Jane H. Cerhan

Effect of Radiosurgery Alone vs Radiosurgery With Whole Brain Radiation Therapy on Cognitive Function in Patients With 1 to 3 Brain Metastases: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) significantly improves tumor control in the brain after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), yet because of its association with cognitive decline, its role in the treatment of patients with brain metastases remains controversial. OBJECTIVE To determine whether there is less cognitive deterioration at 3 months after SRS alone vs SRS plus WBRT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS At 34 institutions in North America, patients with 1 to 3 brain metastases were randomized to receive SRS or SRS plus WBRT between February 2002 and December 2013. INTERVENTIONS The WBRT dose schedule was 30 Gy in 12 fractions; the SRS dose was 18 to 22 Gy in the SRS plus WBRT group and 20 to 24 Gy for SRS alone. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end point was cognitive deterioration (decline >1 SD from baseline on at least 1 cognitive test at 3 months) in participants who completed the baseline and 3-month assessments. Secondary end points included time to intracranial failure, quality of life, functional independence, long-term cognitive status, and overall survival. RESULTS There were 213 randomized participants (SRS alone, n = 111; SRS plus WBRT, n = 102) with a mean age of 60.6 years (SD, 10.5 years); 103 (48%) were women. There was less cognitive deterioration at 3 months after SRS alone (40/63 patients [63.5%]) than when combined with WBRT (44/48 patients [91.7%]; difference, -28.2%; 90% CI, -41.9% to -14.4%; P < .001). Quality of life was higher at 3 months with SRS alone, including overall quality of life (mean change from baseline, -0.1 vs -12.0 points; mean difference, 11.9; 95% CI, 4.8-19.0 points; P = .001). Time to intracranial failure was significantly shorter for SRS alone compared with SRS plus WBRT (hazard ratio, 3.6; 95% CI, 2.2-5.9; P < .001). There was no significant difference in functional independence at 3 months between the treatment groups (mean change from baseline, -1.5 points for SRS alone vs -4.2 points for SRS plus WBRT; mean difference, 2.7 points; 95% CI, -2.0 to 7.4 points; P = .26). Median overall survival was 10.4 months for SRS alone and 7.4 months for SRS plus WBRT (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.75-1.38; P = .92). For long-term survivors, the incidence of cognitive deterioration was less after SRS alone at 3 months (5/11 [45.5%] vs 16/17 [94.1%]; difference, -48.7%; 95% CI, -87.6% to -9.7%; P = .007) and at 12 months (6/10 [60%] vs 17/18 [94.4%]; difference, -34.4%; 95% CI, -74.4% to 5.5%; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients with 1 to 3 brain metastases, the use of SRS alone, compared with SRS combined with WBRT, resulted in less cognitive deterioration at 3 months. In the absence of a difference in overall survival, these findings suggest that for patients with 1 to 3 brain metastases amenable to radiosurgery, SRS alone may be a preferred strategy. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00377156.

Postoperative stereotactic radiosurgery compared with whole brain radiotherapy for resected metastatic brain disease (NCCTG N107C/CEC·3): a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is the standard of care to improve intracranial control following resection of brain metastasis. However, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to the surgical cavity is widely used in an attempt to reduce cognitive toxicity, despite the absence of high-level comparative data substantiating efficacy in the postoperative setting. We aimed to establish the effect of SRS on survival and cognitive outcomes compared with WBRT in patients with resected brain metastasis. METHODS In this randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, adult patients (aged 18 years or older) from 48 institutions in the USA and Canada with one resected brain metastasis and a resection cavity less than 5·0 cm in maximal extent were randomly assigned (1:1) to either postoperative SRS (12-20 Gy single fraction with dose determined by surgical cavity volume) or WBRT (30 Gy in ten daily fractions or 37·5 Gy in 15 daily fractions of 2·5 Gy; fractionation schedule predetermined for all patients at treating centre). We randomised patients using a dynamic allocation strategy with stratification factors of age, duration of extracranial disease control, number of brain metastases, histology, maximal resection cavity diameter, and treatment centre. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The co-primary endpoints were cognitive-deterioration-free survival and overall survival, and analyses were done by intention to treat. We report the final analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01372774. FINDINGS Between Nov 10, 2011, and Nov 16, 2015, 194 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to SRS (98 patients) or WBRT (96 patients). Median follow-up was 11·1 months (IQR 5·1-18·0). Cognitive-deterioration-free survival was longer in patients assigned to SRS (median 3·7 months [95% CI 3·45-5·06], 93 events) than in patients assigned to WBRT (median 3·0 months [2·86-3·25], 93 events; hazard ratio [HR] 0·47 [95% CI 0·35-0·63]; p<0·0001), and cognitive deterioration at 6 months was less frequent in patients who received SRS than those who received WBRT (28 [52%] of 54 evaluable patients assigned to SRS vs 41 [85%] of 48 evaluable patients assigned to WBRT; difference -33·6% [95% CI -45·3 to -21·8], p<0·00031). Median overall survival was 12·2 months (95% CI 9·7-16·0, 69 deaths) for SRS and 11·6 months (9·9-18·0, 67 deaths) for WBRT (HR 1·07 [95% CI 0·76-1·50]; p=0·70). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported with a relative frequency greater than 4% were hearing impairment (three [3%] of 93 patients in the SRS group vs eight [9%] of 92 patients in the WBRT group) and cognitive disturbance (three [3%] vs five [5%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION Decline in cognitive function was more frequent with WBRT than with SRS and there was no difference in overall survival between the treatment groups. After resection of a brain metastasis, SRS radiosurgery should be considered one of the standards of care as a less toxic alternative to WBRT for this patient population. FUNDING National Cancer Institute.

NCCTG N0574 (Alliance): A phase III randomized trial of whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) in addition to radiosurgery (SRS) in patients with 1 to 3 brain metastases.

LBA4 Background: WBRT significantly improves tumor control in the brain after SRS, yet the role of adjuvant WBRT remains undefined due to concerns regarding neurocognitive risks. METHODS Patients with 1-3 brain metastases, each < 3 cm by contrast MRI, were randomized to SRS alone or SRS + WBRT and underwent cognitive testing before and after treatment. The primary endpoint was cognitive progression (CP) defined as decline > 1 SD from baseline in any of the 6 cognitive tests at 3 months. Time to CP was estimated using cumulative incidence adjusting for survival as a competing risk. RESULTS 213 patients were enrolled with 2 ineligible and 3 cancels prior to receiving treatment. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced between study arms. The median age was 60 and lung primary the most common (68%). CP at 3 months was more frequent after WBRT + SRS vs. SRS alone (88.0% vs. 61.9% respectively, p = 0.002). There was more deterioration in the WBRT + SRS arm in immediate recall (31% vs. 8%, p = 0.007), delayed recall (51% vs. 20%, p = 0.002), and verbal fluency (19% vs. 2%, p = 0.02). Intracranial tumor control at 6 and 12 months were 66.1% and 50.5% with SRS alone vs. 88.3% and 84.9% with SRS+WBRT (p < 0.001). Median OS was 10.7 for SRS alone vs. 7.5 months for SRS+WBRT respectively (HR = 1.02, p = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS Decline in cognitive function, specifically immediate recall, memory and verbal fluency, was more frequent with the addition of WBRT to SRS. Adjuvant WBRT did not improve OS despite better brain control. Initial treatment with SRS and close monitoring is recommended to better preserve cognitive function in patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases that are amenable to SRS. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION NCT00377156.

Detrimental Effects of Tumor Progression on Cognitive Function of Patients With High-Grade Glioma

PURPOSE There is growing recognition that the primary cause of cognitive deficits in adult patients with primary brain tumors is the tumor itself and more significantly, tumor progression. To assess the cognitive performance of high-grade glioma patients, prospectively collected cognitive performance data were analyzed. PATIENTS AND METHODS We studied 1,244 high-grade brain tumor patients entered onto eight consecutive North Central Cancer Treatment Group treatment trials that used radiation and nitrosourea-based chemotherapy. Imaging studies and Folstein Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores recorded at baseline, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months were analyzed to assess tumor status and cognitive function over time. RESULTS The proportion of patients without tumor progression who experienced clinically significant cognitive deterioration compared with baseline was stable at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months (18%, 16%, 14%, and 13%, respectively). In patients without radiographic evidence of progression, clinically significant deterioration in MMSE scores was a strong predictor of a more rapid time to tumor progression and death. At evaluations preceding interval radiographic evidence of progression, there was significant deterioration in MMSE scores for patients who were to experience progression, whereas the scores remained stable for the patients who did not have tumor progression. CONCLUSION The proportion of high-grade glioma patients with cognitive deterioration over time is stable, most consistent with the constant pressure of tumor progression over time. Although other factors may contribute to cognitive decline, the predominant cause of cognitive decline seems to be subclinical tumor progression that precedes radiographic changes.

Understanding the diagnostic capabilities of cognitive tests.

Statistics (i.e., sensitivity, specificity, hit rates, positive and negative predictive values, odds ratios, and likelihood ratios) that best describe a diagnostic tests ability to classify persons as either impaired or normal, but that are not commonly reported in neuropsychological research, are reviewed. These statistics are applied to Mayo Cognitive Factor Scale scores (MCFS; Smith et al., 1994) to demonstrate information that can be acquired about the diagnostic capabilities of cognitive tests as they are commonly used in clinical settings. Multivariate analyses then generated a statistical model that combines MCFS scores and improves on the diagnostic capabilities of the individual MCFS scores. This model enjoys better diagnostic power than individual scores. It establishes that cognitive testing that uses multiple measures is very good at differentiating normal from impaired cognitive states. Information is also provided that helps clinicians quantify a persons risk for cognitive impairment based on specific cognitive test score(s).

Comparing neuropsychological tasks to optimize brief cognitive batteries for brain tumor clinical trials

Neuropsychological tests are increasingly being used as outcome measures in clinical trials of brain tumor therapies. This study informs development of brief neurocognitive batteries for clinical trials by identifying cognitive tasks that detect effects on a group level in a mixed brain tumor population. This is a retrospective study of brain tumor patients who completed a standardized battery sampling multiple cognitive domains using twelve subtests with widely-used task formats (the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status). Sixty-eight patients with brain tumors were studied (60% high-grade glioma). Forty patients (58.8%) were impaired (>2 standard deviations below published means) on at least one subtest. A combination of four subtests (Figure Copy, Coding, List Recognition, and Story Recall) captured 90% of the impaired subgroup. These results suggest visuoconstruction, processing speed, and verbal memory measures may be the most important domains to assess when evaluating cognitive change in brain tumor clinical trials.

Hepatic Encephalopathy: A Dynamic or Static Condition

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a neuropsychiatric disorder associated with portal hypertension. The mechanism of this disorder is still being characterized and the management has relied primarily on lowering the amount of ammonia present in the gastrointestinal tract or reversing liver disease by replacing the diseased liver. It is, however, not established that all the effects of hepatic encephalopathy are reversed by liver transplantation. In this review, we have outlined the mechanisms underlying HE and the pros and cons of reversibility of HE.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, glioblastoma multiforme, and impact on toxicities and overall survival: The mayo clinic experience

Purpose:The diagnoses of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) and depression are often found to coexist. The impact of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) on treatment-related toxicity and outcome in patients with GBM is unclear. Methods and Materials:We retrospectively reviewed 160 patients with GBM who received treatment at our institution between 1999 and 2008. Those taking an SSRI during treatment for GBM were identified and toxicities were assessed. Results:Median survival for the entire cohort was 1.05 years. A total of 35 patients (21.8%) took an SSRI during initial treatment for GBM. There was no statistical difference in the rate of ≥grade 3 toxicity in patients taking an SSRI when compared with those who were not (11.4% vs. 13.6%, respectively; P = 1.00). Two-year survival in the cohort of patients taking an SSRI was 32% versus 17% in those who were not (P = 0.18). After making adjustment for age, recursive partitioning analysis class, and extent of surgery, absence of an SSRI during treatment was associated with a hazard risk of 1.5 (95% confidence interval = 1.00–2.42; P = 0.05). Conclusions:This retrospective review suggests that concomitant use of an SSRI during treatment does not adversely affect survival. There was no increased toxicity with the use of SSRI concurrent with treatment of newly-diagnosed GBM.

A novel VCP mutation underlies scapuloperoneal muscular dystrophy and dropped head syndrome featuring lobulated fibers

Introduction: Valosin‐containing protein (VCP) is a ubiquitously expressed, multifunctional AAA‐ATPase protein. Its dominant mutations cause hereditary inclusion body myopathy associated with Paget disease of bone and frontotemporal dementia (IBMPFD) or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The pattern of muscle weakness in IBMPFD patients is variable and includes limb‐girdle, scapuloperoneal, distal, or axial distributions. Case Report: We report a 63‐year‐old man with progressive scapuloperoneal weakness, head drop, and hyperCKemia since age 40 years. Electromyography showed myopathic changes and rare myotonic discharges. Muscle biopsy revealed numerous lobulated fibers, few fibers with glycogen accumulation, and rare fibers with polyglucosan bodies. Rimmed vacuoles and congophilic inclusions, often seen in IBMPFD, were absent. VCP sequencing identified a novel heterozygous c. 1160G>A mutation resulting in p.Asn387Ser substitution. Conclusions: Our patient broadens the pathological spectrum of VCP‐myopathy and emphasizes the importance of VCP analysis in patients with scapuloperoneal muscular dystrophy despite the absence of Paget disease, dementia, rimmed vacuoles, or intracellular amyloid deposition. Muscle Nerve 50:295–299, 2014

Same, better, or worse? Neurocognitive effects of radiotherapy for low-grade gliomas remain unknown.

www.thelancet.com/neurology Vol 8 September 2009 779 Low-grade gliomas (LGG) are a heterogeneous group of tumours that occur primarily in young adults. LGGs are slowly progressive, often have few symptoms initially, and frequently undergo anaplastic transformation. The prognosis of patients with LGG is primarily aff ected by their age and the pathological type of the LGG. Many questions remain about the management of LGG, including the roles of aggressive surgical resection and Same, better, or worse? Neurocognitive eff ects of radiotherapy for low-grade gliomas remain unknown endovascular approach. Dissections, vessel perforations, and puncture site complications, such as haematoma or pseudoaneurysms, have also been reported. Mazighi and co-authors reported an intra-arterialrelated complication rate of 4%, consisting of one vessel perforation and one groin haematoma in the combined intravenous–endovascular group. The symptomatic haemorrhage and mortality rates, however, were almost identical in both treatment groups. A concept that is not addressed in detail by Mazighi and co-authors but is worth highlighting is the proper selection of patients for combined intravenous–endovascular treatment. The ideal patient for recanalisation has minimum irreversible injury or a small infarct core. Noncontrast CT can identify irreversible injury by detecting early ischaemic changes, such as hypoattenuation or the loss of grey or white matter diff erentiation. By the use of the Alberta Stroke Program Early CT (ASPECT) score to assess systematically the extent of early ischaemic changes, the size of the ischaemic core can be estimated. This was done in the IMS I patient cohort and compared with the historical NINDS tPA study patients. Those patients with a favourable CT scan at baseline (ASPECT score >7) did particularly well (13% eff ect size) with intravenous–intraarterial therapy compared with only intravenous therapy, as measured by a score on the modifi ed Rankin scale of 0–2. Mazighi and co-authors seemed to select patients who had high ASPECT scores (only seven patients had a baseline ASPECT score <7), which might have contributed to the encouraging results obtained. Although this is not a randomised study, the 13% absolute diff erence in the rates of independent outcome for the combined intravenous–endovascular treatment is encouraging. The intravenous–endovascular treatment group did, however, have less severe initial stroke defi cits (median National Institutes of Health stroke scale [NIHSS] scores 14 vs 16) and earlier initiation of intravenous alteplase compared with the intravenous alteplase alone group (132 min vs 163 min from onset). If the 10% or greater eff ect size is correct, then trials such as IMS III should be suffi ciently powered to detect a benefi t by enrolling 900 patients as planned. Additionally, the endovascular approach continues to develop rapidly; new mechanical devices are available that have the potential to produce early and high recanalisation rates, which should favourably aff ect outcome.