Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Anticancer Research
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Anticancer Research

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies

Potential Impact of the Interval Between Imaging and Whole-brain Radiotherapy in Patients With Relatively Favorable Survival Prognoses

HEINKE C. HANSEN, STEFAN JANSSEN, CATHRIN THIEME, ALEKSEJ PERLOV, STEVEN E. SCHILD and DIRK RADES
Anticancer Research March 2019, 39 (3) 1343-1346; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.13247
HEINKE C. HANSEN
1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
STEFAN JANSSEN
1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
2Medical Practice for Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Hannover, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
CATHRIN THIEME
2Medical Practice for Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Hannover, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ALEKSEJ PERLOV
2Medical Practice for Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Hannover, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
STEVEN E. SCHILD
3Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, U.S.A.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DIRK RADES
1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: rades.dirk@gmx.net

Abstract

Background/Aim: The interval between diagnostic imaging and whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) had no significant impact on survival in our previous study of WBRT for brain metastases. Since median survival time was only 2 months, a potentially negative impact by delaying treatment could have been missed. Therefore, we performed an additional analysis of patients surviving at least 4 months following irradiation. Patients and Methods: The interval between diagnosis of brain metastases and WBRT and ten other factors were retrospectively analyzed for survival in 191 patients surviving 4 months or longer following WBRT. Results: On univariate analyses, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score of 0-1, 1-3 brain metastases and absence of extra-cerebral metastases were significantly associated with longer survival, whereas the interval from diagnostic imaging to WBRT was not. On multivariate analysis, ECOG performance score remained significant, and extra-cerebral metastases showed a trend towards a longer survival. Conclusion: The interval between diagnostic imaging and WBRT didn't have a significant impact on patients surviving 4 months or longer. Depending on the need for symptom relief, WBRT may be postponed for very important reasons such as obtaining a multidisciplinary tumor board decision or definitive histology.

  • Whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT)
  • diagnostic imaging
  • treatment delay
  • survival prognosis

Many cancer patients with brain metastases have multiple lesions and receive whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), either alone or in combination with local therapies including resection and radiosurgery (1). WBRT alone can also be a reasonable option for patients with very few cerebral lesions, if they have a poor performance score or a high comorbidity-index (2). When patients are assigned to WBRT, treatment is generally recommended to start as soon as reasonably possible, particularly in case of metastases-related debilitating symptoms (3). However, an early start of radiotherapy is not always reasonable. If discussion of the entire treatment concept in a multidisciplinary tumor board or a definitive histology are lacking but considered mandatory, a delay of up to a very few weeks may be justified. In a previous study, we have investigated whether such a delay would result in worse survival (4). According to the findings of that previous study, which compared three intervals between diagnostic imaging identifying the brain metastases and the start of WBRT (0-7 days, 8-14 days and 15-21 days), a delay of up to 21 days had no impact on survival. However, one unanswered question was whether a possible impact of the interval between diagnostic imaging and WBRT on survival may have been missed, because the median survival time was only 2 months and possibly too short to detect a significant impact (4). Therefore, we conducted this additional analysis limited to patients who survived at least 4 months following WBRT.

Patients and Methods

The data of 191 patients who had been treated with WBRT alone for brain metastases between 2008 and 2017 and survived for at least 4 months following treatment, were retrospectively evaluated. The cerebral lesions were diagnosed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in 135 patients or computed tomography (CT) in 56 patients.

The potential impact of the interval between the diagnostic imaging and WBRT (0-7 days versus 8-14 days versus 15-21 days), and of 10 additional characteristics on survival following WBRT was investigated. The distributions of these 10 characteristics related to the three intervals are summarized in Table I. For univariate analyses, the Kaplan–Meier method and the log-rank test were applied (5). Characteristics showing a significant association with survival (p<0.05) were further analyzed for independence in a multivariate manner with a Cox regression model.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Patient characteristics related to the interval between imaging and WBRT.

Results

The median survival time of the 191 patients was 9 months; the 6-months and 12-month survival rates were 65% and 26%. On univariate analyses, an ECOG performance score of 0-1 (p<0.001), a limited number of 1-3 brain metastases (p=0.010) and absence of extra-cerebral metastases (p=0.015) showed significant associations with longer survival (Table II). In contrast, the interval between diagnostic imaging of brain metastases and WBRT was not significantly associated with survival (p=0.50, Figure 1).

In the additional Cox regression analysis, a better ECOG performance score remained significantly associated with improved survival (risk ratio [RR]=1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.18-2.16; p=0.003), absence of extra-cerebral metastases showed a trend towards a longer survival (RR=1.50; 95%CI=0.99-2.38; p=0.058), and for the number of brain metastases no significant association with survival was found (RR=1.11; 95%CI=0.98-1.26; p=0.11).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Comparison of the three investigated intervals between imaging and WBRT for survival. The p-value was calculated using the log rank test.

Discussion

Personalization of anti-cancer treatment requires adjustments to individual patient's personal situation and individual prognosis, particularly in the palliative care of brain metastases (6-15). A personalized treatment approach should be designed by physicians from different disciplines, ideally within a multidisciplinary tumor board. Moreover, to select the optimal treatment regimen, definitive histology should be available. The start of the treatment for brain metastases may be postponed for days to very few weeks while waiting for obtaining pathology or decision by a tumor board or patient. An important question is, whether such a delay would decrease patients' expected survival. To address this question, we performed a previously reported study of 573 patients treated with WBRT alone (4). Three intervals between imaging leading to the diagnosis of brain metastasis and the start of WBRT, i.e. 0-7 days, 8-14 days and 15-21 days, were compared with respect to survival. The 6-month survival rates were 22%, 20% and 22%, respectively, and the 12-month survival rates 8%, 9% and 11%, respectively (p=0.84). Thus, the interval between imaging and WBRT had no significant impact on survival. However, the median survival time in that study was quite short (2 months), and a potential negative impact of this delay may have been missed (4). Therefore, we also performed this study in patients who survived at least 4 months following WBRT. The median survival times of these patients were more favorable than in the previous study, i.e. 9 months versus 2 months (4). A median survival time of 9 months can be considered favorable, since it was even longer than that in the favorable-prognosis group (7.1 months) of the widely accepted recursive partitioning analysis classification (16). The worst prognostic group of the RPA classification had a median survival time of 2.3 months, which was similar to the 2 months of our previous study. The comparison with the RPA classification demonstrates that the present study was performed in a cohort of patients with brain metastases and a relatively favorable survival prognosis, as intended (16).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Survival rates following whole-brain radiotherapy.

The results of the present study suggest that for patients with relatively favorable survival prognoses, the interval between diagnostic imaging and WBRT had no significant impact on survival at 6 and 12 months following WBRT. Therefore, for important reasons such as obtaining a decision from a multidisciplinary tumor board or definitive histology, a delay in the start of WBRT for some days appears possible without a significant decrement in survival. However, the necessity of controlling burdensome metastases-related symptoms such as headache, nausea, vomiting, seizures and disturbances of vision or hearing should be considered when postponing WBRT (1, 6). Corticosteroids, mainly dexamethasone, may help to control the symptoms and bridge the time until WBRT is started.

In summary, similar to the previous study, the interval between diagnosing of brain metastases by imaging and the start of WBRT for up to 21 days had no significant impact on survival also in patients with a relatively favorable survival prognosis. If clinical symptoms can be controlled with corticosteroids, WBRT may be postponed for up to three weeks for very important reasons.

Footnotes

  • Authors' Contributions

    H.C.H., S.J., S.E.S. and D.R. participated in the design of the study. H.C.H., S.J., C.T., A.P.and D.R. provided data for the study. S.E.S. and D.R. performed the analyses. H.C.H., S.J., S.E.S. and D.R. performed the interpretation of the data and drafted the manuscript, which has been reviewed and approved in its final form by all other authors.

  • Conflicts of Interest

    On behalf of all Authors, the corresponding Author states that there is no conflict of interest related to this study.

  • Received January 18, 2019.
  • Revision received January 25, 2019.
  • Accepted January 28, 2019.
  • Copyright© 2019, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved

References

    1. Tsao MN,
    2. Rades D,
    3. Wirth A,
    4. Lo SS,
    5. Danielson BL,
    6. Gaspar LE,
    7. Sperduto PW,
    8. Vogelbaum MA,
    9. Radawski JD,
    10. Wang JZ,
    11. Gillin MT,
    12. Mohideen N,
    13. Hahn CA,
    14. Chang EL
    : Radiotherapeutic and surgical management for newly diagnosed brain metastasis(es): An American Society for Radiation Oncology evidence-based guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol 2: 210-225, 2012. PMID: 25925626, DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2011.12.004
    1. Rades D,
    2. Janssen S,
    3. Dziggel L,
    4. Blanck O,
    5. Bajrovic A,
    6. Veninga T,
    7. Schild SE
    : A matched-pair study comparing whole-brain irradiation alone to radiosurgery or fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy alone in patients irradiated for up to three brain metastases. BMC Cancer 17: 30, 2017. PMID: 28061768, DOI: 10.1186/s12885-016-2989-3
    1. van Oorschot B,
    2. Beckmann G,
    3. Schulze W,
    4. Rades D,
    5. Feyer P
    : Radiotherapeutic options for symptom control in breast cancer. Breast Care (Basel) 6: 14-19, 2011. PMID: 21547021, DOI: 10.1159/000324564
    1. Hansen HC,
    2. Janssen S,
    3. Thieme C,
    4. Perlov A,
    5. Schild SE,
    6. Rades D
    : Whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) for brain metastases: Does the interval between imaging and treatment matter? Anticancer Res 38: 6835-6840, 2018. PMID: 30504398, DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.13057
    1. Kaplan EL,
    2. Meier P
    : Non-parametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 53: 457-481, 1958.
    1. Staackmann C,
    2. Janssen S,
    3. Schild SE,
    4. Rades D
    : A tool to predict the probability of intracerebral recurrence or new cerebral metastases after whole-brain irradiation in patients with head-and-neck cancer. Anticancer Res 38: 4199-4202, 2018. PMID: 2997055, DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.12714
    1. Rades D,
    2. Dziggel L,
    3. Manig L,
    4. Janssen S,
    5. Khoa MT,
    6. Duong VN,
    7. Khiem VH,
    8. Schild SE
    : Predicting survival after whole-brain irradiation for cerebral metastases in patients with cancer of the bladder. In Vivo 32: 633-636, 2018. PMID: 29695570, DOI: 10.21873/invivo.11285
    1. Rades D,
    2. Blanck O,
    3. Khoa MT,
    4. Van Thai P,
    5. Hung NQ,
    6. Dziggel L,
    7. Schild SE
    : Validation of a survival score for patients receiving radiosurgery or fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for 1 to 3 brain metastases. In Vivo 32: 381-384, 2018. PMID: 29475924, DOI: 10.21873/invivo.11249
    1. Dziggel L,
    2. Schild SE,
    3. Veninga T,
    4. Bajrovic A,
    5. Rades D
    : Clinical factors asssociated with treatment outcomes following whole-brain irradiation in patients with prostate cancer. In Vivo 31: 35-38, 2017. PMID: 28064217, DOI: 10.21873/invivo.11021
    1. Janssen S,
    2. Hansen HC,
    3. Schild SE,
    4. Rades D
    : An instrument for estimating the 6-month survival probability after whole-brain irradiation alone for cerebral metastases from gynecological cancer. Anticancer Res 38: 3753-3756, 2018. PMID: 29848738, DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.12656
    1. Rades D,
    2. Dziggel,
    3. Schild SE
    : A specific survival score for patients receiving local therapy for single brain metastasis from a gynecological malignancy. In Vivo 32: 825-828, 2018. PMID: 29936465, DOI: 10.21873/invivo.11314
    1. Cha YJ,
    2. Jang WI,
    3. Kim MS,
    4. Yoo HJ,
    5. Paik EK,
    6. Jeong HK,
    7. Youn SM
    : Prediction of response to stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases using convolutional neural networks. Anticancer Res 38: 5437-5445, 2018. PMID: 30194200, DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.12875
    1. Rades D,
    2. Dziggel L,
    3. Blanck O,
    4. Gebauer N,
    5. Bartscht T,
    6. Schild SE
    : A score to identify patients with brain metastases from colorectal cancer who may benefit from whole-brain radiotherapy in addition to stereotactic radiosurgery/radiotherapy. Anticancer Res 38: 3111-3114, 2018. PMID: 29715148, DOI: 10.21873/ anticanres.12570
    1. Takamori S,
    2. Toyokawa G,
    3. Okamoto I,
    4. Takada K,
    5. Kinoshita F,
    6. Kozuma Y,
    7. Matsubara T,
    8. Haratake N,
    9. Akamine T,
    10. Mukae N,
    11. Hirai F,
    12. Tagawa T,
    13. Oda Y,
    14. Iwaki T,
    15. Iihara K,
    16. Nakanishi Y,
    17. Maehara Y
    : Clinical significance of PD-L1 expression in brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer. Anticancer Res 38: 553-557, 2018. PMID: 29277823, DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.12258
    1. Dziggel L,
    2. Gebauer N,
    3. Bartscht T,
    4. Schild SE,
    5. Rades D
    : Performance status and number of metastatic extra-cerebral sites predict survival after radiotherapy of brain metastases from thyroid cancer. Anticancer Res 38: 2391-2394, 2018. PMID: 29599366, DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.12488
    1. Gaspar L,
    2. Scott C,
    3. Rotman M,
    4. Asbell S,
    5. Phillips T,
    6. Wasserman T,
    7. McKenna WG,
    8. Byhardt R
    : Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) of prognostic factors in three Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) brain metastases trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 37: 745-751, 1997. PMID: 9128946
Anticancer Research

© 2022 Anticancer Research

Powered by HighWire