Executive Summary from American Radium Society's Appropriate Use Criteria on Neurocognition after stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases. Neuro-oncology Milano, M. T., Chiang, V. L., Soltys, S. G., Wang, T. J., Lo, S. S., Brackett, A. n., Nagpal, S. n., Chao, S. n., Garg, A. K., Jabbari, S. n., Halasz, L. M., Gephart, M. H., Knisely, J. P., Sahgal, A. n., Chang, E. L. 2020


The ARS Appropriate Use Criteria brain malignancies panel systematically reviewed (PRISMA) published literature on neurocognitive outcomes after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for patients with multiple brain metastases (BrM) to generate consensus guidelines.The panel developed 4 key questions (KQ) to guide systematic review. From 11,614 original articles, 12 were selected. The panel developed model cases addressing KQ and potentially controversial scenarios not addressed in the systematic review (that might inform future ARS projects). Based upon quality of evidence, the panel confidentially voted on treatment options using a 9-point scale of appropriateness.The panel agreed that SRS-alone is usually appropriate for those with good performance status (PS) and 2-10 asymptomatic BrM, and usually not appropriate for >20 BrM. For 11-15 and 16-20 BrM there was (between 4 case variants) agreement that SRS-alone may be appropriate or disagreement on the appropriateness of SRS-alone. There was no scenario in which conventional whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) was considered usually appropriate by most panelists. There were several areas of disagreement, including: hippocampal sparing WBRT for 2-4 asymptomatic BrM; WBRT for resected BrM amenable to SRS; fractionated- vs, single-fraction SRS for resected BrM, larger targets and/or brainstem metastases; optimal treatment (WBRT, hippocampal sparing WBRT, SRS-alone to all or select lesions) for patients with progressive extracranial disease, poor PS and no systemic options.For patients with 2-10 BrM, SRS-alone is an appropriate treatment option for well-selected patients with good PS. Future study is needed for those scenarios in which there was disagreement among panelists.

View details for DOI 10.1093/neuonc/noaa192

View details for PubMedID 32780818