Stereotactic Radiosurgery vs Conventional Radiotherapy for Localized Vertebral Metastases of the Spine

Author:

Ryu Samuel1,Deshmukh Snehal23,Timmerman Robert D.4,Movsas Benjamin5,Gerszten Peter6,Yin Fang-Fang7,Dicker Adam8,Abraham Christopher D.9,Zhong Jim10,Shiao Stephen L.11,Tuli Richard12,Desai Anand13,Mell Loren K.14,Iyengar Puneeth4,Hitchcock Ying J.15,Allen Aaron Max16,Burton Steven6,Brown Doris17,Sharp Hadley J.18,Dunlap Neal E.19,Siddiqui M. Salim5,Chen Timothy H.20,Pugh Stephanie L.23,Kachnic Lisa A.21

Affiliation:

1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Stony Brook University Health Science Center, Stony Brook, New York

2. NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

3. American College of Radiology, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

4. University of Texas Southwestern/Simmons Cancer Center–Dallas

5. Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan

6. University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

7. Duke University, Durham, North Carolina

8. Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

9. Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri

10. Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia

11. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California

12. University of South Florida, Tampa

13. Summa Akron City Hospital/Cooper Cancer Center, Akron, Ohio

14. University of California San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla

15. Huntsman Cancer Institute/University of Utah, Salt Lake City

16. Rabin Medical Center, Tikvah, Illinois

17. Wake Forest University Health Sciences, Winston Salem, North Carolina

18. Levine Cancer Institute, Charlotte, North Carolina

19. The James Graham Brown Cancer Center at University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky

20. Capital Health Medical Center, Pennington, New Jersey

21. Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York

Abstract

ImportanceSpine metastasis can be treated with high-dose radiation therapy with advanced delivery technology for long-term tumor and pain control.ObjectiveTo assess whether patient-reported pain relief was improved with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) as compared with conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) for patients with 1 to 3 sites of vertebral metastases.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn this randomized clinical trial, patients with 1 to 3 vertebral metastases were randomized 2:1 to the SRS or cEBRT groups. This NRG 0631 phase 3 study was performed as multi-institutional enrollment within NRG Oncology. Eligibility criteria included the following: (1) solitary vertebral metastasis, (2) 2 contiguous vertebral levels involved, or (3) maximum of 3 separate sites. Each site may involve up to 2 contiguous vertebral bodies. A total of 353 patients enrolled in the trial, and 339 patients were analyzed. This analysis includes data extracted on March 9, 2020.InterventionsPatients randomized to the SRS group were treated with a single dose of 16 or 18 Gy (to convert to rad, multiply by 100) given to the involved vertebral level(s) only, not including any additional spine levels. Patients assigned to cEBRT were treated with 8 Gy given to the involved vertebra plus 1 additional vertebra above and below.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary end point was patient-reported pain response defined as at least a 3-point improvement on the Numerical Rating Pain Scale (NRPS) without worsening in pain at the secondary site(s) or the use of pain medication. Secondary end points included treatment-related toxic effects, quality of life, and long-term effects on vertebral bone and spinal cord.ResultsA total of 339 patients (mean [SD] age of SRS group vs cEBRT group, respectively, 61.9 [13.1] years vs 63.7 [11.9] years; 114 [54.5%] male in SRS group vs 70 [53.8%] male in cEBRT group) were analyzed. The baseline mean (SD) pain score at the index vertebra was 6.06 (2.61) in the SRS group and 5.88 (2.41) in the cEBRT group. The primary end point of pain response at 3 months favored cEBRT (41.3% for SRS vs 60.5% for cEBRT; difference, −19 percentage points; 95% CI, −32.9 to −5.5; 1-sidedP = .99; 2-sidedP = .01). Zubrod score (a measure of performance status ranging from 0 to 4, with 0 being fully functional and asymptomatic, and 4 being bedridden) was the significant factor influencing pain response. There were no differences in the proportion of acute or late adverse effects. Vertebral compression fracture at 24 months was 19.5% with SRS and 21.6% with cEBRT (P = .59). There were no spinal cord complications reported at 24 months.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, superiority of SRS for the primary end point of patient-reported pain response at 3 months was not found, and there were no spinal cord complications at 2 years after SRS. This finding may inform further investigation of using spine radiosurgery in the setting of oligometastases, where durability of cancer control is essential.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT00922974

Publisher

American Medical Association (AMA)

Subject

Oncology,Cancer Research

Cited by 42 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3