Trends in the use of radiation for meningioma across the United States

IF 1.8 Q3 ONCOLOGY Radiation Oncology Journal Pub Date : 2022-03-01 DOI:10.3857/roj.2021.00563
H. Matani, S. Abel, A. Yu, S. Karlovits, R. Wegner
{"title":"Trends in the use of radiation for meningioma across the United States","authors":"H. Matani, S. Abel, A. Yu, S. Karlovits, R. Wegner","doi":"10.3857/roj.2021.00563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose Meningiomas are tumors originating from arachnoid cap cells on the surface of the brain or spinal cord. Treatment differs by grade but can consist of observation, surgery, radiation therapy or both. We utilized the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to compare trends in the use stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in the management of meningioma. Materials and Methods We queried the NCDB from 2004–2015 for meningioma patients (grade 1–3) treated with radiation therapy, either SRS or EBRT. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of each treatment and to generate a propensity score. Propensity adjusted Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis and multivariable Cox hazards ratios were used to identify predictors of survival. Results We identified 5,406 patients with meningioma meeting above criteria with 45%, 44%, and 11% having World Health Organization (WHO) grade 1, 2, and 3 disease, respectively. Median follow up was 43 months. Predictors for SRS were grade 1 disease, distance from treatment facility, and histology. The only predictor of EBRT was grade 3 disease. Treatment year, histology, race and female sex were associated with improved survival. Five- and 10-year survival rates were 89.2% versus 72.6% (p < 0.0001) and 80.3% versus 61.4% (p = 0.29) for SRS and EBRT respectively. After propensity matching 226 pairs were generated. For SRS, 5-year survival was not significantly improved at 88.2% compared with EBRT (p = 0.056). Conclusion In the present analysis, predictors of SRS utilization in management of meningioma include WHO grade 1 disease, distance from treatment facility and histology whereas conventional EBRT utilization was associated with grade 2 and 3 disease. Future studies need to be performed in order to optimize management of atypical and malignant meningioma.","PeriodicalId":46572,"journal":{"name":"Radiation Oncology Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiation Oncology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3857/roj.2021.00563","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Purpose Meningiomas are tumors originating from arachnoid cap cells on the surface of the brain or spinal cord. Treatment differs by grade but can consist of observation, surgery, radiation therapy or both. We utilized the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to compare trends in the use stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in the management of meningioma. Materials and Methods We queried the NCDB from 2004–2015 for meningioma patients (grade 1–3) treated with radiation therapy, either SRS or EBRT. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of each treatment and to generate a propensity score. Propensity adjusted Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis and multivariable Cox hazards ratios were used to identify predictors of survival. Results We identified 5,406 patients with meningioma meeting above criteria with 45%, 44%, and 11% having World Health Organization (WHO) grade 1, 2, and 3 disease, respectively. Median follow up was 43 months. Predictors for SRS were grade 1 disease, distance from treatment facility, and histology. The only predictor of EBRT was grade 3 disease. Treatment year, histology, race and female sex were associated with improved survival. Five- and 10-year survival rates were 89.2% versus 72.6% (p < 0.0001) and 80.3% versus 61.4% (p = 0.29) for SRS and EBRT respectively. After propensity matching 226 pairs were generated. For SRS, 5-year survival was not significantly improved at 88.2% compared with EBRT (p = 0.056). Conclusion In the present analysis, predictors of SRS utilization in management of meningioma include WHO grade 1 disease, distance from treatment facility and histology whereas conventional EBRT utilization was associated with grade 2 and 3 disease. Future studies need to be performed in order to optimize management of atypical and malignant meningioma.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国脑膜瘤放射治疗的趋势
目的脑膜瘤是起源于脑或脊髓表面蛛网膜帽细胞的肿瘤。治疗因分级而异,但可以包括观察、手术、放射治疗或两者兼而有之。我们利用国家癌症数据库(NCDB)来比较在脑膜瘤治疗中使用立体定向放射手术(SRS)和外束放射治疗(EBRT)的趋势。材料和方法我们查询了2004-2015年接受SRS或EBRT放射治疗的脑膜瘤患者(1-3级)的NCDB。使用多变量逻辑回归来确定每种治疗的预测因子并生成倾向评分。使用倾向校正Kaplan-Meier生存曲线分析和多变量Cox风险比来确定生存预测因子。结果5406例脑膜瘤患者符合上述标准,其中45%、44%和11%分别为世界卫生组织(WHO) 1级、2级和3级疾病。中位随访时间为43个月。SRS的预测因子为1级疾病、与治疗机构的距离和组织学。EBRT的唯一预测因子是3级疾病。治疗时间、组织学、种族和女性与生存率的提高有关。SRS和EBRT的5年和10年生存率分别为89.2%对72.6% (p < 0.0001)和80.3%对61.4% (p = 0.29)。经过倾向匹配,生成226对。对于SRS,与EBRT相比,5年生存率没有显著提高,为88.2% (p = 0.056)。结论:在目前的分析中,脑膜瘤治疗中SRS使用的预测因素包括WHO分级为1级的疾病、与治疗设施的距离和组织学,而常规EBRT使用与分级为2级和3级的疾病相关。未来的研究需要进行,以优化非典型和恶性脑膜瘤的管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
24
期刊最新文献
Implementing high-dose rate surface mould brachytherapy for carcinoma of eyelid: a practical approach and weekly review The effects of high-dose radiation therapy on bone: a scoping review Validation of Combs prognostic scoring system in Indian recurrent glioma patients treated with re-radiation Long-term toxicities after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation with or without total body irradiation: a population-based study in Korea Proton beam therapy as a promising option for high-risk limited stage small cell lung cancer: revealing potential of future novel agents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1