4.5 Article

Safety and feasibility of motexafin gadolinium administration with whole brain radiation therapy and stereotactic radiosurgery boost in the treatment of ≤6 brain metastases: a multi-institutional phase II trial

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEURO-ONCOLOGY
卷 105, 期 2, 页码 301-308

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11060-011-0590-9

关键词

Motexafin gadolinium; Whole-brain radiotherapy; Stereotactic radiosurgery; Brain metastases

资金

  1. Pharmacyclics Inc., Sunnyvale, CA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To determine the safety, tolerability, and report on secondary efficacy endpoints of motexafin gadolinium (MGd) in combination with whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for patients with <= 6 brain metastases. We conducted an international study of WBRT (37.5 Gy in 15 fractions) and SRS (15-21 Gy) with the addition of MGd (5 mg/kg preceding each fraction beginning week 2). The primary endpoint was to evaluate the rate of irreversible grade 3 or any grade >= 4 neurotoxicity and establish feasibility in preparation for a phase III trial. Sixty-five patients were enrolled from 14 institutions, of which 45 (69%) received SRS with MGd as intended and were available for evaluation. Grade >= 3 neurotoxicity attributable to radiation therapy within 3 months of SRS was seen in 2 patients (4.4%), including generalized weakness and radionecrosis requiring surgical management. Immediately following the course of MGd plus WBRT, new brain metastases were detected in 11 patients (24.4%) at the time of the SRS treatment planning MRI. The actuarial incidence of neurologic progression at 6 months and 1 year was 17 and 20%, respectively. The median investigator-determined neurologic progression free survival and overall survival times were 8 (95% CI: 5-14) and 9 months (95% CI: 6-not reached), respectively. We observed a low rate of neurotoxicity, demonstrating that the addition of MGd does not increase the incidence or severity of neurologic complications from WBRT with SRS boost.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据