Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Experiences on two different stereotactic radiosurgery modalities of Gamma Knife and Cyberknife in treating brain metastases

  • Clinical Article - Brain Tumors
  • Published:
Acta Neurochirurgica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In this study, we compared the dosimetric properties between Gamma Knife (GK) and Cyberknife (CK), and investigated the clinical implications in treating brain metastases (BMs).

Methods

Between 2011 and 2013, 77 patients treated with either single-fraction GK for small BMs (n = 40) or fractionated CK for large BMs >3 cm (n = 37) were analyzed. Among a total of 160 lesions, 81 were treated with GK (median, 22 Gy) and 38 (large lesions) with three- or five-fraction CK (median, 35 Gy). The median tumor volume was 1.0 cc (IQR, 0.12–4.4 cc) for GK and 17.6 cc (IQR, 12.8–23.7 cc) for fractionated CK. A lesion-to-lesion dosimetric comparison was performed using the identical contour set in both systems.

Results

The mean dose to tumor was significantly higher in GK by 1.25-fold (P < 0.001), whereas normal tissue volume receiving 90–10 % of prescription dose was significantly larger in CK by 1.26-fold (P < 0.001). Nevertheless, no differences were observed in local tumor control (rates at 1 year, 89.7 % vs 87.0 %; P = 0.594) and overall survival (median, 14 vs 16 months; P = 0.493) between GK and fractionated CK groups. The incidences of radiation necrosis were also not different (12.3 % vs 15.8 %; P = 0.443).

Conclusions

Despite slightly inferior dosimetric properties of CK, fractionated CK for large BMs appears to be as effective and safe as single-fraction GK for small BMs, representing fractionation as an effective strategy for enhancing efficacy and moderating toxicity in stereotactic radiosurgery for BMs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Blonigen BJ, Steinmetz RD, Levin L, Lamba MA, Warnick RE, Breneman JC (2010) Irradiated volume as a predictor of brain radionecrosis after linear accelerator stereotactic radiosurgery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 77:996–1001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chang SD, Main W, Martin DP, Gibbs IC, Heilbrun MP (2003) An analysis of the accuracy of the CyberKnife: a robotic frameless stereotactic radiosurgical system. Neurosurgery 52:140–146, discussion 146–147

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Chin LS, Ma L, DiBiase S (2001) Radiation necrosis following gamma knife surgery: a case-controlled comparison of treatment parameters and long-term clinical follow up. J Neurosurg 94:899–904

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fahrig A, Ganslandt O, Lambrecht U, Grabenbauer G, Kleinert G, Sauer R, Hamm K (2007) Hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for brain metastases—results from three different dose concepts. Strahlenther Onkol 183:625–630

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Feuvret L, Vinchon S, Martin V, Lamproglou I, Halley A, Calugaru V, Chea M, Valery CA, Simon JM, Mazeron JJ (2014) Stereotactic radiotherapy for large solitary brain metastases. Cancer Radiother 18:97–106

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Friedman WA (2013) Expanding indications for stereotactic radiosurgery in the treatment of brain metastases. Neurosurgery 60(Suppl 1):9–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gevaert T, Levivier M, Lacornerie T, Verellen D, Engels B, Reynaert N, Tournel K, Duchateau M, Reynders T, Depuydt T, Collen C, Lartigau E, De Ridder M (2013) Dosimetric comparison of different treatment modalities for stereotactic radiosurgery of arteriovenous malformations and acoustic neuromas. Radiother Oncol 106:192–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Giubilei C, Ingrosso G, D’Andrea M, Benassi M, Santoni R (2009) Hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy in combination with whole brain radiotherapy for brain metastases. J Neurooncol 91:207–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hall EJ, Brenner DJ (1993) The radiobiology of radiosurgery: rationale for different treatment regimes for AVMs and malignancies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 25:381–385

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Higuchi Y, Serizawa T, Nagano O, Matsuda S, Ono J, Sato M, Iwadate Y, Saeki N (2009) Three-staged stereotactic radiotherapy without whole brain irradiation for large metastatic brain tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 74:1543–1548

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jiang XS, Xiao JP, Zhang Y, Xu YJ, Li XP, Chen XJ, Huang XD, Yi JL, Gao L, Li YX (2012) Hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for brain metastases larger than three centimeters. Radiat Oncol 7:36

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaul D, Badakhshi H, Gevaert T, Pasemann D, Budach V, Tulaesca C, Gruen A, Prasad V, Levivier M, Kufeld M (2015) Dosimetric comparison of different treatment modalities for stereotactic radiosurgery of meningioma. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 157:559–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim YJ, Cho KH, Kim JY, Lim YK, Min HS, Lee SH, Kim HJ, Gwak HS, Yoo H, Lee SH (2011) Single-dose versus fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for brain metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 81:483–489

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kwon AK, Dibiase SJ, Wang B, Hughes SL, Milcarek B, Zhu Y (2009) Hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for the treatment of brain metastases. Cancer 115:890–898

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Likhacheva A, Pinnix CC, Parikh NR, Allen PK, McAleer MF, Chiu MS, Sulman EP, Mahajan A, Guha-Thakurta N, Prabhu SS, Cahill DP, Luo D, Shiu AS, Brown PD, Chang EL (2013) Predictors of survival in contemporary practice after initial radiosurgery for brain metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 85:656–661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ling CC, Lo YC, Larson DA (1995) Radiobiophysical aspects of stereotaxic radiation treatment of central nervous system diseases. Semin Radiat Oncol 5:192–196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Linskey ME, Andrews DW, Asher AL, Burri SH, Kondziolka D, Robinson PD, Ammirati M, Cobbs CS, Gaspar LE, Loeffler JS, McDermott M, Mehta MP, Mikkelsen T, Olson JJ, Paleologos NA, Patchell RA, Ryken TC, Kalkanis SN (2010) The role of stereotactic radiosurgery in the management of patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline. J Neurooncol 96:45–68

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ma L, Sahgal A, Descovich M, Cho YB, Chuang C, Huang K, Laperriere NJ, Shrieve DC, Larson DA (2010) Equivalence in dose fall-off for isocentric and nonisocentric intracranial treatment modalities and its impact on dose fractionation schemes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 76:943–948

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Macdonald DR, Cascino TL, Schold SC Jr, Cairncross JG (1990) Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. J Clin Oncol 8:1277–1280

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Minniti G, Clarke E, Lanzetta G, Osti MF, Trasimeni G, Bozzao A, Romano A, Enrici RM (2011) Stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases: analysis of outcome and risk of brain radionecrosis. Radiat Oncol 6:48

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Minniti G, D’Angelillo RM, Scaringi C, Trodella LE, Clarke E, Matteucci P, Osti MF, Ramella S, Enrici RM, Trodella L (2014) Fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery for patients with brain metastases. J Neurooncol 117:295–301

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Murai T, Ogino H, Manabe Y, Iwabuchi M, Okumura T, Matsushita Y, Tsuji Y, Suzuki H, Shibamoto Y (2014) Fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy using CyberKnife for the treatment of large brain metastases: a dose escalation study. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 26:151–158

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Park C, Papiez L, Zhang S, Story M, Timmerman RD (2008) Universal survival curve and single fraction equivalent dose: useful tools in understanding potency of ablative radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 70:847–852

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Shaw E, Scott C, Souhami L, Dinapoli R, Kline R, Loeffler J, Farnan N (2000) Single dose radiosurgical treatment of recurrent previously irradiated primary brain tumors and brain metastases: final report of RTOG protocol 90–05. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 47:291–298

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sio TT, Jang S, Lee SW, Curran B, Pyakuryal AP, Sternick ES (2014) Comparing gamma knife and cyberknife in patients with brain metastases. J Appl Clin Med Phys 15:4095

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Tsao M, Xu W, Sahgal A (2012) A meta-analysis evaluating stereotactic radiosurgery, whole-brain radiotherapy, or both for patients presenting with a limited number of brain metastases. Cancer 118:2486–2493

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tsao MN, Rades D, Wirth A, Lo SS, Danielson BL, Gaspar LE, Sperduto PW, Vogelbaum MA, Radawski JD, Wang JZ, Gillin MT, Mohideen N, Hahn CA, Chang EL (2012) Radiotherapeutic and surgical management for newly diagnosed brain metastasis(es): an American Society for Radiation Oncology evidence-based guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol 2:210–225

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wowra B, Muacevic A, Tonn JC (2009) Quality of radiosurgery for single brain metastases with respect to treatment technology: a matched-pair analysis. J Neurooncol 94:69–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Yu C, Jozsef G, Apuzzo ML, Petrovich Z (2003) Dosimetric comparison of CyberKnife with other radiosurgical modalities for an ellipsoidal target. Neurosurgery 53:1155–1162, discussion 1162–1153

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Yu C, Main W, Taylor D, Kuduvalli G, Apuzzo MLJ, Adler JRJ, Wang MY (2004) An anthropomorphic phantom study of the accuracy of CyberKnife spinal radiosurgery. Neurosurgery 55:1138–1149

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Professor Byungchul Cho, PhD at Radiosurgry Center, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea for his technical support and scientific contribution to this study.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Young Hyun Cho.

Additional information

Comment

This study compared both the dosimetric properties and clinical outcome of Gamma Knife treatment for small cerebral metastases with Cyberknife treatment for large metastases. Such studies are usually geared towards trying to prove that one or another technology is superior and it is reassuring to read that we may have passed that stage in development of radiosurgery. Quite rightly, the authors have chosen the use of one or another machine, guided by the perceived advantages of each in the different clinical situations, particularly tumour size.

Naturally, there will be significant dosimetric differences, but at least in this setting they did not result in significant clinical outcome differences. With the study (understandably) not being a randomized one, there will be natural differences in anatomical position of the tumours so one may not be able to draw far-going conclusions. In a clinically vital anatomical position (e.g. brainstem), the wider margin of normal tissues receiving the peripheral dose fall-off may indeed have made a difference.

Of course, this approach means that comparison is made between apples and oranges, small and large metastases. Therefore the only lesson one can learn is that treating large metastases using hypo-fractionated radiosurgery using a Cyberknife is as safe and as effective as treating small lesions with a Gamma Knife, the latter being a more or less universally accepted intervention. This clearly broadens the application of radiosurgery.

Andras Kemeny

Sheffield, UK

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cho, Y.H., Lee, J.M., Lee, D. et al. Experiences on two different stereotactic radiosurgery modalities of Gamma Knife and Cyberknife in treating brain metastases. Acta Neurochir 157, 2003–2009 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-015-2585-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-015-2585-3

Keywords

Navigation