TY - JOUR
T1 - Single fraction radiosurgery, fractionated radiosurgery, and conventional radiotherapy for spinal oligometastasis (SAFFRON)
T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Singh, Raj
AU - Lehrer, Eric J.
AU - Dahshan, Basem
AU - Palmer, Joshua D.
AU - Sahgal, Arjun
AU - Gerszten, Peter C.
AU - Zaorsky, Nicholas G.
AU - Trifiletti, Daniel M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2020/5
Y1 - 2020/5
N2 - Background and purpose: To perform a systematic review/meta-analysis of outcomes for patients with spinal metastases treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) (either single-fraction (SF-SRS) or multiple-fraction (MF-SRS)) or conventional radiotherapy (RT). Materials and methods: Thirty-seven studies were identified. Primary outcomes were 1-year local control (LC) and acute/late grade 3–5 toxicities (including vertebral compression fractures (VCF)). Weighted random effects meta-analyses using the DerSimonian and Laird methods and meta-regressions were conducted to characterize and compare effect sizes. Mixed effects regression models were used in dose analyses. Results: A total of 3237 patients with 4911 lesions were included; 43.8%, 19.7%, and 36.5% of lesions received SF-SRS, MF-SRS, or RT, respectively. SF-SRS resulted in improved 1-year LC (92.9% (95% CI: 86.4–97.4%); p = 0.007) compared to RT (81.0% (95% CI: 69.2–90.5%)) with no difference between MF-SRS (82.1%; p = 0.86) and RT. On subgroup analysis of de novo metastases, superior 1-year LC following SF-SRS (95.5% (95% CI: 87.4–99.6%)) was maintained compared to RT (83.6% (95% CI: 70.4–93.5%); p = 0.007). A 4.7% increase in LC was noted for each 10 Gy10 increase in biologically effective dose (BED10, assuming an alpha/beta = 10) with SRS (p < 0.001). No difference in toxicities were found between SF-SRS (0.4%), MF-SRS (0.2%), or RT (0%). Higher VCF rates were noted following SF-SRS (19.5%) vs. MF-SRS (9.6%; p = 0.039)) with no correlation between dose and VCF rates. Conclusion: SF-SRS resulted in superior LC with a roughly 5% LC benefit for every 10 Gy10 increase in BED10 with higher VCF rates compared to MF-SRS. If LC is the goal of treatment, then SRS may be a preferred treatment modality. However, these results are hypothesis-generating, and prospective randomized clinical trials are indicated to definitively address the question of whether SRS results in improved LC compared to RT.
AB - Background and purpose: To perform a systematic review/meta-analysis of outcomes for patients with spinal metastases treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) (either single-fraction (SF-SRS) or multiple-fraction (MF-SRS)) or conventional radiotherapy (RT). Materials and methods: Thirty-seven studies were identified. Primary outcomes were 1-year local control (LC) and acute/late grade 3–5 toxicities (including vertebral compression fractures (VCF)). Weighted random effects meta-analyses using the DerSimonian and Laird methods and meta-regressions were conducted to characterize and compare effect sizes. Mixed effects regression models were used in dose analyses. Results: A total of 3237 patients with 4911 lesions were included; 43.8%, 19.7%, and 36.5% of lesions received SF-SRS, MF-SRS, or RT, respectively. SF-SRS resulted in improved 1-year LC (92.9% (95% CI: 86.4–97.4%); p = 0.007) compared to RT (81.0% (95% CI: 69.2–90.5%)) with no difference between MF-SRS (82.1%; p = 0.86) and RT. On subgroup analysis of de novo metastases, superior 1-year LC following SF-SRS (95.5% (95% CI: 87.4–99.6%)) was maintained compared to RT (83.6% (95% CI: 70.4–93.5%); p = 0.007). A 4.7% increase in LC was noted for each 10 Gy10 increase in biologically effective dose (BED10, assuming an alpha/beta = 10) with SRS (p < 0.001). No difference in toxicities were found between SF-SRS (0.4%), MF-SRS (0.2%), or RT (0%). Higher VCF rates were noted following SF-SRS (19.5%) vs. MF-SRS (9.6%; p = 0.039)) with no correlation between dose and VCF rates. Conclusion: SF-SRS resulted in superior LC with a roughly 5% LC benefit for every 10 Gy10 increase in BED10 with higher VCF rates compared to MF-SRS. If LC is the goal of treatment, then SRS may be a preferred treatment modality. However, these results are hypothesis-generating, and prospective randomized clinical trials are indicated to definitively address the question of whether SRS results in improved LC compared to RT.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85080093607&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85080093607&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.01.030
DO - 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.01.030
M3 - Review article
C2 - 32114269
AN - SCOPUS:85080093607
SN - 0167-8140
VL - 146
SP - 76
EP - 89
JO - Radiotherapy and Oncology
JF - Radiotherapy and Oncology
ER -