Keywords
neoadjuvant - preoperative - stereotactic radiotherapy
Introduction
Brain metastases occur in ∼10% of patients during their illness.[1] Notably, patients with either melanoma or lung cancer have a 25% incidence, while
for those patients with either breast cancer or renal cell carcinoma, the incidence
rate ranges from 5 to 10%.[2] Enhanced imaging modalities and systemic treatments contribute to the increased
incidence in the detection of more brain metastases among patients with cancer.[2] Brain metastases lead to considerable morbidity and shortened life spans. Optimal
management strategies balancing efficacy and minimal toxicity are crucial.[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
Surgical resection effectively relieves symptoms due to tumor pressure or edema. For
solitary brain metastases or oligometastatic disease (≤ 5 lesions), resection improves
survival and functional independence. However, local recurrence rates of up to 50%
persist even after surgery alone.[7]
[8]
[9]
In recent decades, studies show that combining neurosurgical resection with whole-brain
radiation therapy (WBRT) reduces local and distant recurrence rates compared with
surgery alone. However, WBRT has long-term neurotoxicity and cognitive decline risks.[8]
[9]
[10]
Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is gaining favor due to its effective tumor control
and improved quality of life over postoperative WBRT.[11]
[12]
[13]
[14] Despite challenges like leptomeningeal disease risk and logistical complexities,
researchers explore preoperative SRS for brain metastases.[15] While preoperative/neoadjuvant therapy has gained widespread acceptance in various
malignancies, including esophageal and rectal cancers, there has been a growing interest
in applying this treatment approach to brain metastases.[16]
[17] This review discusses the rationale, evidence, challenges, and ongoing trials in
this novel approach.
Rationale for Preoperative SRS
Rationale for Preoperative SRS
Radiobiology and Preoperative SRS
Radiotherapy effectiveness diminishes in hypoxic environments due to the oxygen enhancement
ratio.[18] While adjuvant SRS targets hypoxic postoperative beds with radiation, preoperative
SRS (SRSPreop) directs radiation toward tumors that still have an intact blood supply and oxygenation.
In the nonhypoxic microenvironment before surgical resection, tumor cells may exhibit
higher radiosensitivity. Consequently, SRSPreop is likely to be more effective in these cases.
Leptomeningeal Disease and Preceding Surgery
Studies done by Nguyen et al suggested that patients who undergo SRS to resect cavities
face an elevated risk of developing leptomeningeal disease compared with those with
intact lesions. This observation posits that tumor cells might be disseminated during
surgery, leading to viable cells capable of persisting outside the radiation treatment
volume.[19] Preceding surgery with tumor-targeted radiosurgery could potentially mitigate this
risk, as any dispersed tumor cells would have been subjected to irradiation, reducing
their potential for replication.
Logistical Challenges and Timely Treatment
Coordinating SRS in the postoperative period can be challenging due to the need to
balance patient rehabilitation and recovery following surgery. Prolonged delays in
commencing SRS after surgery (>38 days) have been shown to reduce its effectiveness.[20] Surgical morbidity, experienced by ∼20% of patients, may also hinder the start of
adjuvant SRS.[21] Brennan et al in a phase 2 study showed that 20% of patients did not proceed to
scheduled SRS following resection.[22] Delays in patients receiving adjuvant SRS may lead to the withholding of systemic
therapy for an extended duration, which could adversely affect survival outcomes.
To expedite treatment, patients can undergo SRS within 1 to 2 days prior to surgery,
shortening the duration from diagnosis to completion of treatment.
Contouring/Delineation
Delineating intact metastases is generally straightforward using imaging and is more
reproducible than delineating the postoperative cavities for adjuvant SRS.[23] However, contouring surgical cavities for adjuvant SRS is more complex due to postoperative
alterations, leading to an unclear definition of the target volume. Consensus guidelines
aim to improve consistency in defining the clinical target volume for better treatment
outcomes, but were still found to have significant discrepancies in interrater agreement.[24]
Radiation Necrosis and Preoperative SRS
SRSPreop offers an opportunity to reduce irradiated brain tissue volume. However, there is
a potential risk of toxicity when large portions of normal brain tissue receive moderate
radiation doses during radiosurgery. Studies focusing on dosimetry show that theoretical
SRSPreop plans result in decreased irradiation of normal brain tissue compared with postoperative
SRS plans for equivalent lesions. Contouring guidelines for postoperative cavity SRS
recommend including additional tissue (surgical tract and applying a 5–10 mm additional
margin along the bone flap if the tumor was in contact with the dura before surgery)
in both the gross tumor volume (GTV)[24]
[25]
[26] and clinical target volume (CTV), along with the complete contrast-enhancing cavity.[24]
[25]
[26] For SRSPreop, only the metastasis is considered in the target volume, eliminating the need to
incorporate normal tissue.
Evidence for Preoperative SRS
Evidence for Preoperative SRS
In an early retrospective case-matched study of preoperative SRS, an adjuvant SRS
was done by Yamamoto et al using the gamma knife. They had 16 patients in each group.
Preoperative SRS achieved 75% overall local control, compared with 93.8% with adjuvant
SRS. Distant control rates were 68.8 and 56.3% for preoperative and adjuvant cohorts,
respectively. Median overall survival (OR) was 10.5 months (preoperative) and 8.9
months (adjuvant). Subdural dissemination occurred in 6.2% (preoperative) and 43.8%
(adjuvant) cases.[27]
Asher et al studied 47 patients with 51 lesions treated using preoperative SRS (SRSPreop
). At 6 and 12 months, OR rates were 77.8 and 60.0%, respectively. Local control rates
were 97.8, 85.6, and 71.8% at 6, 12, and 24 months. Some failures occurred without
radiation necrosis. No perioperative adverse events were reported, and 14.8% received
WBRT. Lesion characteristics (lesions >10 cc, >3.4 cm, surface lesions or those close
to draining veins or in eloquent areas, and presence of dural attachment) influenced
local failure risk.[28]
Vetlova's preliminary results involved 19 patients with 22 lesions, including 8 with
multiple brain metastases. Median follow-up was 6.3 months. No neurological deterioration
occurred during pre-SRS. Local recurrences happened in two cases (at 5.5, 07.4 months),
and radionecrosis was observed once. Local leptomeningeal disease (LMD) occurred 1.5
months after partial resection of a metastatic brain lesion near the dura in one patient.[29]
In a multi-institutional retrospective comparison by Patel and colleagues, 180 patients
underwent surgical resection for 189 brain metastases. Of these, 66 (36.7%) received
pre-SRS, and 114 (63.3%) received post-SRS. The median imaging follow-up period for
surviving patients was 24.6 months. Multivariable analyses showed no significant difference
between groups for OR, local recurrence, and distant brain recurrence. However, post-SRS
was associated with significantly higher rates of LMD (2 years: 16.6 vs. 3.2%, p = 0.010) and symptomatic radiation necrosis (2 years: 16.4 vs. 4.9%, p = 0.010).[30]
In an ambispective study conducted by Prabhu et al,[31] 117 patients with 125 lesions underwent single-fraction preoperative SRS followed
by planned resection. The majority (70.1%) had a single brain metastasis. At 2 years,
event cumulative incidence included cavity local recurrence (LR) at 25.1%, distant
brain failure (DBF) at 60.2%, LMD at 4.3%, and symptomatic radiation necrosis (RN)
at 4.8%. Median OS was 17.2 months, with a 2-year OS rate of 36.7%. Subtotal resection
(STR) significantly increased the risk of cavity LR and worsened OS in multivariable
analyses.
Patel and colleagues retrospectively reviewed 12 patients who received preoperative
SRS at their institution, with a median follow-up of 13 months. Distant disease control
rates at 6 and 12 months were 72.7 and 14.5%, respectively, while OR rates were 83.3
and 74.1%. Two patients developed LMD around 11.3 months. There was a tendency toward
increased local failure with larger tumor volumes and diameters.[32]
Udovicich et al performed a retrospective multicenter case series involving consecutive
patients slated for SRS followed by resection of intracranial lesions with confirmed
primary malignancy. Hypofractionated SRS was administered in 62.1% of cases. The 12-month
local control (LC) rate was 91.3%, LMD rate was 4.0%, and the 12-month rates for radiation
necrosis (RN), distant control (DC), and OR were 5.0, 51.5, and 60.1%, respectively.[33]
In a retrospective review by Deguchi and colleagues, 20 consecutive patients with
brain metastases underwent neoadjuvant fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT)
followed by piecemeal resection between July 2019 and March 2021. The mean follow-up
duration was 7.8 months. Postoperative complications included deterioration of paresis
in two patients. LR occurred in one patient (5.0%) who underwent STR at 2 months after
craniotomy. Distant recurrence was observed in six patients (30.0%) at a median of
6.9 months. Leptomeningeal disease recurrence was detected in one patient (5.0%) at
3 months. Notably, no cases of radiation necrosis developed.[34]
Kotecha and colleagues presented the first results of in-human evaluation of the immediate
biological impacts of SRS/SRT on resected brain metastases. Their study included 22
patients with both irradiated and resected brain metastases, paired with non-irradiated
primary tumor samples. The rate of necrosis was significantly higher in irradiated
brain metastases compared with non-irradiated primary tumors (p < 0.001). The median follow-up period was 12.3 months, reporting a 1-year freedom
from local failure rate of 95%.[35]
Li and colleagues conducted a single institutional analysis, retrospectively reviewing
patients who underwent neoadjuvant SRS (specifically, Gamma Knife radiosurgery) followed
by resection of a brain metastasis. In the single-institution cohort of 24 patients,
rates of local disease control were 100% at 6 months, 87.6% at 12 months, and 73.5%
at 24 months. Among the four patients who experienced local treatment failure, salvage
therapy included repeat resection, laser interstitial thermal therapy, or repeat SRS.
Remarkably, none of the patients in the cohort developed leptomeningeal carcinomatosis.[36]
In a retrospective analysis by Palmer et al, 53 patients with 55 lesions underwent
pre-operative FSRT for large or symptomatic brain metastases. Notably, there were
no local failures, but three cases of Grade 2 to 3 radiation necrosis events and one
occurrence of meningeal disease were observed, resulting in an 8% per-patient composite
endpoint event rate.[37]
The PROPS-BM (Preoperative Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases) multicenter cohort study,
led by Prabhu and colleagues, included 242 patients with 253 index lesions. Cavity
LR rates at 1 and 2 years were 15 and 17.9%, respectively. STR was a strong independent
predictor of LR. LMD rates at 1 and 2 years were 6.1 and 7.6%, respectively, and any
grade adverse radiation effects (ARE) were 4.7 and 6.8%. Median OS duration was 16.9
months, with a 2-year OS rate of 38.4%. Most meningeal disease cases were classified
as classical leptomeningeal disease. Ten patients (4.1%) experienced grades ≥3 postoperative
surgical complications.[38]
Palmisciano and colleagues reviewed literature on neoadjuvant stereotactic radiotherapy
for brain metastases, including 7 studies with 460 patients and 483 brain metastases,
and 13 ongoing trials. Most patients underwent piecemeal (76.3%) and gross-total (94%)
resection, typically within a median of 1 day posttreatment. With a median follow-up
of 19.2 months, the rates posttreatment were as follows: 4% symptomatic radiation
necrosis, 15% LR, 47% distant recurrence, 6% leptomeningeal metastases, 81% 1-year
local tumor control, and 59% 1-year OR.[39]
The PROPS-BM collaboration, an international cohort study, compared outcomes and toxicity
between preoperative single-fraction SRS and multifraction SRS (3–5 fractions). It
included 404 patients with 416 resected lesions; single-fraction SRS was used in 317
patients (78.5%) at a median dose of 15 Gy, and multifraction SRS in 87 patients (21.5%)
at a median dose of 24 Gy across three fractions. Single-fraction SRS showed higher
cavity LR at 2 years (16.3 vs. 2.3%, p = 0.004) on both univariable and multivariate analyses. The propensity-score-matched
analysis of 81 pairs confirmed higher recurrence with single-fraction SRS (2 years:
19.8 vs. 3.3%; p = 0.003).[40]
Active Research Trials in Progress
Active Research Trials in Progress
Several ongoing trials are currently investigating the use of preoperative SRS for
the treatment of brain metastases, aiming to provide novel insights into its safety
and effectiveness. Comprehensive details regarding these trials, including their objectives
and study designs, are compiled in [Table 2].
Table 1
Summary of published series of neoadjuvant stereotactic radiotherapy (SRS/FSRT) followed
by resection
Sl. no.
|
Author name
|
Year
|
Number of patients
|
Number of lesions
|
Surgical details
|
Median time interval NaSRS to resection
|
Pre-op SRS dose
|
Median lesion size (cm)/median lesion volume (cc)/PTV
|
Median follow-up
|
Local control/local recurrence
|
Overall survival
|
Adverse events
|
6-mo LC
|
12-mo LC
|
24-mo LC
|
6-mo OS
|
12-mo OS
|
24-mo OS
|
Radiation necrosis
|
Leptomeningeal disease
|
1
|
Asher
|
2014
|
47
|
51
|
GTR: 46
STR: 1
|
1 d
|
14 Gy in 1#
|
Lesion size = 3.04 cm: GTV = CTV = PTV
|
12 mo
|
97.80%
|
85.60%
|
71.80%
|
77.80%
|
60.00%
|
26.93%
|
0
|
0
|
2
|
Vetlova
|
2017
|
19
|
22
|
GTR: 22 (100%)
|
1–2 d
|
18 Gy in 1#
|
14.31 cc
|
6.3 mo
|
2 cases (10.5%) of LF, 1 at 5.5 mo and 2nd at 17.4 mo
|
NR
|
NR
|
NR
|
1 patient
|
NR
|
3
|
Patel
|
2016
|
66
|
71
|
GTR: 57
STR: 14
|
Within 48 h
|
14.5 Gy in 1#
|
0.83 cm
|
24.6 mo
|
1-y LR: 15.9%
|
Median OS: 17.1 mo
|
1 y: 1.5%
2 y: 4.9%
|
1 y: 3.2%
2 y: 3.2%
|
4
|
Prabhu
|
2018
|
117
|
125
|
GTR: 119
STR: 6
|
2 d
|
15 Gy in 1 #
|
GTV: 8.3 cc
|
14.9 mo
|
2-y cavity LR: 25.1%
2-y DBF: 60.2%
|
Median OS: 17.2 mo
|
|
2-y OS: 36.7%
|
2 y: 4.8%
|
2 y: 4.3%
|
5
|
Patel
|
2018
|
12
|
12
|
GTR: 12 (100%)
|
1 d
|
16 Gy in 1#
|
Median size: 3.66 cm
Median volume: 14.69 cc
|
13 mo
|
81.80%
|
49.10%
|
|
83.30%
|
74.10%
|
|
0
|
2 patients at a mean interval of 11.3 mo
|
6
|
Christian Udovicich
|
2021
|
28
|
29
|
GTR: 25 (86.2%)
STR: 3 (10.3%)
Unknown: 1 (3.4%)
|
1 d
|
24 Gy in 3#
20 Gy in 1#
|
Median PTV: 4.50 cc
|
12.8 mo
|
|
91.30%
|
|
|
60.10%
|
|
12-mo RN rate: 5%
|
12-mo LMD rate: 4%
|
7
|
Shoichi Deguchi
|
202 1
|
20
|
20
|
GTR: 17 (85%)
STR: 3 (15%)
|
4 d
|
FSRT: 30 Gy in 5#
|
Median size: 3.66 cm
Median volume: 17.6 cc
|
7.8 mo
|
LR: 5%
|
56%
|
50%
|
|
0
|
1 patient (5%)
|
8
|
Rupesh Kotecha
|
2022
|
22
|
22
|
GTR: 22 (100%)
|
67.8 h
|
18 Gy in 1#
|
Median size: 3.6 cm
Median volume: 14.20 cc
|
12.3 mo
|
LR: 3 (1.6%)
|
|
|
|
NR
|
NR
|
9
|
Derek Li
|
2022
|
24
|
24
|
NR
|
2 d
|
17 Gy in 1#
|
Median size: 3.0 cm
Median tumor: 10.1 cc
|
16.5 mo
|
100%
|
87.60 %
|
73.50 %
|
75%
|
70%
|
Median OS: 2.2 y
|
NR
|
NR
|
10
|
Joshua D Palmer
|
2022
|
53
|
55
|
GTR: 52 (98.1%)
NR: 1 (1.9%)
|
2 d
|
24 Gy in 3#
|
Median GTV: 12 cc
Median PTV: 19 cc
|
9 mo
|
LC: no progression
|
OS: 12 mo survival probability: 70%
|
12%
Grade 2: 33%
Grade 3: 67%
|
2%
|
11
|
Paolo Palmisciano
|
2022
|
460
|
483
|
GTR: 454 (94%)
STR: 29 (6%)
|
1 d
|
16.5 Gy, 1#: 90.9%
3#: 4.3%
5#: 4.8%
|
Median PTV: 9.9 cc
|
19.2 mo
|
|
80%
|
|
80%
|
58%
|
37.80%
|
32 (7.3%)
|
30 (6.8%)
|
Abbreviations: CTV, clinical target volume; FSRT, fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy;
GTR, gross total resection; GTV, gross tumor volume NaSRS, neoadjuvant stereotactic
radiosurgery; PTV, planning target volume; STR, subtotal resection.
Note: # denotes “number of fractions” (e.g., 1# = 1 fraction; 3# = 3 fractions; 5#
= 5 fractions).
Table 2
Ongoing and planned clinical trials of preoperative/neoadjuvant stereotactic radiotherapy
for brain metastases
Sl. no.
|
Article title
|
Principal investigator
|
Conducting institute
|
Clinical trial number
|
Estimated enrolment
|
Intervention (preoperative SRS f/b tumor resection)
|
Comparison arm
|
Primary outcome
|
1
|
A pilot study analyzing preoperative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with Gamma Knife
(GK) for brain metastases[41]
|
Michael Straza
|
Medical College of Wisconsin, Wisconsin, USA
|
NCT04545814
|
15
|
15 Gy/single fraction
|
None
|
Number of subjects with no identifiable disease on MRI following resection at 20 mo
|
2
|
A phase II study analyzing pre-operative stereotactic radiosurgery followed by resection
for patients with 1–4 brain metastases[42]
|
Namita Agrawal
|
Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, USA
|
NCT03398694
|
50
|
15 Gy/single fraction
|
None
|
Rate of local control of any new, recurrent, or progressing tumors within the PTV
at 6 mo
|
3
|
A phase II study of neoadjuvant stereotactic radiosurgery for large brain metastases[43]
|
David Shultz
|
University Health Network, Toronto
|
NCT03368625
|
30
|
NR
|
None
|
Radiation toxicity (symptomatic, i.e., ≥ Grade 2) at 12 mo
|
4
|
Neoadjuvant radiosurgery for resectable brain metastases: phase I/II study[44]
|
Erin Murphy
|
Cleveland Clinic, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ohio, USA
|
NCT01891318
|
36
|
Phase 1 dose escalation study
|
None
|
Phase 1: maximum tolerated dose at day 0
Phase 2: local control at 3 y
|
5
|
A phase 1 dose escalation trial of neoadjuvant radiosurgery for the treatment of metastatic
brain tumors[45]
|
Stephen Shiao
|
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, LA, California, USA
|
NCT03163368
|
25
|
*Phase 1 dose escalation study
|
None
|
Maximum tolerated dose at 1 mo postsurgery
|
6
|
Preoperative radiosurgery for brain metastases planned for surgical resection: a two-arm
pilot study[46]
|
Zachary Buchwald
|
Emory University Hospital/Winship Cancer Institute, USA
|
NCT04895592
|
20
|
Arm 1: Pre-op SRS + low-dose steroids, a tumor resection
Arm 2: Pre-op SRS + high-dose steroids, a tumor resection
|
None
|
Incidence of adverse events ≥ grade 3 at 4 mo posttreatment
|
7
|
Phase II study determining the efficacy of pre-operative stereotactic radiosurgery
followed by resection for brain metastases[47]
|
Christopher A Wilke
|
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
|
NCT02514915
|
24
|
NR
|
None
|
Local control at 6,12, and 24 mo
|
8
|
Pre-operative hypofractionated stereotactic radiosurgery for resectable brain metastases[48]
|
Michael Yu
|
Moffitt Cancer Center, Florida
|
NCT05267587
|
60
|
NR
|
None
|
Time to progression (local progression or death) up to 12 mo
|
9
|
Phase II study to assess Preoperative Hypofractionated Stereotactic Radiotherapy of
Brain Metastases (STEP trial)[49]
|
Angeline Ginzac Couvé
|
Centre Jean Perrin Groupement Interrégional de Recherche Clinique et d'Innovation
(AURA), France
|
NCT04503772
|
70
|
NR
|
None
|
Evaluation of 6-mo local control rate
|
10
|
A Phase III trial of pre-operative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) versus post-operative
SRS for brain metastases[50]
|
Debra Yeboa
|
M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
|
NCT03741673
|
110
|
Pre-op SRS f/b tumor resection
|
Tumor Resection à Post-op SRS
|
1-y leptomeningeal disease-free rate
|
11
|
A randomized controlled trial of pre-operative versus post-operative stereotactic
radiosurgery for patients with surgically resectable brain metastases[51]
|
Muhammad Faruqi
|
Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
|
NCT04474925
|
88
|
Pre-op SRS f/b tumor resection
|
Tumor Resection à Post-op SRS
|
Local control at 12 mo
|
12
|
A multicenter prospective, interventional, randomized trial of preoperative radiosurgery
compared with postoperative stereotactic radiotherapy for resectable brain metastases[52]
|
Susanne Rogers
|
Kantonsspital Aarau, Switzerland
|
NCT05124236
|
200
|
Preop SRS f/b tumor resection
|
Tumor Resection à Post-op HFSRT
|
Incidence of leptomeningeal disease at 12 mo
|
13
|
Pre-operative vs. post-operative stereotactic radiosurgery for operative metastatic
brain tumors (phase 3)[53]
|
Elizabeth Yan
|
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
|
|
140
|
Pre-op SRS f/b tumor resection
|
Tumor resection à post-op SRS
|
Central nervous system (CNS) composite endpoint event up to 5 y
|
The eligibility criteria for ongoing trials examining preoperative SRS are robust,
enrolling individuals aged 18 years or older with a favorable performance status and
histological confirmation of primary tumors. These patients should have no MRI contraindications
and exhibit 3 to 6 contrast-enhancing brain metastases within specific size parameters,
with one lesion suitable for surgical resection. They must also be eligible for SRS
or SRT, have an estimated survival of 3 to 12 months, and demonstrate the capacity
to undergo neurocognitive assessments and provide informed consent. Conversely, individuals
are excluded if they have radiosensitive tumor histology, significant midline brain
shift, or previous WBRT or SRS/SRT to the lesion to be resected. Additionally, those
with leptomeningeal metastases, prior cytotoxic chemotherapy or anti-VEGFR therapy,
or psychological disorders or unstable illnesses are ineligible.[41]
[42]
[43]
[44]
[45]
[46]
[47]
[48]
[49]
[50]
In addition to assessing common endpoints like local control, toxicity, and leptomeningeal
disease rates, one trial specifically compares high-dose versus low-dose steroid therapy
in patients undergoing neoadjuvant SRS.[46] Neurocognitive status and quality of life are also evaluated in multiple trials,
while another trial investigates RNA biomarkers and their potential correlation with
local control.[42]
[50]
[51]
[52]
[53]
Potential Issues or Pitfalls of Using Preoperative SRS
Potential Issues or Pitfalls of Using Preoperative SRS
When considering the preoperative SRS approach for brain metastases, several potential
issues and pitfalls should be taken into account. First, there is a lack of histopathological
diagnosis before treatment, as preoperative SRS does not allow for tissue confirmation.
Historically, some patients with suspected brain metastases were later found not to
have metastatic lesions after biopsy or resection.[9]
[28]
However, patients with brain metastases often already have a confirmed pathological
diagnosis from a biopsy of the primary tumor or an extracranial metastatic site prior
to undergoing SRS.[15]
Although modern imaging techniques have improved accuracy, a definitive pathological
diagnosis remains elusive before SRS.[54]
Second, wound dehiscence poses a challenge. Unlike traditional approaches, preoperative
SRS does not allow a grace period for wound maturation after resection. Immediate
radiation therapy follows, potentially affecting wound healing and complications.[55]
Third, coordination and feasibility challenges arise. Implementing preoperative SRS
requires complex coordination among medical teams. Centers with limited oncological
expertise may lack the necessary resources and infrastructure for effective implementation.
Additionally, there is a risk of radiation necrosis due to exposure of healthy brain
tissue to radiation. Close monitoring and management are crucial to minimizing this
risk.[36]
Leptomeningeal disease risk has also been reported after preoperative SRS, emphasizing
the need for vigilance in follow-up and early detection.[56]
Lastly, patient selection and eligibility criteria play a critical role. Balancing
the benefits (such as expedited treatment) with potential risks requires careful consideration.
While promising, long-term data on outcomes and survival are still limited, necessitating
ongoing trials and further research to establish the efficacy and safety of this approach.[36]
Recommended Time Interval between Preoperative SRS and Surgical Resection
Recommended Time Interval between Preoperative SRS and Surgical Resection
The ideal timing for preoperative SRS (SRSPreop
) in brain metastases remains uncertain in the current literature. Kotecha et al reported
on a limited case series of 22 patients, showing that tumor necrosis typically occurs
∼24 hours after treatment and persists for several days.[35] Similarly, Steverink et al studied timing and necrosis in spinal metastases treated
with stereotactic body radiotherapy in a small group of 10 patients. They found that
within 6 hours posttreatment, no biopsy specimens demonstrated necrosis, while 83%
of specimens collected at least 21 hours after SBRT showed necrosis.[55] Both studies suggest that optimal tumor necrosis occurs around 24 hours after SBRT,
indicating a potential optimal timing for surgical intervention following SRSPreop
. Surgeons may consider delaying surgery until at least 24 hours after SRSPreop
to enhance surgical outcomes and potentially reduce complications.
Optimal Dose Fractionation Schedule for Preoperative SRS
Optimal Dose Fractionation Schedule for Preoperative SRS
Among the studies conducted, various dosing regimens were commonly employed for SRSPreop
in the treatment of brain metastases. Single-fraction doses ranged typically from
14 to 18 Gy, while fractionated treatments included doses of 24 to 27 Gy delivered
in three fractions, and 30 to 35 Gy administered in five fractions. These dose ranges
reflect the diversity in treatment approaches aimed at achieving effective tumor control
while minimizing adverse effects, highlighting the flexibility and adaptation of protocols
in clinical practice.
Consensus on the Maximum Size of Brain Metastases and Number of Metastases Treatable
with Preoperative SRS
Consensus on the Maximum Size of Brain Metastases and Number of Metastases Treatable
with Preoperative SRS
Current ongoing trials investigating SRSPreop
have included patients with brain metastases ranging up to 4 to 6 cm in size, with
one trial even enrolling patients with lesions up to 7 cm. The majority of these trials
have enrolled patients with up to 4 lesions, though some studies have extended inclusion
criteria to patients with up to 6 metastatic lesions, and one study even includes
patients with up to 10 metastatic lesions. See [Table 3] for the ongoing clinical trials along with the size of lesions being considered
for SRSPreop
.
Table 3
Trial lesion/size eligibility used in ongoing preoperative SRS trials
Author
|
Clinical trial number
|
Number of lesions
|
Size of lesions
|
Rogers[52]
|
NCT05124236
|
≤3
|
≤4 cm
|
Couvé[49]
|
NCT04503772
|
≤4
|
≤5 cm
|
Straza[41]
|
NCT04545814
|
≤4
|
≤5 cm
|
Agrawal[42]
|
NCT03398694
|
≤4
|
≤5 cm
|
Shultz[43]
|
NCT03368625
|
≤6
|
<4 cm
|
Shiao[45]
|
NCT03163368
|
(−)
|
<4 cm
|
Wilke[47]
|
NCT02514915
|
≤4
|
≤4 cm
|
Yu[48]
|
NCT05267587
|
X
|
≤6 cm
|
Murphy[44]
|
NCT01891318
|
<4
|
≤5 cm
|
Yan[53]
|
NCT03750227
|
≤10
|
≤5 cm
|
Yeboa[50]
|
NCT03741673
|
X
|
<4 cm—SRS
≤ 7 cm—SRT
|
Future Directions
Future research should aim to standardize both the optimal dose-fractionation schedules
and the timing of surgery following neoadjuvant SRS. Current evidence indicates that
single-fraction regimens of 14 to 18 Gy are effective for smaller lesions, whereas
hypofractionated approaches such as 24 Gy in three fractions or 30 to 35 Gy in five
fractions appear to provide superior local control with lower risks of radionecrosis
in larger or eloquent lesions. Thus, tailoring the dose according to tumor size may
offer the best balance of efficacy and safety. With respect to surgical timing, biological
data and early clinical experience suggest that surgery performed at least 24 hours
after SRS allows for optimal tumor necrosis and radiosensitization, while remaining
safe within a 24- to 48-hour window. Taken together, the most promising strategy at
present involves hypofractionated neoadjuvant SRS for larger lesions and single-fraction
SRS for smaller ones, with surgical resection scheduled 24 to 48 hours after treatment.
Ongoing randomized trials are expected to provide more definitive guidance, but until
then, adopting this approach appears most likely to yield favorable neurological and
oncological outcomes.
Conclusion
Emerging evidence suggests that preoperative SRS is a viable and safe option for managing
specific brain metastases. Studies indicate that local control and OR rates achieved
with SRSPreop
protocols are comparable to those seen with standard postoperative SRS, although
direct comparative research is lacking. The main advantages of SRSPreop
include lower rates of posttreatment radiation necrosis and leptomeningeal metastases.
However, strict criteria and protocols may limit its use in patients with multiple
or large brain metastases requiring urgent neurosurgical intervention or those with
prior radiotherapy. Ongoing randomized trials aim to evaluate long-term outcomes,
particularly local control and neurotoxicity, in larger patient cohorts ([Fig. 1]).
Fig. 1 Graphical abstract.