A technique for approximating transition rates from published survival analyses.

BACKGROUND: Quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs) are used to concurrently quantify morbidity and mortality within a single parameter. For this reason, QALYs can facilitate the discussion of risks and benefits during patient counseling regarding treatment options. QALYs are often calculated using partitioned-survival modelling. Alternatively, QALYs can be calculated using more flexible and informative state-transition models populated with transition rates estimated using multistate modelling (MSM) techniques. Unfortunately the latter approach is considered not possible when only progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) analyses are reported. METHODS: We have developed a method that can be used to estimate approximate transition rates from published PFS and OS analyses (we will refer to transition rates estimated using full multistate methods as true transition rates). RESULTS: The approximation method is more accurate for estimating the transition rates out of health than the transition rate out of illness. The method tends to under-estimate true transition rates as censoring increases. CONCLUSIONS: In this article we present the basis for and use of the transition rate approximation method. We then apply the method to a case study and evaluate the method in a simulation study.

The role of steroids in the management of brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline.

QUESTION: Do steroids improve neurologic symptoms in patients with metastatic brain tumors compared to no treatment? If steroids are given, what dose should be used? Comparisons include: (1) steroid therapy versus none. (2) comparison of different doses of steroid therapy. TARGET POPULATION: These recommendations apply to adults diagnosed with brain metastases. RECOMMENDATIONS: Steroid therapy versus no steroid therapy Asymptomatic brain metastases patients without mass effect Insufficient evidence exists to make a treatment recommendation for this clinical scenario. Brain metastases patients with mild symptoms related to mass effect Level 3 Corticosteroids are recommended to provide temporary symptomatic relief of symptoms related to increased intracranial pressure and edema secondary to brain metastases. It is recommended for patients who are symptomatic from metastatic disease to the brain that a starting dose of 4-8 mg/day of dexamethasone be considered. Brain metastases patients with moderate to severe symptoms related to mass effect Level 3 Corticosteroids are recommended to provide temporary symptomatic relief of symptoms related to increased intracranial pressure and edema secondary to brain metastases. If patients exhibit severe symptoms consistent with increased intracranial pressure, it is recommended that higher doses such as 16 mg/day or more be considered. Choice of Steroid Level 3 If corticosteroids are given, dexamethasone is the best drug choice given the available evidence. Duration of Corticosteroid Administration Level 3 Corticosteroids, if given, should be tapered slowly over a 2 week time period, or longer in symptomatic patients, based upon an individualized treatment regimen and a full understanding of the long-term sequelae of corticosteroid therapy. Given the very limited number of studies (two) which met the eligibility criteria for the systematic review, these are the only recommendations that can be offered based on this methodology. Please see "Discussion" and "Summary" section for additional details.

The role of prophylactic anticonvulsants in the management of brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline.

QUESTION: Do prophylactic anticonvulsants decrease the risk of seizure in patients with metastatic brain tumors compared with no treatment? TARGET POPULATION: These recommendations apply to adults with solid brain metastases who have not experienced a seizure due to their metastatic brain disease. RECOMMENDATION: Level 3 For adults with brain metastases who have not experienced a seizure due to their metastatic brain disease, routine prophylactic use of anticonvulsants is not recommended. Only a single underpowered randomized controlled trial (RCT), which did not detect a difference in seizure occurrence, provides evidence for decision-making purposes.

The role of emerging and investigational therapies for metastatic brain tumors: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline of selected topics.

QUESTION: What evidence is available regarding the emerging and investigational therapies for the treatment of metastatic brain tumors? TARGET POPULATION: These recommendations apply to adults with brain metastases. RECOMMENDATIONS: New radiation sensitizers Level 2 A subgroup analysis of a large prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) suggested a prolongation of time to neurological progression with the early use of motexafin-gadolinium (MGd). Nonetheless this was not borne out in the overall study population and therefore an unequivocal recommendation to use the currently available radiation sensitizers, motexafin-gadolinium and efaproxiral (RSR 13) cannot be provided. Interstitial modalities There is no evidence to support the routine use of new or existing interstitial radiation, interstitial chemotherapy and or other interstitial modalities outside of approved clinical trials. New chemotherapeutic agents Level 2 Treatment of melanoma brain metastases with whole brain radiation therapy and temozolomide is reasonable based on one class II study. Level 3 Depending on individual circumstances there may be patients who benefit from the use of temozolomide or fotemustine in the therapy of their brain metastases. Molecular targeted agents Level 3 The use of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors may be of use in the management of brain metastases from non-small cell lung carcinoma.

The role of retreatment in the management of recurrent/progressive brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline.

QUESTION: What evidence is available regarding the use of whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT), stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), surgical resection or chemotherapy for the treatment of recurrent/progressive brain metastases? TARGET POPULATION: This recommendation applies to adults with recurrent/progressive brain metastases who have previously been treated with WBRT, surgical resection and/or radiosurgery. Recurrent/progressive brain metastases are defined as metastases that recur/progress anywhere in the brain (original and/or non-original sites) after initial therapy. RECOMMENDATION: Level 3 Since there is insufficient evidence to make definitive treatment recommendations in patients with recurrent/progressive brain metastases, treatment should be individualized based on a patient's functional status, extent of disease, volume/number of metastases, recurrence or progression at original versus non-original site, previous treatment and type of primary cancer, and enrollment in clinical trials is encouraged. In this context, the following can be recommended depending on a patient's specific condition: no further treatment (supportive care), re-irradiation (either WBRT and/or SRS), surgical excision or, to a lesser extent, chemotherapy. Question If WBRT is used in the setting of recurrent/progressive brain metastases, what impact does tumor histopathology have on treatment outcomes? No studies were identified that met the eligibility criteria for this question.

The role of stereotactic radiosurgery in the management of patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline.

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.

The role of chemotherapy in the management of newly diagnosed brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline.

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.

The role of surgical resection in the management of newly diagnosed brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline.

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.

The role of whole brain radiation therapy in the management of newly diagnosed brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline.

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.

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression.

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) occurs when cancer metastasises to the spine or epidural space and causes secondary compression of the spinal cord. MESCC is a common complication of malignancy that affects almost 5% of patients with cancer. The most common symptom is back pain. MESCC is a medical emergency that needs rapid diagnosis and treatment if permanent paralysis is to be prevented: the diagnosis of MESCC is best made with MRI; and corticosteroids, radiation therapy, and surgery are all established treatments. Future research will focus on prevention, improving detection, and the development of new treatments.

Long-term survival in patients with synchronous, solitary brain metastasis from non-small-cell lung cancer treated with radiosurgery.

PURPOSE: To report the outcome of patients with synchronous, solitary brain metastasis from non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with gamma knife stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients diagnosed with synchronous, solitary brain metastasis from NSCLC were treated with GKSRS between 1993 and 2006. The median Karnofsky performance status (KPS) was 90. Patients had thoracic Stage I-III disease (American Joint Committee on Cancer 2002 guidelines). Definitive thoracic therapy was delivered to 26/42 (62%) patients; 9 patients underwent chemotherapy and radiation, 12 patients had surgical resection, and 5 patients underwent preoperative chemoradiation and surgical resection. RESULTS: The median overall survival (OS) was 18 months. The 1-, 2-, and 5-year actuarial OS rates were 71.3%, 34.1%, and 21%, respectively. For patients who underwent definitive thoracic therapy, the median OS was 26.4 months compared with 13.1 months for those who had nondefinitive therapy, and the 5-year actuarial OS was 34.6% vs. 0% (p < 0.0001). Median OS was significantly longer for patients with a KPS >or=90 vs. KPS < 90 (27.8 months vs. 13.1 months, p < 0.0001). The prognostic factors significant on multivariate analysis were definitive thoracic therapy (p = 0.020) and KPS (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the largest series of patients diagnosed with synchronous, solitary brain metastasis from NSCLC treated with GKSRS. Definitive thoracic therapy and KPS significantly impacted OS. The 5-year OS of 21% demonstrates the potential for long-term survival in patients treated with GKSRS; therefore, patients with good KPS should be considered for definitive thoracic therapy.

Direct decompressive surgical resection in the treatment of spinal cord compression caused by metastatic cancer: a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The standard treatment for spinal cord compression caused by metastatic cancer is corticosteroids and radiotherapy. The role of surgery has not been established. We assessed the efficacy of direct decompressive surgery. METHODS: In this randomised, multi-institutional, non-blinded trial, we randomly assigned patients with spinal cord compression caused by metastatic cancer to either surgery followed by radiotherapy (n=50) or radiotherapy alone (n=51). Radiotherapy for both treatment groups was given in ten 3 Gy fractions. The primary endpoint was the ability to walk. Secondary endpoints were urinary continence, muscle strength and functional status, the need for corticosteroids and opioid analgesics, and survival time. All analyses were by intention to treat. FINDINGS: After an interim analysis the study was stopped because the criterion of a predetermined early stopping rule was met. Thus, 123 patients were assessed for eligibility before the study closed and 101 were randomised. Significantly more patients in the surgery group (42/50, 84%) than in the radiotherapy group (29/51, 57%) were able to walk after treatment (odds ratio 6.2 [95% CI 2.0-19.8] p=0.001). Patients treated with surgery also retained the ability to walk significantly longer than did those with radiotherapy alone (median 122 days vs 13 days, p=0.003). 32 patients entered the study unable to walk; significantly more patients in the surgery group regained the ability to walk than patients in the radiation group (10/16 [62%] vs 3/16 [19%], p=0.01). The need for corticosteroids and opioid analgesics was significantly reduced in the surgical group. INTERPRETATION: Direct decompressive surgery plus postoperative radiotherapy is superior to treatment with radiotherapy alone for patients with spinal cord compression caused by metastatic cancer.

Clinical approach to metastatic epidural spinal cord compression.

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) is a devastating complication of cancer that occurs when cancer metastasizes to the spine and then secondarily compresses the spinal cord. It is a relatively common complication of cancer and. in the United States, more than 20,000 cases of MESCC are diagnosed annually. If left untreated, virtually 100% of these patients would become paraplegic; therefore, it is considered a true medical emergency and immediate intervention is required. Even with aggressive therapy, results can often be unsatisfactory. Although most patients with MESCC have limited survival, up to one third will survive beyond one year. Thus. it is essential to consider aggressive therapy to preserve or improve the quality of life and prevent paraplegia.

Lead-in phase to randomized trial of motexafin gadolinium and whole-brain radiation for patients with brain metastases: centralized assessment of magnetic resonance imaging, neurocognitive, and neurologic end points.

PURPOSE: Motexafin gadolinium is a redox mediator that selectively targets tumor cells, is detectable by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and enhances the effect of radiation therapy. This lead-in phase to a randomized trial served to evaluate radiologic, neurocognitive, and neurologic progression end points and to evaluate the safety and radiologic response of motexafin gadolinium administered concurrently with 30 Gy in 10-fraction whole-brain radiation therapy for the treatment of brain metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Motexafin gadolinium (5.0 mg/kg/d for 10 days) was administered before each radiation treatment in this prospective international trial. Patients were evaluated by MRI, neurologic examinations, and neurocognitive tests. Prospective criteria and centralized review procedures were established for radiologic, neurocognitive, and neurologic progression end points. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients with brain metastases from lung (52%) and breast (24%) cancer, recursive partitioning analysis class 2 (96%), and an average of 11 brain metastases were enrolled. Neurocognitive function was highly impaired at presentation. Motexafin gadolinium was well tolerated. Freedom from neurologic progression was 77% at 1 year. Median survival was 5.0 months. In 29% of patients, the cause of death was brain metastasis progression. The radiologic response rate was 68%. Motexafin gadolinium's tumor selectivity was established with MRI. CONCLUSION: (1) Centralized neurologic progression scoring that incorporated neurocognitive tests was implemented successfully. (2) Motexafin gadolinium was well tolerated. (3) Local control, measured by radiologic response rate, neurologic progression, and death caused by progression of brain metastasis, seemed to be improved compared with historical results. A randomized phase III trial using these methods for evaluation of efficacy has just been completed.

The management of brain metastases.

Brain metastases are neoplasms that originate in tissues outside the brain and then spread secondarily to the brain. Metastases to the brain are the most common intracranial tumours in adults. Substantial progress has been made in the treatment of these tumours, and radiotherapy, surgery, and stereotactic radiosurgery are now established treatments. With aggressive treatment, most patients experience meaningful symptom reduction and extension of life.

Stereotatic radiosurgery of 468 brain metastases < or =2 cm: implications for SRS dose and whole brain radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: The national standard stereostatic radiosurgery (SRS) dose for brain metastases < or =2 cm is 24 Gy as established by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group study 90-05, in which planned whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) was not used. On the basis of our institutional experience, the goal of this study was to determine the optimal SRS dose and influence of WBRT on local tumor control among 468 < or =2-cm metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between October 1992 and May 2001, 468 newly diagnosed or recurrent < or =2-cm brain metastases, among 160 patients, were treated with SRS (dose range, 7-30 Gy; median, 20). A total of 240 metastases received planned WBRT (range, 6.75-50.4 Gy; median, 40.5) vs. 228 metastases that did not. The variables tested by multivariate analysis for their potential effect on tumor control included histologic type, site of metastasis, primary diagnosis, tumor volume, SRS dose, newly diagnosed vs. recurrent metastasis, and planned WBRT vs. no planned WBRT. RESULTS: Follow-up ranged from 1 to 82 months (median 7). On multivariate analysis, the addition of WBRT was the most significant predictor of local tumor control. Overall, patients who received WBRT had superior local tumor control rates (97% vs. 87% in those who did not receive WBRT; p = 0.0001). Patients receiving WBRT and SRS > or =20 Gy achieved local control rates of 99% compared with 91% control rates when treated with WBRT and SRS <20 Gy (p = 0.0029). Increasing the SRS dose to >20 Gy resulted in no improvement in local tumor control and a higher rate of Grade 3 and 4 neurotoxicity, approaching statistical significance (5.9% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.078). CONCLUSION: First, optimal control of brain metastasis < or =2 cm was seen with 20-Gy SRS combined with planned WBRT. Second, SRS doses >20 Gy resulted in no obvious improvement in local control and appeared to be associated with a greater rate of complications.

Risk of symptomatic brain tumor recurrence and neurologic deficit after radiosurgery alone in patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases: results and implications.

PURPOSE: A single-institution experience using primary stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) alone in the management of newly diagnosed brain metastases was analyzed to identify the risk of symptomatic brain tumor recurrence (BTR) and neurologic deficit associated with such a treatment strategy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Thirty-six patients were treated for newly diagnosed single/multiple brain metastases using SRS alone followed by planned observation. SRS minimum tumor dose ranged from 8 to 25 Gy (median: 20 Gy). Factors evaluated in analysis of treatment outcome included number of metastases, site of metastasis, primary tumor site, histology, extent of intracranial and extracranial disease, and interval to diagnosis of brain metastasis. RESULTS: Median and 1-year survival for the entire group was 9 months and 36%, respectively. BTR anywhere in the brain occurred in 47% (17/36) of patients. Forty-seven percent of BTR (8/17) recurred at the site of original metastasis; 35% (6/17) recurred at both original [corrected] and distant sites in the brain, and 18% (3/17) recurred at distant only [corrected] brain sites. Seventy-one percent (12/17) of the patients were symptomatic at the time of recurrence, and 59% (10/17) had an associated neurologic deficit. Multivariate analysis found that only the extent of disease was a predictor of BTR. Patients who had disease limited to the brain only had a BTR rate of 80% (8/10) vs. 35% (9/26) who had disease involving the brain, primary site, and/or other extracranial metastatic sites (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Use of primary SRS alone in this setting is associated with an increasingly significant risk of BTR with increasing survival time. In addition, the majority of such recurrences are symptomatic and associated with a neurologic deficit, a finding not analyzed in recently reported experiences withholding whole brain radiation therapy as part of the primary treatment of brain metastasis.

Feasibility of neurocognitive outcome evaluations in patients with brain metastases in a multi-institutional cooperative group setting: results of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trial BR-0018.

PURPOSE: A multi-institutional trial was conducted by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) to test the feasibility of performing a test battery consisting of five neurocognitive measures and a quality-of-life instrument in patients with brain metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The major eligibility requirements included histologic proof of a primary malignancy, measurable single or multiple brain metastases, Zubrod performance status of 0-1, neurologic function status of 0-2, and "certification" for administration of neurocognitive assessments. This certification process required either attendance at an RTOG neurocognitive assessment training workshop or review of an instructional video, followed by submission of an audiotape of mock/simulated test sessions for central review. The test battery included the following measures: the Mini-Mental Status Examination, Hopkins Verbal Learning Test, Verbal Fluency/Controlled Word Association Test, Ruff 2 and 7 test, Trailmaking Test, and Profile of Mood States-Short Form. The primary objective of this trial was to establish whether patients were able to complete this test battery. Compliance was defined as successful completion of a test measure. The test battery was to be administered just before, at completion of, and 1 month after whole brain radiotherapy to 37.5 Gy at 2.5 Gy/fraction once daily. Fifty-nine patients were enrolled in the trial. RESULTS: The patient characteristics included 32% > or =65 years; 44% with Zubrod performance status of 0; and 81% with multiple brain metastases. The overall compliance rate for administration and completion of the five neurocognitive measures and a quality-of-life instrument before treatment, at treatment completion, and 1 month after treatment was > or =95%, > or =84%, and > or =70%. The most common causes of noncompliance were patient-related factors (e.g., performance status or inability to understand test instructions) and not institutional error. CONCLUSION: Neurocognitive evaluation of patients with brain metastases in a multi-institutional and cooperative group setting is feasible using the test battery and certification process used in this study. This battery and certification process will be incorporated into future RTOG brain tumor trials.

The rationale for adjuvant whole brain radiation therapy with radiosurgery in the treatment of single brain metastases.

Randomized trials have established the efficacy of focal treatment (either stereotactic radiosurgery or conventional surgery) for single brain metastases. In the past, adjuvant whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) was routinely given with focal therapy. Recently, the utility of adjuvant WBRT has been called into question. This paper examines the scientific evidence and the arguments, pro and con, concerning the use of adjuvant WBRT in association with stereotactic radiosurgery or conventional surgery.