PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11123862

Single Brain Metastasis.

Abstract

The management of single brain metastases has evolved substantially over the last decade. The advent of triple-dose contrast-enhanced MRI scans has improved the radiologists' capacity to resolve small tumors, and, thereby, has resulted in a declining percentage of brain metastases classified as single. Only 25% to 30% of brain metastases are single; single brain metastases in the absence of systemic metastases are termed solitary. Randomized trials suggest that patients not in imminent danger of herniation are best managed initially with dexamethasone 2 to 4 mg administered orally twice daily. The routine use of prophylactic anticonvulsants is discouraged. Patients with refractory progressive systemic tumor likely to prove fatal within 3 to 6 months should receive fractionated whole brain radiotherapy. Patients with highly radiosensitive primary tumors such as small cell lung cancer, lymphoma, and germinoma should also receive whole brain radiotherapy. Patients with inactive or controllable systemic cancer and good performance status benefit from the addition of local strategies like surgery or radiosurgery to whole brain radiotherapy. Although surgery and radiosurgery have not been compared in a randomized controlled trial, data suggest that results are similar. Consequently, for most metastases that fall within the size constraints of radiosurgery (3.5 cm or smaller in diameter), radiosurgery is preferred for its relatively noninvasive nature. Patients with larger or cystic tumors, with obstructive hydrocephalus, or neurologic instability despite corticosteroids are best treated with craniotomy. Fractionated whole brain radiation following surgical or radiosurgical management of single brain metastasis appears to decrease the risk of recurrent brain metastasis, although it has not been shown to improve survival. We recommend its use in most patients, although patients with tumors likely to be highly resistant to fractionated radiotherapy or at high risk of radiation neurotoxicity may reasonably defer its use.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D Schiff. 2001. Single Brain Metastasis.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11940-001-0027-4

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗