MRI-based contrast clearance analysis shows high differentiation accuracy between radiation-induced reactions and progressive disease after cranial radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Pseudoprogression (PsP) or radiation necrosis (RN) may frequently occur after cranial radiotherapy and show a similar imaging pattern compared with progressive disease (PD). We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging-based contrast clearance analysis (CCA) in this clinical setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with equivocal imaging findings after cranial radiotherapy were consecutively included into this monocentric prospective study. CCA was carried out by software-based automated subtraction of imaging features in late versus early T1-weighted sequences after contrast agent application. Two experienced neuroradiologists evaluated CCA with respect to PsP/RN and PD being blinded for histological findings. The radiological assessment was compared with the histopathological results, and its accuracy was calculated statistically. RESULTS: A total of 33 patients were included; 16 (48.5%) were treated because of a primary brain tumor (BT), and 17 (51.1%) because of a secondary BT. In one patient, CCA was technically infeasible. The accuracy of CCA in predicting the histological result was 0.84 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.95; one-sided P = 0.051; n = 32]. Sensitivity and specificity of CCA were 0.93 (95% CI 0.66-1.00) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.52-0.94), respectively. The accuracy in patients with secondary BTs was 0.94 (95% CI 0.71-1.00) and nonsignificantly higher compared with patients with primary BT with an accuracy of 0.73 (95% CI 0.45-0.92), P = 0.16. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, CCA was a highly accurate, easy, and helpful method for distinguishing PsP or RN from PD after cranial radiotherapy, especially in patients with secondary tumors after radiosurgical treatment.

Effectiveness and tolerability of radiotherapy for patients with indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a monocenter analysis.

To analyze the effectiveness and toxicities of radiotherapy in indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (iNHL) patients treated in our institution. Patients with iNHL treated with radiotherapy between 1999 and 2016 were included. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were local control (LC), overall survival (OS) and toxicities. PFS, LC, and OS were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method. Log-rank test was used to investigate the differences between subgroups. Cox proportional hazard model was used for univariate continuous analysis. Seventy-five patients were identified in our institutional database between 1999 and 2016. Fifty-eight (77.3%) had stage I after Ann-Arbor and 17 patients (22.7%) had stage II. The median follow-up was 87 months (95% CI 72-102 months). Median single dose per fraction was 2.0 Gy (range 1.5-2 Gy) and median total dose was 30.6 Gy (range 16-45 Gy). Radiotherapy was performed in 2D (n = 10; 13.3%), 3D (n = 63; 84.0%) and VMAT (n = 2; 2.7%) techniques, respectively. The median PFS was 14.0 years (95% CI 8.3-19.7 years). The estimated PFS after 5 and 10 years were 73.0% and 65.5% in Kaplan-Meier analysis, respectively. The 5- and 10-year LC were 94.9% and 92.3%, respectively. The 5- and 10-year OS were 88.6% and 73.9%. In univariate analyses of PFS, younger patients (≤ 60 years old) had significantly superior PFS to those older than 60 years old (5-year PFS 81.9% vs. 65.1%, p = 0.021). Dose escalation > 36.0 Gy had no prognostic influence in term of PFS (p = 0.425). Extranodal involvement, stage and histology had no prognostic impact on PFS. Depending on the site of lymphomas, the most common acute side effects were: dermatitis CTCAE° I-II (8.0%), xerostomia CTC° I (8.0%), cataract CTC° I (12.0%) and dry eyes CTC° I-II (14.6%). No adverse event CTC° III was reported. Most acute side effects recovered at 3 to 6 months after radiotherapy except for CTC° I cataract and xerostomia. Local Radiotherapy was highly effective for treatment of early stage iNHL with no serious side effects in our cohort. The most acute CTCAE° I-II side effects recovered 3 to 6 months later. Technique advances seem to have further improved effectiveness and tolerability of radiotherapy.Trial registration: Local ethics committee of Ludwig-Maximilian-University (LMU) Munich approved this retrospective analysis on the May 7th, 2019 (Nr. 19-137).

Bevacizumab as a treatment option for radiation necrosis after cranial radiation therapy: a retrospective monocentric analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiation necrosis is a possible adverse event after cranial radiation therapy and can cause severe symptoms, such as an increased intracranial pressure or neurological deterioration. The vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor bevacizumab (BEV) has been shown to be a feasible therapeutic option for symptomatic radiation necrosis, either when traditional antiedematous steroid treatment fails, or as an alternative to steroid treatment. However, to the best of our knowledge, only one randomized study with a rather small cohort exists to prove a beneficial effect in this setting. Therefore, further real-life data are needed. This retrospective monocentric case study evaluates patients who received BEV due to radiation necrosis, with a specific focus on the respective clinical course. METHODS: Using the internal database for pharmaceutical products, all patients who received BEV in our department were identified. Only patients who received BEV as symptomatic treatment for radiation necrosis were included. Patient characteristics, symptoms before, during, and after treatment, and the use of dexamethasone were evaluated using medical reports and systematic internal documentation. The symptoms were graded using CTCAE version 5.0 for general neurological symptoms. Symptoms were graded directly before each cycle and after the treatment (approximately 6 weeks). Additionally, the daily steroid dose was collected at these timepoints. Patients who either improved in symptoms, received less dexamethasone after treatment, or both were considered to have a benefit from the treatment. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients who received BEV due to radiation necrosis were identified. For 10 patients (47.6%) symptoms improved and 11 patients (52.4%) remained clinically stable during the treatment. In 14 patients (66.7%) the dexamethasone dose could be reduced during therapy, 5 patients (23.8%) received the same dose of dexamethasone before and after the treatment, and 2 patients (9.5%) received a higher dose at the end of the treatment. According to this analysis, overall, 19 patients (90.5%) benefited from the treatment with BEV. No severe adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSION: BEV might be an effective and safe therapeutic option for patients with radiation necrosis as a complication after cranial radiation therapy. Patients seem to benefit from this treatment by improving symptomatically or through reduction of dexamethasone.