Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38097090›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2024

Long-Term Intracranial Outcomes With Combination Dual Immune-Checkpoint Blockade and Stereotactic Radiosurgery in Patients With Melanoma and Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Brain Metastases.

Eugene J Vaios, Rachel F Shenker, Peter G Hendrickson, Zihan Wan, Donna Niedzwiecki, Sebastian F Winter, Helen A Shih, Jorg Dietrich, Chunhao Wang, April K S Salama and 7 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Improved Survival and Prognostication in Melanoma Patients With Brain Metastases: An Update of the Melanoma Graded Prognostic Assessment.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Eugene J VaiosDepartments of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Rachel F ShenkerDepartments of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Peter G HendricksonDepartments of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Zihan WanDuke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Donna NiedzwieckiDuke Cancer Institute Biostatistics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Sebastian F WinterDivision of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Helen A ShihDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jorg DietrichDivision of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Chunhao WangDepartments of Medical Physics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
April K S SalamaMedicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Jeffrey M ClarkeMedicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Karen AllenDepartments of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Paul SperdutoDepartments of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Trey MullikinDepartments of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
John P KirkpatrickDepartments of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Neurosurgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Scott R FloydDepartments of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Zachary J ReitmanDepartments of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Neurosurgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Pathology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. Electronic address: zjr@duke.edu.
Duke Medical Center · USMassachusetts General Hospital · US

Funding

Duke Radiation Oncology and Radiology Stimulating Access to Research in ResidencyR38CA245204 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI FLOYD, SCOTT R · 2020 to 2023
$1.4M
Enhancing the efficacy of Radiation Therapy for brainstem glioma by targeting ATMK08CA256045 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Zachary Reitman · 2022 to 2026
$1.1M
NCI NIH HHS K08 CA256045NCI NIH HHS R38 CA245204
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe intracranial benefit of offering dual immune-checkpoint inhibition (D-ICPI) with ipilimumab and nivolumab to patients with melanoma or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases (BMs) is unknown. We hypothesized that D-ICPI improves local control compared with SRS alone. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with melanoma or NSCLC treated with SRS from 2014 to 2022 were evaluated. Patients were stratified by treatment with D-ICPI, single ICPI (S-ICPI), or SRS alone. Local recurrence, intracranial progression (IP), and overall survival were estimated using competing risk and Kaplan-Meier analyses. IP included both local and distant intracranial recurrence.

resultsTwo hundred eighty-eight patients (44% melanoma, 56% NSCLC) with 1,704 BMs were included. Fifty-three percent of patients had symptomatic BMs. The median follow-up was 58.8 months. Twelve-month local control rates with D-ICPI, S-ICPI, and SRS alone were 94.73% (95% CI, 91.11%-96.90%), 91.74% (95% CI, 89.30%-93.64%), and 88.26% (95% CI, 84.07%-91.41%). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, only D-ICPI was significantly associated with reduced local recurrence (P = .0032). On multivariate Cox regression, D-ICPI (hazard ratio [HR], 0.4003; 95% CI, 0.1781-0.8728; P = .0239) and planning target volume (HR, 1.022; 95% CI, 1.004-1.035; P = .0059) correlated with local control. One hundred seventy-three (60%) patients developed IP. The 12-month cumulative incidence of IP was 41.27% (95% CI, 30.27%-51.92%), 51.86% (95% CI, 42.78%-60.19%), and 57.15% (95% CI, 44.98%-67.59%) after D-ICPI, S-ICPI, and SRS alone. On competing risk analysis, only D-ICPI was significantly associated with reduced IP (P = .0408). On multivariate Cox regression, D-ICPI (HR, 0.595; 95% CI, 0.373-0.951; P = .0300) and presentation with >10 BMs (HR, 2.492; 95% CI, 1.668-3.725; P < .0001) remained significantly correlated with IP. The median overall survival after D-ICPI, S-ICPI, and SRS alone was 26.1 (95% CI, 15.5-40.7), 21.5 (16.5-29.6), and 17.5 (11.3-23.8) months. S-ICPI, fractionation, and histology were not associated with clinical outcomes. There was no difference in hospitalizations or neurologic adverse events between cohorts.

conclusionsThe addition of D-ICPI for patients with melanoma and NSCLC undergoing SRS is associated with improved local and intracranial control. This appears to be an effective strategy, including for patients with symptomatic or multiple BMs.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsMelanomaRadiosurgeryHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsRetrospective StudiesImmune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID38097090
PMCPMC11056239
OpenAlexW4389617339

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.