Prognostic factors and treatment options in patients with leptomeningeal metastases of different primary tumors: a retrospective analysis
- 366 Downloads
Leptomeningeal metastases (LM) are associated with very poor prognosis and data on outcome are limited. We evaluated prognostic factors and treatment options in patients (pts) with LM of different malignancies in a single center experience.
Single center data on characteristics, treatment and outcome of 135 consecutive pts (73 solid tumors and 62 hematologic malignancies) with LM between 1989 and 2005 were retrospectively analyzed.
Treatment consisted of systemic chemotherapy (SC) plus intrathecal chemotherapy (ITC) in 28%, ITC alone in 22%, radiotherapy (RT) plus ITC in 12% and other modalities (SC, RT, SC + RT) in 7%. Thirteen percent of pts received supportive care only (4% not evaluable on treatment). Median survival from diagnosis of LM was 2.5 months. Univariate analysis revealed age >50, interval between diagnosis of primary tumor and LM ≤12 months, lung cancer and malignant melanoma, and Karnofsky performance status ≤70 as significant negative predictors for overall survival. Positive predictive factors were response in cerebrospinal fluid and application of SC. In multivariate analysis, only SC was significantly associated with longer median survival (5.6 vs. 1.7 months).
In patients with LM an age >50, performance status ≤70%, interval between diagnosis of primary tumor and LM ≤12 months, primary tumor (lung cancer, malignant melanoma) and lack of cytologic response present negative prognostic factors. Systemic chemotherapy is significantly associated with longer survival time than local treatment modalities.
KeywordsLeptomeningeal metastases Meningeosis carcinomatosa Intrathecal chemotherapy Radiotherapy
Conflict of interest statement
We all declare that none of us has any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could inappropriately influence the work on the underlying retrospective analysis titled “Prognostic factors and treatment options in patients with leptomeningeal metastases of different primary tumors.”
- De Angeles LM, Boutros D (2005) Leptomeningeal metastases. Cancer Invest 23:145–154Google Scholar
- Fizazi K, Asselain B, Vincent-Salomon A, Jouve M, Dieras V, Palangie T, Beuzeboc P, Dorval T, Pouillart P (1996) Meningeal carcinomatosis in patients with breast carcinoma. Clinical features, prognostic factors, and results of a high-dose intrathecal methotrexate regimen. Cancer 77:1315–1323CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Glantz MJ, LaFollette S, Jaeckle KA, Shapiro W, Swinnen L, Rozental JR, Phuphanich S, Rogers LR, Gutheil JC, Batchelor T, Lyter D, Chamberlain MC, Maria BL, Schiffer C, Bashir R, Thomas D, Cowens W, Howell SB (1999) Randomized trial of a slow-release versus a standard formulation of cytarabin for the intrathecal treatment of lymphomatous meningitis. J Clin Oncol 17:3110–3116PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Grossman SA, Finkelstein DM, Ruckdeschel JC, Trump DL, Moynihan T, Ettinger DS for the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (1993) Randomized prospective comparison of intraventricular methotrexate and thiotepa in patients with previously untreated neoplastic meningitis. J Clin Oncol 11:561–569PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kim DY, Lee KW, Yun T, Park SR, Jung JY, Kim DW, Kim TY, Heo DS, Bang YJ, Kim NK (2003) Comparison of intrathecal chemotherapy for leptomeningeal carcinomatosis of a solid tumor: methotrexate alone versus methotrexate in combination with cytosine arabinoside and hydrocortisone. Jpn J Clin Oncol 33:608–612CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar