Search

Key Points: Question: What is the effect among patients with small- or medium-sized vestibular schwannoma of upfront radiosurgery on tumor volume at 4 years vs a wait-and-scan approach with treatment given only when tumor growth was documented radiographically? Findings: In this randomized clinical trial that included 100 patients, the mean ratio between tumor volume at the trial end and baseline (V4:V0) was 0.87 in the upfront radiosurgery group and 1.51 in the wait-and-scan group, a significant difference. Meaning: Among patients with small or medium vestibular schwannoma, a treatment strategy consisting of upfront radiosurgery was more effective at reducing tumor volume at 4 years than was the initial wait-and-scan approach. Importance: Current guidelines for treating small- to medium-sized vestibular schwannoma recommend either upfront radiosurgery or waiting to treat until tumor growth has been detected radiographically. Objective: To determine whether upfront radiosurgery provides superior tumor volume reduction to a wait-and-scan approach for small- to medium-sized vestibular schwannoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial of 100 patients with a newly diagnosed (<6 months) unilateral vestibular schwannoma and a maximal tumor diameter of less than 2 cm in the cerebellopontine angle as measured on magnetic resonance imaging. Participants were enrolled at the Norwegian National Unit for Vestibular Schwannoma from October 28, 2014, through October 3, 2017; 4-year follow-up ended on October 20, 2021. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive either upfront radiosurgery (n = 50) or to undergo a wait-and-scan protocol, for which treatment was given only upon radiographically documented tumor growth (n = 50). Participants underwent 5 annual study visits consisting of clinical assessment, radiological examination, audiovestibular tests, and questionnaires. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the ratio between tumor volume at the trial end at 4 years and baseline (V4:V0). There were 26 prespecified secondary outcomes, including patient-reported symptoms, clinical examinations, audiovestibular tests, and quality-of-life outcomes. Safety outcomes were the risk of salvage microsurgery and radiation-associated complications. Results: Of the 100 randomized patients, 98 completed the trial and were included in the primary analysis (mean age, 54 years; 42% female). In the upfront radiosurgery group, 1 participant (2%) received repeated radiosurgery upon tumor growth, 2 (4%) needed salvage microsurgery, and 45 (94%) had no additional treatment. In the wait-and-scan group, 21 patients (42%) received radiosurgery upon tumor growth, 1 (2%) underwent salvage microsurgery, and 28 (56%) remained untreated. For the primary outcome of the ratio of tumor volume at the trial end to baseline, the geometric mean V4:V0 was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.66-1.15) in the upfront radiosurgery group and 1.51 (95% CI, 1.23-1.84) in the wait-and-scan group, showing a significantly greater tumor volume reduction in patients treated with upfront radiosurgery (wait-and-scan to upfront radiosurgery ratio, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.23-2.44; P =.002). Of 26 secondary outcomes, 25 showed no significant difference. No radiation-associated complications were observed. Conclusion and relevance: Among patients with newly diagnosed small- and medium-sized vestibular schwannoma, upfront radiosurgery demonstrated a significantly greater tumor volume reduction at 4 years than a wait-and-scan approach with treatment upon tumor growth. These findings may help inform treatment decisions for patients with vestibular schwannoma, and further investigation of long-term clinical outcomes is needed. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02249572 This randomized clinical trial evaluates whether upfront radiosurgery is more effective in reducing vestibular schwannoma tumor size than treatment delivered only when tumor growth has been detected radiographically. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The success of deep brain stimulation (DBS) treatment depends on several factors, including proper patient selection, accurate electrode placement, and adequate stimulation settings. Another factor that may impact long-term satisfaction and therapy outcomes is the type of implantable pulse generator (IPG) used: rechargeable or non-rechargeable. However, there are currently no guidelines on the choice of IPG type. The present study investigates the current practices, opinions, and factors DBS clinicians consider when choosing an IPG for their patients. Methods: Between December 2021 and June 2022, we sent a structured questionnaire with 42 questions to DBS experts of two international, functional neurosurgery societies. The questionnaire included a rating scale where participants could rate the factors influencing their choice of IPG type and their satisfaction with certain IPG aspects. Additionally, we presented four clinical case scenarios to assess preference of choice of IPG-type in each case. Results: Eighty-seven participants from 30 different countries completed the questionnaire. The three most relevant factors for IPG choice were "existing social support," "cognitive status," and "patient age." Most participants believed that patients valued avoiding repetitive replacement surgeries more than the burden of regularly recharging the IPG. Participants reported that they implanted the same amount of rechargeable as non-rechargeable IPGs for primary DBS insertions and 20% converted non-rechargeable to rechargeable IPGs during IPG replacements. Most participants estimated that rechargeable was the more cost-effective option. Conclusion: This present study shows that the decision-making of the choice of IPG is very individualized. We identified the key factors influencing the physician's choice of IPG. Compared to patient-centric studies, clinicians may value different aspects. Therefore, clinicians should rely not only on their opinion but also counsel patients on different types of IPGs and consider the patient's preferences. Uniform global guidelines on IPG choice may not represent regional or national differences in the healthcare systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Coercion is rare in cancer treatment. We present a case where a young woman received gamma knife radiosurgery and immunochemotherapy under compulsory institutional care., Case Presentation: A previously healthy patient in her thirties was admitted to hospital due to confusion, apathy, weight loss and sleep disturbance. She had difficulties expressing herself and spoke with considerable latency. A brain MRI revealed a tumour of 23 mm in the left-side centrum semiovale and perifocal oedema, while a CT scan showed a 5.6 cm tumour in the right upper lobe and enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes. She was diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer, no actionable mutations, PD-L1 <75 %. When she did not wish to return to the hospital to undergo gamma knife radiosurgery, she was readmitted under a formal decision to use coercion, and remained under institutional care for over six months. Today she is fully recovered and has no cancer progression almost five years after diagnosis., Interpretation: This case report illustrates the challenges of brain metastases and use of coercion during cancer treatment, both for the patient and healthcare personnel. There is a need for thorough interdisciplinary discussions and to establish as early as possible a shared understanding of the intention and scope of the forced treatment.

Objective: The goal of microsurgical resection of vestibular schwannoma (VS) is gross-total resection (GTR) to provide oncological cure. However, a popular strategy is to halt the resection if the surgical team feels the risk of cranial nerve injury is imminent, achieving a maximally safe subtotal resection (STR) instead. The tumor remnant can then be treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) once the patient has recovered from the immediate postoperative period, or it can be followed with serial imaging and treated with SRS in a delayed fashion if residual tumor growth is seen. In this study, the authors evaluated the efficacy of this multimodality approach, particularly the influence of timing and dose of SRS on radiological tumor control, need for salvage treatment, and cranial nerve function., Methods: VS patients treated with initial microsurgery and subsequent radiosurgery were retrospectively included from two tertiary treatment centers and dichotomized depending on whether SRS was given upfront (defined as before 12 months) or later. Radiological tumor control was defined as less than 20% tumor volume expansion and oncological tumor control as an absence of salvage treatment. Facial and cochlear nerve functions were assessed after surgery, at the time of SRS, and at last follow-up. Finally, a systematic literature review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines., Results: A total of 110 VS patients underwent SRS following microsurgical resection, with a mean preradiosurgical tumor volume of 2.2 cm3 (SD 2.5 cm3) and mean post-SRS follow-up time of 5.8 years (SD 4.1 years). The overall radiological tumor control and oncological tumor control were 77.3% and 90.9%, respectively. Thirty-five patients (31.8%) received upfront SRS, while 75 patients (68.2%) were observed for a minimum of 12 months prior to SRS. The timing of SRS did not influence the radiological tumor control (p = 0.869), the oncological tumor control (p = 0.560), or facial nerve (p = 0.413) or cochlear nerve (p = 0.954) function. An escalated marginal dose (> 12 Gy) was associated with greater tumor shrinkage (p = 0.020) and superior radiological tumor control (p = 0.020), but it did not influence the risk of salvage treatment (p = 0.904) or facial (p = 0.351) or cochlear (p = 0.601) nerve deterioration., Conclusions: Delayed SRS after close observation of residuals following STR is a safe alternative to upfront SRS regarding tumor control and cranial nerve preservation in selected patients.

Objectives/hypothesis: To investigate the influence of posttreatment audiovestibular symptoms, facial neuropathy, and headache on long-term quality-of-life outcomes in patients with sporadic vestibular schwannoma (VS) utilizing the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey and the Penn Acoustic Neuroma Quality of Life (PANQOL) scale., Study Design: Cross-sectional observation study., Methods: Patients with sporadic small- or medium-sized VS (< 3.0 cm) who were evaluated between 1998 and 2008 at two independent tertiary academic referral centers were surveyed. Multivariable associations with the PANQOL total score and the SF-36 physical and mental component scores evaluated using regression analysis., Results: A total of 538 surveyed patients returned a completed questionnaire, providing a response rate of 79%. Two hundred forty-seven (46%) patients underwent stereotactic radiosurgery, 143 (27%) microsurgery, and 148 (28%) observation. Multivariable regression analysis revealed that ongoing dizziness was associated with the greatest reduction in PANQOL total score, followed by headache. After adjusting for all examined features, ongoing dizziness and ongoing headache were the only two variables that were associated with both the SF-36 physical and mental component scores. Patient sex and treatment modality did not significantly influence PANQOL or SF-36 scores., Conclusions: Ongoing dizziness and headache are the strongest predictors of long-term quality-of-life reduction in patients with sporadic VS, while the impact of hearing loss, facial nerve function, and tinnitus are less by comparison. This information may be valuable for patient counseling, refinement of VS quality-of-life assessment instruments, and determining high-yield targets for therapy in efforts to further improve patient outcomes., (© 2014 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)