Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Oct 21;16(20):3551.
doi: 10.3390/cancers16203551.

Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Intracranial Breast Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Affiliations
Review

Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Intracranial Breast Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Neil D Almeida et al. Cancers (Basel). .

Abstract

Background/objectives: To determine the impact of stereotactic radiosurgery on outcomes of metastatic breast cancer with intracranial metastases.

Methods: We systematically searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases for studies published between 1 January 1990 and 1 August 2024. Primary research articles evaluating the outcomes of stereotactic radiosurgery on intracranial metastases from breast cancer were included. Adverse events were defined as leptomeningeal disease, radiation necrosis, seizure, and headache. The pooled estimate was calculated using the DerSimonian and Laird approach.

Results: Sixteen studies encompassing 1228 patients met the inclusion criteria. Our analysis revealed a median survival duration of 13.1 ± 3.8 months and a pooled 1-year overall survival rate of 53.1% after SRS treatment. There was a 29% local recurrence rate at 1 year and a 35% overall distant recurrence rate. In addition, our analysis found a relatively low rate of acute adverse events at 15.5%.

Conclusions: SRS demonstrates promising efficacy and safety in managing intracranial metastases from breast cancer, with a favorable toxicity profile.

Keywords: Gamma Knife radiosurgery; breast cancer; intracranial metastasis; stereotactic radiosurgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author Chirag Shah reports Consultant Impedimed, PreludeDX, and Videra Surgical as conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study selection flow chart.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Meta-analysis of 1-year overall survival shown as a forest plot. Plots weighted for sample size show the 1-year overall survival rate ranging from 41.36% to 68.03%. CI, confidence interval [3,14,15,18,19,20,21,22,24,27].
Figure 3
Figure 3
Meta-analysis of 1-year progression-free survival shown as a forest plot. Plots weighted for sample size show the 1-year progression-free survival rate ranging from 42.20% to 79.74%. CI, confidence interval [3,19,23,27].
Figure 4
Figure 4
Meta-analysis of 1-year local recurrence rate shown as a forest plot. Plots weighted for sample size show the 1-year local recurrence rate ranging from 16.65% to 51.96%. CI, confidence interval [17,18,21,22,24].
Figure 5
Figure 5
Meta-analysis of overall local recurrence rate shown as a forest plot. Plots weighted for sample size show the overall local recurrence rate ranging from 7.29% to 23.98%. CI, confidence interval [15,20,21,22,23,24,25].
Figure 6
Figure 6
Meta-analysis of overall distant recurrence rate shown as a forest plot. Plots weighted for sample size show the distant recurrence rate ranging from 30.69% to 39.89%. CI, confidence interval [15,18,20,21,22,24,25].
Figure 7
Figure 7
Meta-analysis of acute adverse event rate shown as a forest plot. Plots weighted for sample size show the acute adverse event rate ranging from 8.77% to 27.33%. CI, confidence interval [15,19,20,23,24,27].
Figure 8
Figure 8
Meta-analysis of neurological death shown as a forest plot. Plots weighted for sample size show the neurological death rate ranging from 13.63% to 34.17%. CI, confidence interval [3,4,14,23,24,27].

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Arnold M., Morgan E., Rumgay H., Mafra A., Singh D., Laversanne M., Vignat J., Gralow J.R., Cardoso F., Siesling S., et al. Current and future burden of breast cancer: Global statistics for 2020 and 2040. Breast. 2022;66:15–23. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2022.08.010. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wilkinson L., Gathani T. Understanding breast cancer as a global health concern. Br. J. Radiol. 2022;95:20211033. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20211033. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ratosa I., Vidmar M.S. Stereotactic radiosurgery for patients with breast cancer brain oligometastases—Molecular subtypes and clinical outcomes. Rep. Pract. Oncol. Radiother. 2021;26:1–11. doi: 10.5603/RPOR.a2021.0001. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wilson T.G., Robinson T., MacFarlane C., Spencer T., Herbert C., Wade L., Reed H., Braybrooke J.P. Treating Brain Metastases from Breast Cancer: Outcomes after Stereotactic Radiosurgery. Clin. Oncol. (R. Coll. Radiol.) 2020;32:390–396. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2020.02.007. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Martin A.M., Cagney D.N., Catalano P.J., Warren L.E., Bellon J.R., Punglia R.S., Claus E.B., Lee E.Q., Wen P.Y., Haas-Kogan D.A., et al. Brain Metastases in Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Study. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3:1069–1077. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.0001. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources