Gamma Knife Surgery versus Linac for Brain Metastasis: Which Technique for Which Patient? Analysis of an Historical Cohort of 63 Consecutive Patients Harboring 130 Lesions


Serval ID
Inproceedings: an article in a conference proceedings.
Publication sub-type
Abstract (Abstract): shot summary in a article that contain essentials elements presented during a scientific conference, lecture or from a poster.
Gamma Knife Surgery versus Linac for Brain Metastasis: Which Technique for Which Patient? Analysis of an Historical Cohort of 63 Consecutive Patients Harboring 130 Lesions
Title of the conference
journal of Neurological Surgery Part A: Central European Neurosurgery
Levivier M., Tuleasca C., Schiappacasse L., Gevaert T., Faouzi M., Von Elm E., Steenbecke F., Engels B., de Ridder M., Bourhis J.
Joint Annual Meeting 2015: Swiss Society of Neurosurgery and Swiss Society of Neuroradiology Together with IG-NOPPS, Lucerne, Switzerland, 10-11 September 2015
2193-6315 (Print)
2193-6323 (Electronic)
Publication state
Issued date
Objectives: We present the retrospective analysis of a single-institution experience for radiosurgery (RS) in brain metastasis (BM) with Gamma Knife (GK) and Linac. Methods: From July 2010 to July 2012, 28 patients (with 83 lesions) had RS with GK and 35 patients (with 47 lesions) with Linac. The primary outcome was the local progression-free survival (LPFS). The secondary outcome was the overall survival (OS). Apart a standard statistical analysis, we included a Cox regression model with shared frailty, to modulate the within-patient correlation (preliminary evaluation showed a significant frailty effect, meaning that the correlation within patient could be ignored). Results: The mean follow-up period was 11.7 months (median 7.9, 1.7-22.7) for GK and 18.1 (median 17, 7.5-28.7) for Linac. The median number of lesions per patient was 2.5 (1-9) in GK compared with 1 (1-3) in Linac. There were more radioresistant lesions (melanoma) and more lesions located in functional areas for the GK group. The median dose was 24 Gy (GK) compared with 20 Gy (Linac). The LPFS actuarial rate was as follows: for GK at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 17 months: 96.96, 96.96, 96.96, 88.1, and 81.5%, and remained stable till 32 months; for Linac at 3, 6, 12, 17, 24, and 33 months, it was 91.5, 91.5, 91.5, 79.9, 55.5, and 17.1%, respectively (p = 0.03, chi-square test). After the Cox regression analysis with shared frailty, the p-value was not statistically significant between groups. The median overall survival was 9.7 months for GK and 23.6 months for Linac group. Uni- and multivariate analysis showed a lower GPA score and noncontrolled systemic status were associated with lower OS. Cox regression analysis adjusting for these two parameters showed comparable OS rate. Conclusions: In this comparative report between GK and Linac, preliminary analysis showed that more difficult cases are treated by GK, with patients harboring more lesions, radioresistant tumors, and highly functional located. The groups look, in this sense, very heterogeneous at baseline. After a Cox frailty model, the LPFS rates seemed very similar (p < 0.05). The OS was similar, after adjusting for systemic status and GPA score (p < 0.05). The technical reasons for choosing GK instead of Linac were the anatomical location related to highly functional areas, histology, technical limitations of Linac movements, especially lower posterior fossa locations, or closeness of multiple lesions to highly functional areas optimal dosimetry with Linac
Create date
20/10/2015 9:44
Last modification date
20/08/2019 16:43
Usage data