4.6 Article

Pseudoprogression of Vestibular Schwannoma after Stereotactic Radiosurgery with Cyberknife(R): Proposal for New Response Criteria

Journal

CANCERS
Volume 15, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cancers15051496

Keywords

radiosurgery; vestibular schwannoma; Cyberknife (R); skull base tumors; RANO criteria

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

After stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for vestibular schwannomas (VS), the temporary increase in tumor size complicates the differentiation between treatment-related changes (pseudoprogression) and tumor recurrence (progressive disease). Therefore, modifying RANO criteria is proposed to facilitate further observation of VS during follow-up.
(1) Background: Transient increase in volume of vestibular schwannomas (VS) after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is common and complicates differentiation between treatment-related changes (pseudoprogression, PP) and tumor recurrence (progressive disease, PD). (2) Methods: Patients with unilateral VS (n = 63) underwent single fraction robotic-guided SRS. Volume changes were classified according to existing RANO criteria. A new response type, PP, with a > 20% transient increase in volume was defined and divided into early (within the first 12 months) and late (> 12 months) occurrence. (3) Results: The median age was 56 (range: 20-82) years, the median initial tumor volume was 1.5 (range: 0.1-8.6) cm(3). The median radiological and clinical follow-up time was 66 (range: 24-103) months. Partial response was observed in 36% (n = 23), stable disease in 35% (n = 22) and PP in 29% (n = 18) of patients. The latter occurred early (16%, n = 10) or late (13%, n = 8). Using these criteria, no case of PD was observed. (4) Conclusion: Any volume increase after SRS for vs. assumed to be PD turned out to be early or late PP. Therefore, we propose modifying RANO criteria for SRS of VS, which may affect the management of vs. during follow-up in favor of further observation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available