Surgical Resection of Cerebral Metastases Leads to Faster Resolution of Peritumoral Edema than Stereotactic Radiosurgery: A Volumetric Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) are well-established treatment options for selected patients with oligo-brain metastases (BMs). The dynamics of edema resolution with each treatment method have not been well characterized. METHODS: Of 389 patients treated for BMs between 2012 and 2014, this study retrospectively identified 107 patients (150 metastases) who underwent either surgery or SRS as a single treatment method for BMs. The two groups of patients were matched for clinical parameters. Volumetric assessments of the tumor and associated edema were performed before treatment and then 2-3 months after treatment. RESULTS: In this study, 76 surgical cases were compared with 74 cases treated with SRS. The volume of the tumor and surrounding edema was significantly greater in the surgery group than in the SRS group. However, resolution of edema was significantly more rapid in the surgical group (p < 0.0001), accompanied by faster weaning from steroids. After a matching process based on the propensity of a patient to receive SRS, a subgroup cohort was analyzed (mean maximal diameter: 21 mm in the surgical group vs 20.8 mm in the SRS group; p = 0.9). At diagnosis, edema volume, but not tumor volume, was significantly greater in the surgical group. The resolution of edema 2-3 months after treatment was better in the surgical group than in the SRS group (89.6% vs 71.1% of baseline, respectively; p = 0.09), although this difference did not reach the level of significance. CONCLUSIONS: Resolution of tumor-associated edema in BMs suitable for either surgery or SRS was significantly faster after surgical resection than after SRS. Accordingly, when both treatment options are suitable, surgery appears to induce faster resolution of the edema.

Dynamics of FLAIR Volume Changes in Glioblastoma and Prediction of Survival.

BACKGROUND: The extent of tumor resection (EOTR) calculated by enhanced T1 changes in glioblastomas has been previously reported to predict survival. However, fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) volume may better represent tumor burden. In this study, we report the first assessment of the dynamics of FLAIR volume changes over time as a predictive variable for post-resection overall survival (OS). METHODS: Contemporary data from 103 consecutive patients with complete imaging and clinical data who underwent resection of newly diagnosed glioblastoma followed by the Stupp protocol between 2010 and 2013 were analyzed. Clinical, radiographic, and outcome parameters were retrieved for each patient, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based volumetric tumor analysis before, immediately after, and 3 months post-surgery. RESULTS: OS rate was 17.6 months. A significant incremental OS advantage was noted, with as little as 85 % T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced (T1Gd)-EOTR measured on contrast-enhanced MRI. Pre- and immediate postoperative FLAIR-based EOTR was not predictive of OS; however, abnormal FLAIR volume measured 3 months post-surgery correlated significantly with outcome when FLAIR residual tumor volume (RTV) was <19.3 cm3 and <46 % of baseline volume (p < 0.0001 for both). Age and isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-1 mutation were predictive of OS (p < 0.0001, Cox proportional hazards). CONCLUSIONS: OS correlated with the immediate postoperative T1Gd-EOTR measured by enhanced T1 MRI, but not by FLAIR volume. Diminished abnormal FLAIR volume at 3 months post-surgery was associated with OS benefit when FLAIR-RTV was <19.3 cm3 or <46 % of baseline. These threshold values provide a new radiological variable that can be used for prediction of OS in patients with glioblastoma immediately after completion of standard chemoradiation.

Concurrent Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) and Radiation Therapy for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma: A Prospective Safety and Feasibility Study.

Background: TTFields are a loco-regional, anti-mitotic treatment comprising low-intensity alternating electric fields. In the EF-14 study of newly diagnosed glioblastoma (ndGBM), TTFields in combination with temozolomide (TMZ) significantly improved survival vs. TMZ alone. In preclinical studies TTFields had a radiosensitizing effect and increased the efficacy of radiation therapy (RT). This study prospectively evaluated the feasibility and safety of TTFields administered concurrently with RT and TMZ in ndGBM patients. Methods: Patients with histologically confirmed ndGBM were treated with TTFields/RT/TMZ followed by adjuvant TMZ/TTFields. TTFields (200 kHz) were delivered for ≥18 hours/day with transducer arrays removed during RT delivery. RT was administered to the tumor bed in 30 fractions (total dose 60 Gy) combined with daily TMZ (75 mg/m2). In the adjuvant phase, patients received monthly TMZ (150-200 mg/m2 for 5 days) plus TTFields. Patients were followed for 24 months or until second disease progression. The primary outcome was safety of the combined therapies; secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Adverse events (AEs) were graded per CTCAE v4.0. Results: Ten patients were enrolled at a single center between April and December 2017. Median age was 60.2 years, median Karnofsky Performance Score was 90.0, and 80% patients were male. Five (50%) patients had undergone tumor resection while the remainder had biopsy only. Eight patients experienced ≥1 RT treatment delay; delays were unrelated to TTFields treatment. All patients experienced ≥1 AE. Three patients suffered from serious AEs (urinary tract infection, confusional state, and decubitus ulcer) that were considered unrelated to TTFields. The most common AE was skin toxicity, reported in eight (80%) patients; all were of low severity (CTCAE grade 1-2) and were reported as related to TTFields treatment. Median PFS from enrollment was 8.9 months; median OS was not reached at the time of study closure. Conclusions: Eighty percent of patients experienced grade 1-2 TTFields-related skin toxicity. No other TTFields-related toxicities were observed without an increase in RT- or TMZ-related toxicities as a result of combining TTFields with these therapies. Preliminary efficacy results are promising and warrant further investigation of concurrent TTFields/RT/TMZ treatment in ndGBM patients.