Integrating Overall Survival and Tumor Control Probability Models to Predict Local Progression After Brain Metastasis Radiosurgery

Aaron B Simon; Jeffrey Quezada; Ahmed Mohyeldin; Jeremy Harris; Mengying Shi; Steven Seyedin; Varun Sehgal; Allen M Chen

doi:10.1016/j.adro.2024.101474

Integrating Overall Survival and Tumor Control Probability Models to Predict Local Progression After Brain Metastasis Radiosurgery

Adv Radiat Oncol. 2024 Feb 16;9(6):101474. doi: 10.1016/j.adro.2024.101474. eCollection 2024 Jun.

Authors

Aaron B Simon¹, Jeffrey Quezada², Ahmed Mohyeldin³, Jeremy Harris¹, Mengying Shi¹, Steven Seyedin¹, Varun Sehgal¹, Allen M Chen¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California.
² University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Irvine, California.
³ Department of Neurosurgery, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California.

Abstract

Purpose: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases is frequently prescribed to the maximum tolerated dose to minimize the probability of local progression. However, many patients die from extracranial disease prior to local progression and may not require maximally aggressive treatment. Recently, improvements in models of SRS tumor control probability (TCP) and overall survival (OS) have been made. We predicted that by combining models of OS and TCP, we could better predict the true risk of local progression after SRS than by using TCP modeling alone.

Methods and materials: Records of patients undergoing SRS at a single institution were reviewed retrospectively. Using established TCP and OS models, for each patient, the probability of 1-year survival [ $p (O S)$ ] was calculated, as was the probability of 1-year local progression [ $p (L P)$ ]) for each treated lesion. Joint-probability was used to combine the models [ $p (L P, O S) = p (L P) * p (O S)$ ]. Analyses were conducted at the individual metastasis and whole-patient levels. Fine-Gray regression was used to model $p (L P)$ or $p (L P, O S)$ on the risk of local progression after SRS, with death as a competing risk.

Results: At the patient level, 1-year local progression was 0.08 (95% CI, 0.03-0.15), median $p (L P, O S)$ was 0.13 (95% CI, 0.07-0.2), and median $p (L P)$ was 0.29 (95% CI, 0.22-0.38). At the metastasis level, 1-year local progression was 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01-0.04), median $p (L P, O S)$ was 0.05 (95% CI, 0.02-0.07), and median $p (L P)$ was 0.10 (95% CI, 0.07-0.13). $p (L P, O S)$ was found to be significantly associated with the risk of local progression at the patient level (P = .048) and metastasis level (P = .007); however, $p (L P)$ was not (P = .16 and P = .28, respectively).

Conclusions: Simultaneous modeling of OS and TCP more accurately predicted local progression than TCP modeling alone. Better understanding which patients with brain metastases are at risk of local progression after SRS may help personalize treatment to minimize risk without sacrificing efficacy.