competing risk regression analysis, larger volume, melanoma histology, and margin dose were predictors of LF. The 1-year and 2-year cumulative incidence of adverse radiation effects (ARE: an adverse imaging-defined response includes increased enhancement and peritumoral edema) was 0.8% and 2%. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:It is feasible to achieve acceptable LC in BMs with low-dose SRS. Volume, melanoma histology, and margin dose seem to be predictors for LF. The value of a low-dose approach may be in the management of patients with higher numbers of small or adjacent tumors with a history of whole brain radio therapy or multiple SRS sessions and in tumors in critical locations with the aim of LC and preservation of neurological function.