Predictors of linear accelerator versus Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery use for brain metastases in the United States
Date
Language
Embargo Lift Date
Department
Committee Members
Degree
Degree Year
Department
Grantor
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Found At
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases is predominantly delivered via single-fraction Gamma Knife SRS (GKRS) or linear accelerator (LINAC) in 1–5 fractions. Predictors of SRS modality have been sparsely examined on a nationwide level.
METHODS The 2010–2016 National Cancer Database identified brain metastases patients from non-small cell lung cancer throughout the United States (US) having undergone SRS. A multivariable logistic regression model characterized SRS receipt, adjusting for patient age, dose, geographic location of treatment, facility type, and distance from treatment facility.
RESULTS A total of 1,760 patients received GKRS, while 1,064 patients received LINAC SRS. Treatment at non-academic facilities was associated with increased LINAC SRS receipt, most prominently in the Midwestern (OR= 6.23; p< 0.001), Northeastern (OR= 4.42; p< 0.001), and Southern US (OR= 1.96;p< 0.001). Administered doses of 18–19 Gy (OR= 1.42;p= 0.025), 20–21 Gy (OR= 1.82;p< 0.001), and 22–24 Gy (OR= 3.11;p< 0.001) were associated with increased LINAC SRS receipt, as was patient location within 20 miles of a radiation treatment facility (OR= 1.27;p= 0.007).
CONCLUSIONS Despite Gamma Knife being more prominently used over LINAC for SRS, patients treated at non-academic facilities outside of the Western US were substantially more likely to receive LINAC over Gamma Knife. Patients located in the Midwest were 523% more likely, Northeast 342% more likely, and South 96% more likely to receive LINAC when treated at a non-academic facility. Increasing dose independently predicted LINAC over GKRS, indicating that smaller tumors – particularly those less than two centimeters (consistent with RTOG 90-05 recommendations) – are being treated with LINAC. Finally, patients residing in close proximity to a treatment center were 27% more likely to receive LINAC, likely indicative of the increased geographic accessibility of LINAC compared with GKRS. These findings should result in hypothesis-generating questions to further explore predictors of LINAC versus GKRS.