Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Results of a questionnaire regarding practice patterns for the diagnosis and treatment of intracranial radiation necrosis after SRS

  • Clinical Study
  • Published:
Journal of Neuro-Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is an effective treatment option for patients with brain tumors, its increased use has raised concern for increased incidence of radiation necrosis (RN). No established standard or guidelines exists regarding non-invasive techniques to diagnose or treat RN. This study was conducted to assess current patterns of evaluation and treatment of RN among physicians who treat intracranial malignancies. A questionnaire consisting of 20 questions was sent to 3,041 members of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and the Society for Neurologic Oncology (SNO). Questions addressed demographics, utilization of SRS, perceptions regarding RN diagnosis treatment, approach to steroid-refractory RN, and management of two clinical scenarios using Kwiksurvey© software. The survey response rate was 8.74 % (266/3,041). Most respondents practice in an academic and/or university setting (62 %) at a facility that performs SRS (94 %) with a variety of systems. The number of annual cases performed at the participant’s institution varied from <50 to >400, with a wide degree of variability. Most respondents practice at an institution that performs 50–100 cases/year (28 %). The most common range of symptomatic RN seen in clinical practice was 1–5 % (61 %). Most respondents reported that asymptomatic RN occurs in 6–10 % (33 %). Favored non-invasive diagnostic mechanisms were clinical evaluation (37 %) and MRI (19 %). In response to a clinical scenario depicting an asymptomatic patient post-SRS for brain metastasis with an enlarging lesion and edema at the treatment site, most respondents felt the image represented RN or a combination of RN and tumor progression. Most (58 %) favored short-term follow-up with repeat MRI. Ninety-three percent of the respondents initiated steroids as a first-line approach if patient was to develop symptoms. Steroids were the preferred first therapy in symptomatic patients on initial follow-up (81 %). In steroid-refractory patients, most recommend surgical intervention (63 %). Most physicians who responded to this questionnaire believe that post-SRS RN is uncommon (≤10 % of cases). The approach to establish the diagnosis of RN is variable. Steroids are the most commonly utilized first-line treatment for suspected RN. Considerable variation exists in the management of steroid-refractory RN. Additional studies are required to establish guidelines for evaluation and treatment of RN.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andrews DW, Scott CB, Sperduto PW et al (2004) Whole brain radiation therapy with or without stereotactic radiosurgery boost for patients with one to three brain metastases: phase III results of the RTOG 9508 randomised trial. Lancet 363:1665–1672

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Aoyama H, Shirato H, Tago M et al (2006) Stereotactic radiosurgery plus whole-brain radiation therapy vs stereotactic radiosurgery alone for treatment of brain metastases: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 295:2483–2491

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Suh JH (2010) Stereotactic radiosurgery for the management of brain metastases. N Engl J Med 362:1119–1127

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. 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 

  5. Hoefnagels FWA, Lagerwaard FJ, Sanchez E, Haasbeek CJA, Knol DL, Slotman BJ, Vandertop WP (2009) Radiological progression of cerebral metastases after radiosurgery: assessment of perfusion MRI for differentiating between necrosis and recurrence. J Neurol 256:878–887

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 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  Google Scholar 

  7. Andaluz N, Choutka O, Zuccarello M (2010) Trends in the management of adult moyamoya disease in the United States: results of a Nationwide Survey. World Neurosurgery 73:361–364

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Martins Y, Lederman RI, Lowenstein CL, Joffe S, Neville BA, Hastings BT, Abel GA (2012) Increasing response rates from physicians in oncology research: a structured literature review and data from a recent physician survey. Br J Cancer 106:1021–1026

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dawood S, Shaikh AJ, Buchholz TA, Cortes J, Cristofanilli M, Gupta S, Gonzalez-Angulo AM (2012) The use of bevacizumab among women with metastatic breast cancer: a survey on clinical practice and the ongoing controversy. Cancer 118:2780–2786

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Dequesada IM, Quisling RG, Yachnis A, Friedman WA (2008) Can standard magnetic resonance imaging reliably distinguish recurrent tumor from radiation necrosis after radiosurgery for brain metastases? A radiographic-pathological study. Neurosurgery 63:898–903 (discussion 904)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Stockham AL, Tievsky AL, Koyfman SA, Reddy CA, Suh JH, Vogelbaum MA, Barnett GH, Chao ST (2012) Conventional MRI does not reliably distinguish radiation necrosis from tumor recurrence after stereotactic radiosurgery. J Neurooncol 109:149–158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kano H, Kondziolka D, Lobato-Polo J, Zorro O, Flickinger JC, Lunsford LD (2010) T1/T2 matching to differentiate tumor growth from radiation effects after stereotactic radiosurgery. Neurosurgery 66:486–491 (discussion 491–492)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wang S, Tryggestad E, Zhou T, Armour M, Wen Z, Fu D-X, Ford E, van Zijl PCM, Zhou J (2012) Assessment of MRI parameters as imaging biomarkers for radiation necrosis in the rat brain. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 83:e431–e436

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Dooms GC, Hecht S, Brant-Zawadzki M, Berthiaume Y, Norman D, Newton TH (1986) Brain radiation lesions: MR imaging. Radiology 158:149–155

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Tan H, Chen L, Guan Y, Lin X (2011) Comparison of MRI, F-18 FDG, and 11C-choline PET/CT for their potentials in differentiating brain tumor recurrence from brain tumor necrosis following radiotherapy. Clin Nucl Med 36:978–981

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Okamoto S, Shiga T, Hattori N, Kubo N, Takei T, Katoh N, Sawamura Y, Nishijima K, Kuge Y, Tamaki N (2011) Semiquantitative analysis of C-11 methionine PET may distinguish brain tumor recurrence from radiation necrosis even in small lesions. Ann Nucl Med 25:213–220

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Serizawa T, Saeki N, Higuchi Y, Ono J, Matsuda S, Sato M, Yanagisawa M, Iuchi T, Nagano O, Yamaura A (2005) Diagnostic value of thallium-201 chloride single-photon emission computerized tomography in differentiating tumor recurrence from radiation injury after gamma knife surgery for metastatic brain tumors. J Neurosurg 102(Suppl):266–271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Alexiou GA, Fotopoulos AD, Tsiouris S, Voulgaris S, Kyritsis AP (2011) The role of 99mTc-tetrofosmin brain SPECT in differentiating treatment-induced necrosis from recurrent brain tumor. J Neurooncol 104:611

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Matsunaga S, Shuto T, Takase H, Ohtake M, Tomura N, Tanaka T, Sonoda M (2013) Semiquantitative analysis using thallium-201 SPECT for differential diagnosis between tumor recurrence and radiation necrosis after gamma knife surgery for malignant brain tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 85:47–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kimura T, Sako K, Tohyama Y, Aizawa S, Yoshida H, Aburano T, Tanaka K, Tanaka T (2003) Diagnosis and treatment of progressive space-occupying radiation necrosis following stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastasis: value of proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 145:557–564

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Bobek-Billewicz B, Stasik-Pres G, Majchrzak H, Zarudzki L (2010) Differentiation between brain tumor recurrence and radiation injury using perfusion, diffusion-weighted imaging and MR spectroscopy. Folia Neuropathol 48:81–92

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Li H, Li J, Lin C, Liu X, Geng Z, Mo Y, Zhang R, Xie C (2012) An experimental study on acute brain radiation injury: dynamic changes in proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy and the correlation with histopathology. Eur J Radiol 81:3496–3503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Levin VA, Bidaut L, Hou P et al (2011) Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of bevacizumab therapy for radiation necrosis of the central nervous system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 79:1487–1495

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Sanborn MR, Danish SF, Rosenfeld MR, O’Rourke D, Lee JYK (2011) Treatment of steroid refractory, Gamma Knife related radiation necrosis with bevacizumab: case report and review of the literature. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 113:798–802

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wang Y, Pan L, Sheng X, Mao Y, Yao Y, Wang E, Zhang N, Dai J (2012) Reversal of cerebral radiation necrosis with bevacizumab treatment in 17 Chinese patients. Eur J Med Res 17:25

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Matuschek C, Bölke E, Nawatny J, Hoffmann TK, Peiper M, Orth K, Gerber PA, Rusnak E, Lammering G, Budach W (2011) Bevacizumab as a treatment option for radiation-induced cerebral necrosis. Strahlenther Onkol 187:135–139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Jeyaretna DS, Curry WT Jr, Batchelor TT, Stemmer-Rachamimov A, Plotkin SR (2011) Exacerbation of cerebral radiation necrosis by bevacizumab. J Clin Oncol 29:e159–e162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Delanian S, Lefaix J-L (2007) Current management for late normal tissue injury: radiation-induced fibrosis and necrosis. Semin Radiat Oncol 17:99–107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Futran ND, Trotti A, Gwede C (1997) Pentoxifylline in the treatment of radiation-related soft tissue injury: preliminary observations. Laryngoscope 107:391–395

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Hepgül G, Tanrikulu S, Unalp HR, Akguner T, Erbil Y, Olgaç V, Ademoğlu E (2010) Preventive effect of pentoxifylline on acute radiation damage via antioxidant and anti-inflammatory pathways. Dig Dis Sci 55:617–625

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hong JH, Chiang CS, Campbell IL, Sun JR, Withers HR, McBride WH (1995) Induction of acute phase gene expression by brain irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 33:619–626

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Williamson R, Kondziolka D, Kanaan H, Lunsford LD, Flickinger JC (2008) Adverse radiation effects after radiosurgery may benefit from oral vitamin E and pentoxifylline therapy: a pilot study. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 86:359–366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Monaco EA 3rd, Niranjan A, Kano H, Flickinger JC, Kondziolka D, Lunsford LD (2012) Management of adverse radiation effects after radiosurgery. Prog Neurol Surg 25:210–220

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

Abigail Stockham, Chandana Reddy, John Suh, Aryavarta Kumar, Michael Vogelbaum, Erin Murphy None for these authors. Manmeet Ahluwalia: Genentech/Roche (advisory capacity), Gene Barnett Moteris Medical (consultant/equity).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Radiation Oncology Department, Taussig Cancer Center, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Mailstop T-28, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA

    Abigail L. Stockham, Chandana A. Reddy, John H. Suh, Aryavarta Kumar, Erin S. Murphy & Samuel T. Chao

  2. Rose Ella Burkhardt Brain Tumor and Neuro-Oncology Center, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Manmeet Ahluwalia, John H. Suh, Erin S. Murphy & Samuel T. Chao

  3. Neurological Surgery, Rose Ella Burkhardt Brain Tumor and Neuro-Oncology Center, Clinic Cleveland, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Michael A. Vogelbaum & Gene H. Barnett

Authors
  1. Abigail L. Stockham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Manmeet Ahluwalia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chandana A. Reddy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John H. Suh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Aryavarta Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Michael A. Vogelbaum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gene H. Barnett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Erin S. Murphy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Samuel T. Chao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samuel T. Chao.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 747 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 80 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stockham, A.L., Ahluwalia, M., Reddy, C.A. et al. Results of a questionnaire regarding practice patterns for the diagnosis and treatment of intracranial radiation necrosis after SRS. J Neurooncol 115, 469–475 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-013-1248-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-013-1248-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation