Sheehan, Jason

Objective: To characterize patient outcomes after primary stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for the management of sporadic facial nerve schwannoma. Study design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Six tertiary referral centers across the United States and United Kingdom. Patients: Adults undergoing SRS from 2000 through 2023 for sporadic facial nerve schwannoma along any segment of the facial nerve were included. Patients with NF2-related schwannomatosis were excluded. Intervention: Stereotactic radiosurgery. Main outcome measure: Long-term tumor control. Results: Among 60 patients meeting inclusion, the median age at SRS was 52 years (IQR: 41 to 64) with a median tumor size of 19.5 mm (IQR: 14.7 to 22.8). Tumors commonly involved the internal auditory canal (73%), cisternal (49%), geniculate/labyrinthine (47%), and tympanic segments (22%). Two patients experienced SRS failure and underwent salvage treatment; salvage-free survival rates (95% CI; number still at risk) at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years after SRS were 100% (100 to 100; 55), 100% (100 to 100; 36), 100% (100 to 100; 18), and 87% (72 to 100; 9), respectively. Among 31 (52%) patients with House-Brackmann (HB) grade I facial function at presentation, only 6 demonstrated worse facial function at a median of 3.2 years (IQR: 1.7 to 6.6) after SRS. Of 18 patients with serviceable hearing (AAO-HNS class A/B) at SRS, 13 maintained serviceable hearing at a median of 1.0 years (IQR: 0.5 to 4.9) of post-SRS audiometric follow-up. Conclusions: Durable tumor control after primary SRS for sporadic facial nerve schwannoma is achieved in most patients. Among those with HB grade I facial function at presentation, treatment with SRS harbors limited additional risk of facial paresis beyond observation alone.

Abstract BACKGROUND Ovarian cancer rarely metastasises to the brain, thus studies reporting the outcomes of affected patients are lacking. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is now the mainstay of management for patients with brain metastases (BM) from most primary sites, but little evidence of its efficacy in ovarian cancer is available. The current study was undertaken to provide guidance for SRS management using pooled data from multiple institutions. MATERIAL AND METHODS Centers participating in the IRRF (International Radiosurgery Research Foundation) were asked to provide outcome data for patients who had SRS for ovarian cancer brain metastases between 2020 and 2024 and at least one clinical and imaging follow-up after the procedure. Primary endpoints included survival from SRS, local tumor response according to RANO-BM criteria and occurrence of adverse radiation effects (ARE). Cox regression analyses were performed to identify variables impact each endpoint. RESULTS 128 patients had SRS for a total of 532 BM treated. Epithelial histology was the most common (91%). Median age at SRS was 62 years (IQR 56-70). Median KPS was 80% (IQR 80-90%) and 71.9% of patients had neurological symptoms at presentation. Other active systemic metastases were present in 41.4%. The median number of treated BM was 2 (IQR1-3) and the median cumulative treatment volume was 6 cc (IQR 2-12.9). The median margin dose was 18 Gy (IQR 16-20). At last follow-up, 19.5% of patients were still alive. The median overall survival (OS) after SRS was 27 months, and 6-, 12- and 24-month OS was 83.8%, 74.2% and 52.2%, respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed that increasing age at SRS (HR 1.02, p=0.05), active systemic metastases (HR 2, p=0.005) and increasing number of brain metastases (HR 1.05, p=0.04) were associated with worse survival, while repeating SRS (HR 0.4, p=0.002) led to improved survival. Local failure occurred in 12.8% of treated BM. Actuarial progression-free survival (PFS) at 6, 12 and 24 months was 92.3%, 86.6% and 70.3%, respectively. Only prior WBRT (HR 4.36, p=0.03) led to worse local control on multivariate analyses. New remote BM appeared in 49.5% of patients and 14.5% suffered from leptomeningeal dissemination. ARE were seen in 12.1% of BM but were symptomatic in only 3.2%. On multivariate analyses, prior SRS (HR 3.13, p=0.002) was associated with increased risk of ARE. CONCLUSION Ovarian cancer brain metastases can be safely and effectively managed with SRS as the primary treatment modality in most patients.

Background and objectives Arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) with perinidal aneurysms and single draining vein are associated with an elevated risk of rupture and increased procedural complexity. The role of preoperative embolization in this high-risk anatomical subset remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of microsurgery with preoperative embolization, compared with microsurgery alone in patients with such AVMs. Methods We conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis of an AVM registry from the MISTA (Multicenter International Study for Treatment of Brain AVMs) consortium and included AVMs with perinidal aneurysms and a single draining vein. Baseline characteristics, angiographic outcomes, functional outcomes, and complication rates were compared. Propensity score weighting (PSW) using the covariate balancing method was applied to adjust for baseline differences. Results Out of a total of 1919 patients, 65 met the inclusion criteria; 45 patients underwent preoperative embolization followed by microsurgery, and 20 underwent microsurgery alone. After adjustment, complete obliteration rates were similar between groups (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.04 to 16.33, P=0.92), as were rates of functional independence at discharge and follow-up. Overall complication, symptomatic complication, and mortality rates did not differ significantly between groups. However, permanent complications were significantly lower in patients with preoperative embolization (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.004 to 0.84, P=0.03). Discussion In patients with AVMs featuring perinidal aneurysms and single draining vein, preoperative embolization followed by microsurgery was associated with fewer permanent complications and no increase in adverse outcomes compared with microsurgery alone. However, given the small number of events, this finding should be interpreted cautiously.

BACKGROUND: Patients with functioning pituitary adenomas (FPA) require a multidisciplinary team-based approach to select best medical, surgical, and radiation treatments, including stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of SRS for adult patients with FPA. METHODS: PubMed and Embase were searched from data base inception to June 8, 2021. Full-text articles were then screened using published exclusion/inclusion criteria. Evidence tables were developing based on data extraction from the full-text reviews, and evidence-based recommendations were finalized. RESULTS: Of the total 1842 abstracts pertinent to this topic, 343 full articles met eligibility. Of these, 21 met entry criteria and were included in the evidence tables. The provided Class III evidence supported 2 Level III recommendations: 1. SRS, hypofractionated SRS, fractionated (>5 fractions) radiotherapy, and conventional radiation therapy provide excellent radiographic control with variable hormonal reduction and endocrine remission rates. For SRS and fractionated radiotherapy hormonal reduction may continue for up to 10 years after treatment. 2. Clinicians may continue to administer endocrine suppressive medical treatment before SRS as this may not affect radiographic control. CONCLUSION: This systematic review provides evidence-based recommendations to guide providers caring for adult patients with FPA when making decisions pertinent to radiosurgery. The CNS Guidelines Committee will continue to pursue timely updates to further improve the care of patients with this diagnosis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Schwannomas are benign, slow-growing peripheral nerve sheath tumors. Approximately 8% of intracranial schwannomas originate from the trigeminal nerve. No consensus exists regarding superiority of outcomes after resection vs stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in the treatment of trigeminal schwannomas (TS). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and outcomes of resection vs SRS for TS management. METHODS: Embase, PubMed, and SCOPUS databases were queried from the date of inception to July 2023 for primary data reporting TS treatment outcomes after SRS or resection. Risk of bias was reported under Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Overall, 29 retrospective observational studies comprising 949 patients were included in the analysis. A total of 13 studies (n = 589) reported outcomes after SRS, and 16 studies (n = 360) reported outcomes after surgical resection, and 182 patients in the SRS group had previous resection. To ensure statistical validity of comparing the cohorts, 3 checkpoints were assessed: the median age (SRS: 48 vs surgery: 40 years old, P < .01), tumor volume (5.2 vs 8.9 cm 3 , P = .06), and median follow-up (53.9 vs 48.5 months, P = .59), which reflected the choice of treatment. Compared with surgical resection, the SRS group demonstrated significantly higher rates of facial hypesthesia improvement (44% vs 12%, P < .01) and lower rates of new onset (4% vs 15%, P = .051) at last follow-up. Facial pain was less likely to improve (58% vs 81%, P = .024) after SRS compared with surgery. However, worsened (5% vs 1%, P = .71) and new facial pain (2% vs 1%, P = .55) were comparable between cohorts. CONCLUSION: SRS seems to offer improvement in rates of hypesthesia and trigeminal motor deficits compared with surgical resection for TS. However, facial pain improvement was more favorable after surgery. These findings highlight the importance of individualized treatment decisions based on patient characteristics, tumor profile, and pretreatment symptoms.

Abstract Pituitary tumors require a diverse, multidisciplinary approach in their management. Stereotactic radiosurgery (single or hypofractionated) and fractionated radiotherapy are integral parts of the armamentarium. With the introduction of highly conformal, stereotactic ionizing radiation approaches, the reported tumor control rates and clinical outcomes have improved significantly. This review details the indications, risks, and outcomes of pituitary radiosurgery and radiation therapy, and presents in brief the differences in treatment approaches between stereotactic radiosurgery, fractionated radiation therapy, and proton therapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: First-line therapy for most intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulas (dAVFs) is endovascular embolization, but some require microsurgical ligation due to limited endovascular accessibility, anticipated lower cure rates, or unacceptable risk profiles. We investigated the most common surgically treated dAVF locations and the approaches and outcomes of each. METHODS: The Consortium for Dural Arteriovenous Fistula Outcomes Research database was retrospectively reviewed. Patients who underwent dAVF microsurgical ligation were included. Patient demographics, angiographic information, surgical details, and postoperative outcomes were collected. The 5 most common surgically treated dAVF locations were analyzed about used surgical approaches and postoperative outcomes. Univariate analyses were performed with statistical significance set at a threshold of P < .05. RESULTS: In total, 248 patients in the Consortium for Dural Arteriovenous Fistula Outcomes Research database met inclusion criteria. The 5 most common surgically treated dAVF locations were tentorial, anterior cranial fossa (ACF), transverse-sigmoid sinus (TSS), convexity/superior sagittal sinus (SSS), and torcular. Most tentorial dAVFs were approached using a suboccipital, lateral supracerebellar infratentorial approach (39.3%); extended retrosigmoid approach (ERS) (25%); or posterior subtemporal approach (19.6%). All ACF dAVFs used a subfrontal approach; 5.3% also included an anterior interhemispheric approach. Most TSS dAVFs were ligated via ERS (31.3%) or subtemporal (31.3%) approaches. All convexity/SSS dAVFs used an interhemispheric approach. All torcular dAVFs used the suboccipital, lateral supracerebellar infratentorial approach, with 10.5% undergoing simultaneous ERS craniotomy. Angiographic occlusion rates after microsurgery were 85.5%, 100%, 75.8%, 79.2%, and 73.7% for tentorial, ACF, TSS, convexity/SSS, and torcular dAVFs, respectively ( P = .02); the permanent neurological complication rates were 1.8%, 2.6%, 9.1%, 0%, and 0% ( P = .31). There were no statistically significant differences in development of complications ( P = .08) or Modified Rankin Scale at the last follow-up ( P = .11) by fistula location. CONCLUSION: Although endovascular embolization is the first-line treatment for most intracranial dAVFs, surgical ligation is an important alternative. ACF and tentorial fistulas particularly demonstrate high rates of postoperative obliteration.

Background Arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) are uncommon cerebral lesions that can cause significant neurological complications. Surgical resection is the gold standard for treatment, but endovascular embolization and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) are viable alternatives. Objective To compare the outcomes of endovascular embolization versus SRS in the treatment of AVMs with Spetzler-Martin grades I–III. Methods This study combined retrospective data from 10 academic institutions in North America and Europe. Patients aged 1 to 90 years who underwent endovascular embolization or SRS for AVMs with Spetzler-Martin grades I–III between January 2010 and December 2023 were included. Results The study included 244 patients, including 84 who had endovascular embolization and 160 who had SRS. Before propensity score matching (PSM), complete obliteration at the last follow-up was achieved in 74.5% of the SRS group compared with 57.8% of the embolization group (OR=0.47; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.48; P=0.01). After propensity score matching, SRS still achieved significantly higher occlusion rates at last follow-up (78.9% vs 55.3%; OR=0.32; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.90; P=0.03). Hemorrhagic complications were higher in the embolization group than in the SRS group, although this difference did not reach statistical significance after PSM (13.2% vs 2.6%; OR=5.6; 95% CI 0.62 to 50.47; P=0.12). Similarly, re-treatment rate was higher in the embolization group (10.5% vs 5.3%; OR=2.11; 95% CI 0.36 to 12.31; P=0.40) compared with the SRS group. Conclusion Our findings indicate that SRS has a significantly higher obliteration rate at last follow-up compared with endovascular embolization. Also, SRS has a higher tendency for fewer hemorrhagic complications and lower re-treatment rate. Further prospective studies are needed.

Abstract Introduction Historical reservations regarding stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) brain metastases include concerns for short-interval and diffuse central nervous system (CNS) progression, poor prognoses, and increased neurological mortality specific to SCLC histology. We compared SRS outcomes for SCLC and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) where SRS is well established. Methods Multicenter first-line SRS outcomes for SCLC and NSCLC from 2000 to 2022 were retrospectively collected (n = 892 SCLC, n = 4785 NSCLC). Data from the prospective Japanese Leksell Gamma Knife Society (JLGK0901) clinical trial of first-line SRS were analyzed as a comparison cohort (n = 98 SCLC, n = 814 NSCLC). Overall survival (OS) and CNS progression were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard and Fine-Gray models, respectively, with multivariable adjustment for cofactors including age, sex, performance status, year, extracranial disease status, and brain metastasis number and volume. Mutation-stratified analyses were performed in propensity score–matched retrospective cohorts of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) positive NSCLC, mutation-negative NSCLC, and SCLC. Results OS was superior for patients with NSCLC compared to SCLC in the retrospective dataset (median OS = 10.5 vs 8.6 months; P &lt; .001) and in the JLGK0901 dataset. Hazard estimates for first CNS progression favoring NSCLC were similar in both datasets but reached statistical significance in the retrospective dataset only (multivariable hazard ratio = 0.82, 95% confidence interval = 0.73 to 0.92, P = .001). In the propensity score–matched cohorts, there were continued OS advantages for NSCLC patients (median OS = 23.7 [EGFR and ALK positive NSCLC] vs 13.6 [mutation-negative NSCLC] vs 10.4 months [SCLC], pairwise P values &lt; 0.001), but no statistically significant differences in CNS progression were observed in the matched cohorts. Neurological mortality and number of lesions at CNS progression were similar for NSCLC and SCLC patients. Leptomeningeal progression was increased in patients with NSCLC compared to SCLC in the retrospective dataset only (multivariable hazard ratio = 1.61, 95% confidence interval = 1.14 to 2.26, P = .007). Conclusions After SRS, SCLC histology was associated with shorter OS compared to NSCLC. CNS progression occurred earlier in SCLC patients overall but was similar in patients matched on baseline factors. SCLC was not associated with increased neurological mortality, number of lesions at CNS progression, or leptomeningeal progression compared to NSCLC. These findings may better inform clinical expectations and individualized decision making regarding SRS for SCLC patients.