ArticleCureus2021
A Single-Institution Retrospective Study of Patients Treated With Laser-Interstitial Thermal Therapy for Radiation Necrosis of the Brain.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laser Interstitial Thermal Therapy for Brain Tumors: A Prospective Multicenter Analysis of Patients From the LAANTERN Study.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2026Article
- Advances in the prevention and treatment of radiation-induced brain necrosis: a narrative review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Recent advances in laser interstitial thermal therapy in the treatment of brain metastases and radiation necrosis.Lasers in medical science · 2025Review
- Five-year survivors from brain metastases treated with stereotactic radiosurgery: Biology, improving treatments, or just plain luck?Neuro-oncology practice · 2023Article
- Efficacy of laser interstitial thermal therapy for biopsy-proven radiation necrosis in radiographically recurrent brain metastases.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Object Laser-interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) has been proposed as an alternative treatment to surgery for radiation necrosis (RN) in patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases. The present study sought to retrospectively analyze LITT outcomes in patients with RN from SRS. Methods This was a single-institution retrospective study of 30 patients treated from 2011-2018 with pathologically-proven RN after SRS for brain metastases (n=28) or proximally treated extracranial lesions treated with external beam radiotherapy (n=2). Same-day biopsy was performed in all cases. Patients were prospectively followed with Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Brain (FACT-Br), EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D), Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) and clinical history and examination. Adjusted means, standard errors and tests comparing visits to pre-LITT were generated. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate time overall survival. Competing risk analysis was used to estimate cumulative incidence of LITT failure. Results In our patient population, median time from radiotherapy to LITT was 13.1 months. Median SRS dose and median LITT treatment target volume were 20 Gy (IQR 18-22) and 3.5 cc (IQR 2.2-4.6), respectively. Seventy-seven percent of our patients tapered off steroids within one month. There were only two instances of RN recurrence after LITT, with recurrence defined as recurrence of symptoms after initial improvement. These recurrences occurred at 1.9 and 3.4 months. The three-, six- and nine-month freedom from recurrence rates were 95.7%, 90.9%, and 90.9%. Median survival in our patient population with pathologically confirmed RN treated with LITT was 2.1 years. Regarding the quality of life questionnaires with which some patients were followed as part of different prospective studies, completion rates were 22/30 for FACT-Br, 16/30 for the EQ-5D and 8/30 for HVLT. Quality of life questionnaire results were overall stable from baseline. Mean FACT-Br scores were stable from baseline (17.9, 16.6, 21.4 and 22.8) to three months (18.8, 15.4, 18.4 and 23.4) (p=0.38, 0.53, 0.09 and 0.59). The mean EQ-5D Aggregate score was stable from baseline (7.1) to one month (7.6) (p=0.25). Mean HVLT-R Total Recall was stable from baseline (20.6) to three months (18.4) (p=0.09). There was a statistically significant decrease in mean Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) score from baseline (84) to three-month follow-up (75) (p=0.03). Conclusions LITT represents a safe and durably effective treatment option for RN in the brain. Results demonstrate a median survival of 2.1 years from LITT with only two recurrences, both within four months of treatment and salvageable. Patient-reported outcomes showed no severe declines after LITT. Quality of life questionnaires demonstrated stable well-being and functionality from baseline. LITT should be considered for definitive treatment of RN, especially in cases where patients have significant side effects from standards medical therapies such as steroids or if steroids are minimally effective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.