U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Cover of Radiation Therapy for Brain Metastases

Radiation Therapy for Brain Metastases

Comparative Effectiveness Review, No. 242

Investigators: , M.D., , M.D., Ph.D., , M.A.S, M.Phil., , M.D., , M.S., , M.S., , M.S., , B.A., , Ph.D., and , Ph.D.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); .
Report No.: 21-EHC021Report No.: 2020-SR-02

Structured Abstract

Objective:

This evidence report synthesizes the available evidence on radiation therapy for brain metastases.

Data sources:

We searched PubMed®, Embase®, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL®, clinicaltrials.gov, and published guidelines in July 2020; assessed independently submitted data; consulted with experts; and contacted authors.

Review methods:

The protocol was informed by Key Informants. The systematic review was supported by a Technical Expert Panel and is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020168260). Two reviewers independently screened citations; data were abstracted by one reviewer and checked by an experienced reviewer. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and large observational studies (for safety assessments), evaluating whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) alone or in combination, as initial or postoperative treatment, with or without systemic therapy for adults with brain metastases due to non-small cell lung cancer, breast cancer, or melanoma.

Results:

In total, 97 studies, reported in 190 publications, were identified, but the number of analyses was limited due to different intervention and comparator combinations as well as insufficient reporting of outcome data. Risk of bias varied; 25 trials were terminated early, predominantly due to poor accrual. Most studies evaluated WBRT, alone or in combination with SRS, as initial treatment; 10 RCTs reported on post-surgical interventions.

The combination treatment SRS plus WBRT compared to SRS alone or WBRT alone showed no statistically significant difference in overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 1.73; 4 RCTs; low strength of evidence [SoE]) or death due to brain metastases (relative risk [RR], 0.93; CI, 0.48 to 1.81; 3 RCTs; low SoE). Radiation therapy after surgery did not improve overall survival compared with surgery alone (HR, 0.98; CI, 0.76 to 1.26; 5 RCTs; moderate SoE). Data for quality of life, functional status, and cognitive effects were insufficient to determine effects of WBRT, SRS, or post-surgical interventions.

We did not find systematic differences across interventions in serious adverse events radiation necrosis, fatigue, or seizures (all low or moderate SoE). WBRT plus systemic therapy (RR, 1.44; CI, 1.03 to 2.00; 14 studies; moderate SoE) was associated with increased risks for vomiting compared to WBRT alone.

Conclusion:

Despite the substantial research literature on radiation therapy, comparative effectiveness information is limited. There is a need for more data on patient-relevant outcomes such as quality of life, functional status, and cognitive effects.

Contents

Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857; www.ahrq.gov and Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, 1828 L Street, NW, Ste. 900, Washington, DC 20036; www.pcori.org Contract No. 290-2015-00010-I Prepared by: Southern California Evidence-based Practice Center, Santa Monica, CA

Suggested citation:

Garsa A, Jang JK, Baxi S, Chen C, Akinniranye O, Hall O, Larkin J, Motala A, Newberry S, Hempel S. Radiation Therapy for Brain Metastases. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 242. (Prepared by the Southern California Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2015-00001-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 21-EHC021. PCORI Publication No. 2020-SR-02. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; June 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23970/AHRQEPCCER242, Posted final reports are located on the Effective Health Care Program search page.

This report is based on research conducted by the Southern California Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 290-2015-00010-I). The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute® (PCORI®) funded the report (No. 2020-SR-02). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ or PCORI. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of PCORI, AHRQ, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

None of the investigators have any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.

The information in this report is intended to help healthcare decision makers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well-informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of healthcare services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients.

This report is made available to the public under the terms of a licensing agreement between the author and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. This report may be used and reprinted without permission except those copyrighted materials that are clearly noted in the report. Further reproduction of those copyrighted materials is prohibited without the express permission of copyright holders.

PCORI®, AHRQ, or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of any derivative products that may be developed from this report, such as clinical practice guidelines, other quality enhancement tools, or reimbursement or coverage policies, may not be stated or implied.

AHRQ appreciates appropriate acknowledgment and citation of its work. Suggested language for acknowledgment: This work was based on an evidence report, Radiation Therapy for Brain Metastases, by the Evidence-based Practice Center Program at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).

Bookshelf ID: NBK571236PMID: 34152714DOI: 10.23970/AHRQEPCCER242

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (7.0M)

Other titles in this collection

Related information

Similar articles in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...