JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW

Single fraction radiosurgery, fractionated radiosurgery, and conventional radiotherapy for spinal oligometastasis (SAFFRON): A systematic review and meta-analysis

Raj Singh, Eric J Lehrer, Basem Dahshan, Joshua D Palmer, Arjun Sahgal, Peter C Gerszten, Nicholas G Zaorsky, Daniel M Trifiletti
Radiotherapy and Oncology 2020, 146: 76-89
32114269

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.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
32114269
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"