BACKGROUND: Whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is a standard and effective approach for brain metastases, but it is linked to neurocognitive complications, specifically issues related to the hippocampus. Innovative strategies are being explored to enhance outcomes. However, a consensus is yet to be reached in this field. Our aim is to investigate the efficacy and safety of WBRT combined with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB), memantine, and hippocampal avoidance (HA) techniques in treatment of brain metastases.
METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we comprehensively searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane for studies reporting the efficacy and toxicity of WBRT-based combination therapies from inception to September 19, 2023. Data were pooled using random-effects models. Results were reported as risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) for dichotomous outcomes, along with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic.
RESULTS: Among 2175 articles, 29 studies involving 3460 patients were included. The meta-analysis revealed that compared to WBRT alone, combination therapies significantly mitigated neurocognitive function decline (RD = -0.09, 95% CI [-0.18-0.01]; P = 0.03) and intracranial control failure (RR = 0.86, 95% CI [0.52-1.44]; P = 0.02), without increasing the risk of hippocampal recurrence or high-grade toxicities. Notably, HA-WBRT + SIB/memantine demonstrated improved neurocognitive outcomes and survival benefits.
CONCLUSIONS: WBRT-based combination therapies demonstrate improved efficacy and comparable safety to WBRT alone, with specific emphasis on the effectiveness of HA-WBRT + Memantine and HA-WBRT + SIB in optimizing therapeutic outcomes for brain metastases.

Because of improved survival of cancer patients, more patients irradiated for brain metastases develop intracerebral recurrences requiring subsequent courses of radiotherapy. Five studies focused on reirradiation with whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) after initial WBRT for brain metastases. Following the second WBRT course, improvement of clinical symptoms was found in 31-68% of patients. Rates of neurotoxicity, such as encephalopathy or cognitive decline, were reported in two studies (1.4% and 32%). In another study, severe or unexpected adverse events were not observed. Survival following the second WBRT course was generally poor, with median survival times of 2.9-4.1 months. The survival prognosis of patients receiving two courses of WBRT can be estimated by a scoring tool considering five prognostic factors. Three studies investigated reirradiation with single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SF-SRS) following primary WBRT. One-year local control rates were 74-91%, and median survival times ranged between 7.8 and 14 months. Rates of radiation necrosis (RN) after reirradiation were 0-6%. Seven studies were considered that investigated re-treatment with SF-SRS or fractionated stereotactic radiation therapy (FSRT) following initial SF-SRS or FSRT. One-year local control rates were 60-88%, and the median survival times ranged between 8.3 and 25 months. During follow-up after reirradiation, rates of overall (asymptomatic or symptomatic) RN ranged between 12.5% and 30.4%. Symptomatic RN occurred in 4.3% to 23.9% of cases (patients or lesions). The risk of RN associated with symptoms and/or requiring surgery or corticosteroids appears lower after reirradiation with FSRT when compared to SF-SRS. Other potential risk factors of RN include the volume of overlap of normal tissue receiving 12 Gy at the first course and 18 Gy at the second course of SF-SRS, maximum doses ≥40 Gy of the first or the second SF-SRS courses, V12 Gy >9 cm3 of the second course, initial treatment with SF-SRS, volume of normal brain receiving 5 Gy during reirradiation with FSRT, and systemic treatment. Cumulative EQD2 ≤100-120 Gy2 to brain, <100 Gy2 to brainstem, and <75 Gy2 to chiasm and optic nerves may be considered safe. Since most studies were retrospective in nature, prospective trials are required to better define safety and efficacy of reirradiation for recurrent or progressive brain metastases.

UNASSIGNED: Intracranial metastasis that failed standard systematic treatment is common in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), contributing significantly to morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anlotinib combined with whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) for NSCLC with brain metastases (BMs) that progressed or developed after at least one line of prior treatment and compare the outcomes with that of the contemporary institutional control.
UNASSIGNED: NSCLC patients with multiple BMs that progressed or developed after at least one line of prior systematic treatment and treated with WBRT subsequently between 2019 and 2021 were selected retrospectively for analysis. Based on whether concurrent anlotinib had been used in combination with WBRT, the cases were divided into the anlotinib group and control group. The primary endpoints were intracranial progression-free survival (iPFS) and safety.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 76 patients met the inclusion criteria of the study. Of the 76 patients, 34 received concurrent WBRT and anlotinib followed by anlotinib maintenance and 42 were treated with WBRT alone or in combination with other systemic agents at the physicians\' discretion. The median follow-up for the entire cohort was 21 months. The median iPFS for the anlotinib and control group was 6.7 months (95% CI, 4.6-9.9) and 5.3 months (95% CI, 4.0-6.5), respectively (log-rank P = 0.04). There was no difference in overall survival between the two groups (log-rank P = 0.38). In the anlotinib group, treatment-related adverse events were reported in 15 patients (44.1%), with acute or late grade 3-5 adverse events identified in 14.7% of patients (n = 5).
UNASSIGNED: WBRT plus anlotinib, as a convenient chemo-free regimen, may represent an overall safe and effective procedure in advanced NSCLC with multiple BMs that progressed or developed after standard systematic treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with malignant melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) have poor prognoses. For MBMs, the Melanoma-molGPA is the most widely used predictive score, but its predictive value remains uncertain in patients fully treated with radiotherapy. We identified MBMs prognostic factors and modified the prognostic scoring model.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients diagnosed with MBMs between December 2010 and November 2021 for prognostic factors influencing overall survival (OS) by univariate and multivariate analyses. Nomogram plots were based on Cox regression modeling. We evaluated overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log-rank tests.
RESULTS: The median OS (mOS) was 7.9 months. On multivariate analysis, BRAF mutation status (p < 0.001), number of brain metastases (BM) (p < 0.001), presence of liver metastases (p < 0.001), brain metastases with a midline shift (p = 0.003), Karnofsky Performance Score (p = 0.02), and lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (p < 0.0001) were independent OS predictors. These were incorporated into a modified risk-stratification model. Overall, whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) did not significantly affect mOS (mOS, 6.89 vs. 8.83 months; p = 0.07). After risk stratification using our model, WBRT resulted in no significant survival benefit in the low-risk group (mOS 10.07 vs. 13.1 months; p = 0.71) but significantly worse prognosis in the high-risk group (mOS, 2.37 vs. 6.92 months; p = 0.026).
CONCLUSIONS: We propose a modified model that accurately distinguishes the prognosis of patients with MBMs and guides decision-making for radiotherapy. Based on this novel model, WBRT should be cautiously selected for high-risk patients.

Aim: To evaluate the relationship between psychological distress and the efficacy of whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) in advanced brain metastasis patients. Methods: Brain metastasis patients (40 with psychological distress and 47 without psychological distress) completed distress thermometer tests before WBRT, and progression-free survival (PFS) was acquired during the follow-up period. Results: Psychological distress was a risk factor for poorer PFS in patients treated with WBRT (p < 0.01). The PFS of survivors who underwent WBRT was superior for those without psychological distress (hazard ratio: 0.295; 95% CI: 0.173-0.500; p < 0.01). Conclusion: The survival of brain metastasis patients receiving WBRT was influenced by psychological distress, which negatively affected the treatment outcome and is likely to be a potential risk indicator in advanced cancer patients receiving WBRT.
Distress thermometer tests were carried out 1 week before whole-brain radiotherapy to assess psychological distress in 87 brain metastasis patients. The results demonstrated that the progression-free survival of brain metastasis patients with psychological distress was obviously inferior to that of patients without psychological distress. The negative effects of psychological distress could be recognized in advanced patients with brain metastases after whole-brain radiotherapy. Psychological distress is likely to be a potential risk indicator for radiotherapy in brain metastasis patients.

OBJECTIVE: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has become a standard approach for the treatment of patients with few metastatic brain lesions. However, the optimal treatment approach for the use radiotherapy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with brain metastases (BMs) remain unclear. This study aimed to compare the survival outcomes and intracranial local control in NSCLC patients with 1-4 BMs who are treated with SRS using linear accelerators (LINAC-SRS), whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), or WBRT plus radiotherapy boost (WBRT + RTB).
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 156 NSCLC patients with 1-4 BMs who received LINAC-SRS, WBRT, and WBRT + RTB. The median overall survival (OS), intracranial progression-free survival (iPFS), and distant brain failure-free survival (DBF-FS) and related prognostic factors were analyzed.
RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 31.6 months. The median OS times in the LINAC-SRS, WBRT, and WBRT + RTB groups were not reached, 33.3 months and 27.9 months, respectively. The difference in survival rate was non-significant (P = 0.909). The 2-year iPFS and DBF-FS rates in the LINAC-SRS, WBRT and WBRT + RTB groups were 51.6% and 37.5%; 42.0% and 50.4%; and 51.1% and 56.1%, respectively. There was no significant difference in 2-year iPFS or DBF-FS among the three groups (P = 0.572 for iPFS, P = 0.628 for DBF-FS). Multivariate analysis showed that the independent adverse prognostic factors for OS, iPFS, and DBF-FS were neurological symptoms, recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) class, and targeted therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: LINAC-SRS did not result in significantly superior survival times or intracranial local control compared to WBRT or WBRT + RTB in the treatment of NSCLC patients with 1-4 BMs.

BACKGROUND: Existing evidence demonstrates that radiotherapy and antiangiogenic drugs have synergistic antitumour effects and may be a promising treatment option for patients with solid tumour. Thus, we performed a phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) combined with anlotinib for multiple brain metastases (BMs) from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without targetable driver mutations.
METHODS: Patients with multiple BMs (⩾3) from NSCLC without targetable driver mutations who failed to respond to at least first-line chemotherapy were enrolled. Eligible patients received WBRT (30 Gy/10 f, 5 f/week) and anlotinib (12 mg/day, day 1-14 of 21 days per cycle, 2 cycles) until disease progression or treatment intolerance. The primary endpoint was intracranial objective response rate (iORR) and secondary endpoints included intracranial progression-free survival (iPFS), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and safety.
RESULTS: Between April 2019 and March 2021, 21 patients were enrolled in the trial, of which 12 were aged ⩾60 years (57.1%), 13 were men (61.9%), 7 had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of 0 to 1 (81.0%), 18 had adenocarcinoma (85.7%), and 11 had ⩾6 BMs (52.4%). Of the 21 evaluable patients, the iORR was 66.7% (1 complete response + 13 partial response [PR]), and 28.6% (7PR) had extracerebral lesions. The DCRs for intracerebral and extracerebral lesions were 90.5% and 81.0%, respectively. The iPFS and OS were 10.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0-24.8 months) and 13.4 months (95% CI: 0-27.9 months), respectively. The most frequently observed toxicities were loss of appetite (61.9%), hypertension (52.4%), fatigue (47.6%), diarrhoea (28.6%), vomiting (19.0%), dizziness (42.9%), and headache (33.3%). None of the patients developed grade 4 or higher grade adverse reactions.
CONCLUSIONS: Anlotinib combined with WBRT is effective and well tolerated in patients with multiple BMs (⩾3) from NSCLC without targetable driver mutations. Therefore, further validation studies are required.Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR 1900027769.

OBJECTIVE: The reviewed literature supports a treatment regimen for primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) that includes induction chemotherapy, followed by one consolidation therapy. High-dose chemotherapy supported by autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) is the most studied option, but its effects are controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ASCT for newly diagnosed PCNSL by means of a meta-analysis.
METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for studies published until May 20, 2021. Included studies were prospective studies of patients with newly diagnosed PCNSL treated with ASCT. The pooled rates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined for all outcomes. Subgroup analysis was conducted to compare the relative risk (RR) with 95% CIs for the complete remission (CR) rate and the hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS: Thirteen prospective studies including 348 patients were analyzed. The pooled CR rate, overall response rate, and relapse rate were 80% (95% CI, 71-88%, I2 = 67.06%, p = 0.00), 95% (95% CI, 87-100%, I2 = 73.65%, p= 0.00), and 19% (95% CI, 15-24%, I2 = 76.18%, p = 0.00), respectively. The pooled 2- and 5-year PFS and OS rates were 74% (95% CI, 68-80%, I2 = 3.90%), 65% (95% CI, 51-77%, I2 = 74.61%), 80% (95% CI, 72-88%, I2 = 57.54%), and 69% (95% CI, 53-83%, I2 = 83.89%), respectively. Hematological toxicity and infections were more common adverse events above grade 3. The pooled treatment-related mortality was 3% (95% CI, 1-6%, I2 = 28.18%, p = 0.16). In the group analysis of ASCT compared with whole-brain radiotherapy, there were no significant differences in the CR rate (RR, 1.00, 95% CI, 0.88-1.14, p = 0.971), relapse rate (RR, 0.44, 95% CI, 0.06-3.10, p = 0.408), PFS (HR, 1.28, 95% CI, 0.81-2.01, p = 0.29), or OS (HR, 1.62, 95% CI, 0.97-2.69, p = 0.06). Cognitive functions were preserved or improved after ASCT.
CONCLUSIONS: ASCT is a feasible approach for consolidation with good tolerability for newly diagnosed PCNSL patients. High-quality randomized controlled trials are still needed to confirm the effects of ASCT.
BACKGROUND: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42021268422.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present work was to investigate the response and safety of whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) plus temozolomide (TMZ) for patients with brain metastases of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
METHODS: The electronic databases of Pubmed, EMbase, Cochrane, Wangfang, china national knowledge infrastructure (CNKI), and Google scholar were systematically searched to identify the prospective randomized trials relevant to WBRT plus TMZ for patients with brain metastases of NSCLC. The data associated with treatment response and toxicity were extracted from original included studies. The relative risk (RR) for treatment response and toxicity between WBRT+TMZ and WBRT alone was pooled by fixed or random effect model. Publication bias was investigated by Begg\'s funnel plot and Egger\'s line regression test.
RESULTS: Twenty-five clinical trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results showed WBRT+TMZ can significant improve the objective response rate (ORR) compared with WBRT alone (RR = 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32-1.55, p < 0.05) under a fixed effect model. WBRT+TMZ significantly increased the III-IV hematological toxicity compared to WBRT alone (RR = 1.66, 95% CI 1.12-2.54, p < 0.05) in the fixed effect model. Grade III-IV gastrointestinal toxicity was increased in WBRT+TMZ compared to WBRT alone (RR = 1.72, 95% CI 1.29-2.30, p < 0.05). Begg\'s funnel plot and Egger\'s line regression test indicated publication bias.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the present work, WBRT+TMZ can improve the ORR for brain metastases of NSCLC, but the risk of treatment-associated grade III/IV hematological toxicity and gastrointestinal toxicity were also increased compared to WBRT alone.

Objective: To investigate the features of helical tomotherapy and co-planar dual Arcs volumetric-modulated arc therapy during prophylactic cranial irradiation associated with bilateral hippocampal tissue sparing. Materials and methods: Helical tomotherapy and co-planar dual arcs volumetric-modulated arc therapy treatment plans were generated with a dose of 30 Gy/10 fractions in 16 patients treated with prophylactic cranial irradiation. The dose to the bilateral hippocampal tissues, organs at risk, and planning target volume were determined when the average dose of bilateral hippocampal tissues was reduced by approximately 4 Gy as an observation point. Changes in dosimetry when sparing the bilateral hippocampal tissues were determined for both modalities. Results: When bilateral hippocampal tissues were restricted to 8 Gy, D40%mean-bilateral hippocampal tissues = 7.64 ± 0.41 Gy in helical tomotherapy, while D40%mean-bilateral hippocampal tissues = 10.96 ± 0.38 Gy in co-planar dual arcs volumetric-modulated arc therapy volumetric-modulated arc therapy. Helical tomotherapy was associated with significantly lower doses to organs at risk, including Dmean-bilateral hippocampal tissues (P = .03), D98%-bilateral hippocampal tissues (P = .01), D2%-bilateral hippocampal tissues (P = .01), Dmean-inner ear (P = .02), Dmean-parotid glands (P = .02), Dmax-lens (P = .02), and Dmax-brainstem (P = .02), but not Dmax-optic nerves (P = .87). Helical tomotherapy provided better target coverage, with lower average D2%-PTV (P = .02), higher average D98%-PTV (P = .02), and better conformal index (0.87 vs 0.84, P = .02) and homogeneity index (0.15 vs 0.21, P = .05). With smaller bilateral hippocampal tissues doses, the planning target volume dose changed across 3 dosimetry regions for both modalities; the plateau region (>20.0 Gy for helical tomotherapy versus >16.0 Gy for co-planar dual arcs volumetric-modulated arc therapy), gradient region (20.0-12.0 Gy vs 16.0-11.0 Gy), and falling region (<12.0 Gy vs <11.0 Gy). The average delivery duration of helical tomotherapy was almost 7.7 times longer than that of co-planar dual arcs volumetric-modulated arc therapy. Conclusions: Helical tomotherapy was better at sparing the bilateral hippocampal tissues and organs at risk and had better target coverage but a significantly longer treatment duration than co-planar dual arcs volumetric-modulated arc therapy. Further dose decreases in the bilateral hippocampal tissues would yield worse target dose coverage.