Comparative evaluation of outcomes amongst different radiosurgery management paradigms for patients with large brain metastasis
Introduction This study compares four management paradigms for large brain metastasis (LMB): fractionated SRS (FSRS), staged SRS (SSRS), resection and postoperative-FSRS (postop-FSRS) or preoperative-SRS (preop-SRS). Methods Patients with LBM (≥ 2 cm) between July 2017 and January 2022 at a single t...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of neuro-oncology 2024-08, Vol.169 (1), p.105-117 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 117 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 105 |
container_title | Journal of neuro-oncology |
container_volume | 169 |
creator | Kutuk, Tugce Zhang, Yanjia Akdemir, Eyub Yasar Yarlagadda, Sreenija Tolakanahalli, Ranjini Hall, Matthew D. La Rosa, Alonso Wieczorek, DJay J. Lee, Yongsook C. Press, Robert H. Appel, Haley McDermott, Michael W. Odia, Yazmin Ahluwalia, Manmeet S. Gutierrez, Alonso N. Mehta, Minesh P. Kotecha, Rupesh |
description | Introduction
This study compares four management paradigms for large brain metastasis (LMB): fractionated SRS (FSRS), staged SRS (SSRS), resection and postoperative-FSRS (postop-FSRS) or preoperative-SRS (preop-SRS).
Methods
Patients with LBM (≥ 2 cm) between July 2017 and January 2022 at a single tertiary institution were evaluated. Primary endpoints were local failure (LF), radiation necrosis (RN), leptomeningeal disease (LMD), a composite of these variables, and distant intracranial failure (DIF). Gray’s test compared cumulative incidence, treating death as a competing risk with a random survival forests (RSF) machine-learning model also used to evaluate the data.
Results
183 patients were treated to 234 LBMs: 31.6% for postop-FSRS, 28.2% for SSRS, 20.1% for FSRS, and 20.1% for preop-SRS. The overall 1-year composite endpoint rates were comparable (21 vs 20%) between nonoperative and operative strategies, but 1-year RN rate was 8 vs 4% (
p
= 0.012), 1-year overall survival (OS) was 48 vs. 69% (
p
= 0.001), and 1-year LMD rate was 5 vs 10% (
p
= 0.052). There were differences in the 1-year RN rates (7% FSRS, 3% postop-FSRS, 5% preop-SRS, 10% SSRS,
p
= 0.037). With RSF analysis, the out-of-bag error rate for the composite endpoint was 47%, with identified top-risk factors including widespread extracranial disease, > 5 total lesions, and breast cancer histology.
Conclusion
This is the first study to conduct a head-to-head retrospective comparison of four SRS methods, addressing the lack of randomized data in LBM literature amongst treatment paradigms. Despite patient characteristic trends, no significant differences were found in LF, composite endpoint, and DIF rates between non-operative and operative approaches. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11060-024-04706-2 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3064920856</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3064920856</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c256t-7987f16739941d6e7a9893b1470540737387bbd1d9759edea5725481bd221e783</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU-PFCEQxYnRuOPqF_BgSLx4aS2a7gaOZuK_ZBMvmngj9FA9smmakaLX7MmvLu2smngwIQGKXz14PMaeCngpANQrEgIGaKDtGugUDE17j-1Er2SjpJL32Q7EoJredF8u2COia4CKSfGQXUitpQJhduzHPsWTy66EG-R44-a1LtPC08TTWg4pInEX03Kkwn2YJsy4FJ6dD4nWfMR8y6Nb3BHjVt-UfDhG4lPKdVdCrRL_HspXPruK8zG7sPCIxVEdgR6zB5ObCZ_czZfs89s3n_bvm6uP7z7sX181h7YfSqOMVlN1I43phB9QOaONHEW13Xew2dVqHL3wRvUGPbpetX2nxejbVqDS8pK9OOuecvq2IhUbAx1wnt2CaSUrYehMC7ofKvr8H_Q6rXmpr6uU7gSISlaqPVOHnIgyTvaUQ3T51gqwWzz2HI-t8dhf8dit6dmd9DpG9H9afudRAXkGqB4t9Xv_3v0f2Z-Z5Jww</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3084101492</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative evaluation of outcomes amongst different radiosurgery management paradigms for patients with large brain metastasis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Kutuk, Tugce ; Zhang, Yanjia ; Akdemir, Eyub Yasar ; Yarlagadda, Sreenija ; Tolakanahalli, Ranjini ; Hall, Matthew D. ; La Rosa, Alonso ; Wieczorek, DJay J. ; Lee, Yongsook C. ; Press, Robert H. ; Appel, Haley ; McDermott, Michael W. ; Odia, Yazmin ; Ahluwalia, Manmeet S. ; Gutierrez, Alonso N. ; Mehta, Minesh P. ; Kotecha, Rupesh</creator><creatorcontrib>Kutuk, Tugce ; Zhang, Yanjia ; Akdemir, Eyub Yasar ; Yarlagadda, Sreenija ; Tolakanahalli, Ranjini ; Hall, Matthew D. ; La Rosa, Alonso ; Wieczorek, DJay J. ; Lee, Yongsook C. ; Press, Robert H. ; Appel, Haley ; McDermott, Michael W. ; Odia, Yazmin ; Ahluwalia, Manmeet S. ; Gutierrez, Alonso N. ; Mehta, Minesh P. ; Kotecha, Rupesh</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction
This study compares four management paradigms for large brain metastasis (LMB): fractionated SRS (FSRS), staged SRS (SSRS), resection and postoperative-FSRS (postop-FSRS) or preoperative-SRS (preop-SRS).
Methods
Patients with LBM (≥ 2 cm) between July 2017 and January 2022 at a single tertiary institution were evaluated. Primary endpoints were local failure (LF), radiation necrosis (RN), leptomeningeal disease (LMD), a composite of these variables, and distant intracranial failure (DIF). Gray’s test compared cumulative incidence, treating death as a competing risk with a random survival forests (RSF) machine-learning model also used to evaluate the data.
Results
183 patients were treated to 234 LBMs: 31.6% for postop-FSRS, 28.2% for SSRS, 20.1% for FSRS, and 20.1% for preop-SRS. The overall 1-year composite endpoint rates were comparable (21 vs 20%) between nonoperative and operative strategies, but 1-year RN rate was 8 vs 4% (
p
= 0.012), 1-year overall survival (OS) was 48 vs. 69% (
p
= 0.001), and 1-year LMD rate was 5 vs 10% (
p
= 0.052). There were differences in the 1-year RN rates (7% FSRS, 3% postop-FSRS, 5% preop-SRS, 10% SSRS,
p
= 0.037). With RSF analysis, the out-of-bag error rate for the composite endpoint was 47%, with identified top-risk factors including widespread extracranial disease, > 5 total lesions, and breast cancer histology.
Conclusion
This is the first study to conduct a head-to-head retrospective comparison of four SRS methods, addressing the lack of randomized data in LBM literature amongst treatment paradigms. Despite patient characteristic trends, no significant differences were found in LF, composite endpoint, and DIF rates between non-operative and operative approaches.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0167-594X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1573-7373</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-7373</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11060-024-04706-2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38837019</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Brain cancer ; Brain Neoplasms - mortality ; Brain Neoplasms - radiotherapy ; Brain Neoplasms - secondary ; Brain Neoplasms - surgery ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Meninges ; Metastases ; Metastasis ; Middle Aged ; Neurology ; Oncology ; Radiosurgery ; Radiosurgery - methods ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk factors ; Survival ; Survival Rate ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Journal of neuro-oncology, 2024-08, Vol.169 (1), p.105-117</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><rights>2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c256t-7987f16739941d6e7a9893b1470540737387bbd1d9759edea5725481bd221e783</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11060-024-04706-2$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11060-024-04706-2$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38837019$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kutuk, Tugce</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Yanjia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akdemir, Eyub Yasar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yarlagadda, Sreenija</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tolakanahalli, Ranjini</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hall, Matthew D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>La Rosa, Alonso</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wieczorek, DJay J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Yongsook C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Press, Robert H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Appel, Haley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDermott, Michael W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Odia, Yazmin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahluwalia, Manmeet S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gutierrez, Alonso N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mehta, Minesh P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kotecha, Rupesh</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative evaluation of outcomes amongst different radiosurgery management paradigms for patients with large brain metastasis</title><title>Journal of neuro-oncology</title><addtitle>J Neurooncol</addtitle><addtitle>J Neurooncol</addtitle><description>Introduction
This study compares four management paradigms for large brain metastasis (LMB): fractionated SRS (FSRS), staged SRS (SSRS), resection and postoperative-FSRS (postop-FSRS) or preoperative-SRS (preop-SRS).
Methods
Patients with LBM (≥ 2 cm) between July 2017 and January 2022 at a single tertiary institution were evaluated. Primary endpoints were local failure (LF), radiation necrosis (RN), leptomeningeal disease (LMD), a composite of these variables, and distant intracranial failure (DIF). Gray’s test compared cumulative incidence, treating death as a competing risk with a random survival forests (RSF) machine-learning model also used to evaluate the data.
Results
183 patients were treated to 234 LBMs: 31.6% for postop-FSRS, 28.2% for SSRS, 20.1% for FSRS, and 20.1% for preop-SRS. The overall 1-year composite endpoint rates were comparable (21 vs 20%) between nonoperative and operative strategies, but 1-year RN rate was 8 vs 4% (
p
= 0.012), 1-year overall survival (OS) was 48 vs. 69% (
p
= 0.001), and 1-year LMD rate was 5 vs 10% (
p
= 0.052). There were differences in the 1-year RN rates (7% FSRS, 3% postop-FSRS, 5% preop-SRS, 10% SSRS,
p
= 0.037). With RSF analysis, the out-of-bag error rate for the composite endpoint was 47%, with identified top-risk factors including widespread extracranial disease, > 5 total lesions, and breast cancer histology.
Conclusion
This is the first study to conduct a head-to-head retrospective comparison of four SRS methods, addressing the lack of randomized data in LBM literature amongst treatment paradigms. Despite patient characteristic trends, no significant differences were found in LF, composite endpoint, and DIF rates between non-operative and operative approaches.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Brain cancer</subject><subject>Brain Neoplasms - mortality</subject><subject>Brain Neoplasms - radiotherapy</subject><subject>Brain Neoplasms - secondary</subject><subject>Brain Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Meninges</subject><subject>Metastases</subject><subject>Metastasis</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Neurology</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Radiosurgery</subject><subject>Radiosurgery - methods</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><subject>Survival</subject><subject>Survival Rate</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0167-594X</issn><issn>1573-7373</issn><issn>1573-7373</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU-PFCEQxYnRuOPqF_BgSLx4aS2a7gaOZuK_ZBMvmngj9FA9smmakaLX7MmvLu2smngwIQGKXz14PMaeCngpANQrEgIGaKDtGugUDE17j-1Er2SjpJL32Q7EoJredF8u2COia4CKSfGQXUitpQJhduzHPsWTy66EG-R44-a1LtPC08TTWg4pInEX03Kkwn2YJsy4FJ6dD4nWfMR8y6Nb3BHjVt-UfDhG4lPKdVdCrRL_HspXPruK8zG7sPCIxVEdgR6zB5ObCZ_czZfs89s3n_bvm6uP7z7sX181h7YfSqOMVlN1I43phB9QOaONHEW13Xew2dVqHL3wRvUGPbpetX2nxejbVqDS8pK9OOuecvq2IhUbAx1wnt2CaSUrYehMC7ofKvr8H_Q6rXmpr6uU7gSISlaqPVOHnIgyTvaUQ3T51gqwWzz2HI-t8dhf8dit6dmd9DpG9H9afudRAXkGqB4t9Xv_3v0f2Z-Z5Jww</recordid><startdate>20240801</startdate><enddate>20240801</enddate><creator>Kutuk, Tugce</creator><creator>Zhang, Yanjia</creator><creator>Akdemir, Eyub Yasar</creator><creator>Yarlagadda, Sreenija</creator><creator>Tolakanahalli, Ranjini</creator><creator>Hall, Matthew D.</creator><creator>La Rosa, Alonso</creator><creator>Wieczorek, DJay J.</creator><creator>Lee, Yongsook C.</creator><creator>Press, Robert H.</creator><creator>Appel, Haley</creator><creator>McDermott, Michael W.</creator><creator>Odia, Yazmin</creator><creator>Ahluwalia, Manmeet S.</creator><creator>Gutierrez, Alonso N.</creator><creator>Mehta, Minesh P.</creator><creator>Kotecha, Rupesh</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240801</creationdate><title>Comparative evaluation of outcomes amongst different radiosurgery management paradigms for patients with large brain metastasis</title><author>Kutuk, Tugce ; Zhang, Yanjia ; Akdemir, Eyub Yasar ; Yarlagadda, Sreenija ; Tolakanahalli, Ranjini ; Hall, Matthew D. ; La Rosa, Alonso ; Wieczorek, DJay J. ; Lee, Yongsook C. ; Press, Robert H. ; Appel, Haley ; McDermott, Michael W. ; Odia, Yazmin ; Ahluwalia, Manmeet S. ; Gutierrez, Alonso N. ; Mehta, Minesh P. ; Kotecha, Rupesh</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c256t-7987f16739941d6e7a9893b1470540737387bbd1d9759edea5725481bd221e783</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Brain cancer</topic><topic>Brain Neoplasms - mortality</topic><topic>Brain Neoplasms - radiotherapy</topic><topic>Brain Neoplasms - secondary</topic><topic>Brain Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Meninges</topic><topic>Metastases</topic><topic>Metastasis</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Neurology</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Radiosurgery</topic><topic>Radiosurgery - methods</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><topic>Survival</topic><topic>Survival Rate</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kutuk, Tugce</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Yanjia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akdemir, Eyub Yasar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yarlagadda, Sreenija</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tolakanahalli, Ranjini</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hall, Matthew D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>La Rosa, Alonso</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wieczorek, DJay J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Yongsook C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Press, Robert H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Appel, Haley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDermott, Michael W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Odia, Yazmin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahluwalia, Manmeet S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gutierrez, Alonso N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mehta, Minesh P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kotecha, Rupesh</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of neuro-oncology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kutuk, Tugce</au><au>Zhang, Yanjia</au><au>Akdemir, Eyub Yasar</au><au>Yarlagadda, Sreenija</au><au>Tolakanahalli, Ranjini</au><au>Hall, Matthew D.</au><au>La Rosa, Alonso</au><au>Wieczorek, DJay J.</au><au>Lee, Yongsook C.</au><au>Press, Robert H.</au><au>Appel, Haley</au><au>McDermott, Michael W.</au><au>Odia, Yazmin</au><au>Ahluwalia, Manmeet S.</au><au>Gutierrez, Alonso N.</au><au>Mehta, Minesh P.</au><au>Kotecha, Rupesh</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative evaluation of outcomes amongst different radiosurgery management paradigms for patients with large brain metastasis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of neuro-oncology</jtitle><stitle>J Neurooncol</stitle><addtitle>J Neurooncol</addtitle><date>2024-08-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>169</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>105</spage><epage>117</epage><pages>105-117</pages><issn>0167-594X</issn><issn>1573-7373</issn><eissn>1573-7373</eissn><abstract>Introduction
This study compares four management paradigms for large brain metastasis (LMB): fractionated SRS (FSRS), staged SRS (SSRS), resection and postoperative-FSRS (postop-FSRS) or preoperative-SRS (preop-SRS).
Methods
Patients with LBM (≥ 2 cm) between July 2017 and January 2022 at a single tertiary institution were evaluated. Primary endpoints were local failure (LF), radiation necrosis (RN), leptomeningeal disease (LMD), a composite of these variables, and distant intracranial failure (DIF). Gray’s test compared cumulative incidence, treating death as a competing risk with a random survival forests (RSF) machine-learning model also used to evaluate the data.
Results
183 patients were treated to 234 LBMs: 31.6% for postop-FSRS, 28.2% for SSRS, 20.1% for FSRS, and 20.1% for preop-SRS. The overall 1-year composite endpoint rates were comparable (21 vs 20%) between nonoperative and operative strategies, but 1-year RN rate was 8 vs 4% (
p
= 0.012), 1-year overall survival (OS) was 48 vs. 69% (
p
= 0.001), and 1-year LMD rate was 5 vs 10% (
p
= 0.052). There were differences in the 1-year RN rates (7% FSRS, 3% postop-FSRS, 5% preop-SRS, 10% SSRS,
p
= 0.037). With RSF analysis, the out-of-bag error rate for the composite endpoint was 47%, with identified top-risk factors including widespread extracranial disease, > 5 total lesions, and breast cancer histology.
Conclusion
This is the first study to conduct a head-to-head retrospective comparison of four SRS methods, addressing the lack of randomized data in LBM literature amongst treatment paradigms. Despite patient characteristic trends, no significant differences were found in LF, composite endpoint, and DIF rates between non-operative and operative approaches.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>38837019</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11060-024-04706-2</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0167-594X |
ispartof | Journal of neuro-oncology, 2024-08, Vol.169 (1), p.105-117 |
issn | 0167-594X 1573-7373 1573-7373 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3064920856 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals |
subjects | Adult Aged Brain cancer Brain Neoplasms - mortality Brain Neoplasms - radiotherapy Brain Neoplasms - secondary Brain Neoplasms - surgery Female Follow-Up Studies Humans Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Meninges Metastases Metastasis Middle Aged Neurology Oncology Radiosurgery Radiosurgery - methods Retrospective Studies Risk factors Survival Survival Rate Treatment Outcome |
title | Comparative evaluation of outcomes amongst different radiosurgery management paradigms for patients with large brain metastasis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T20%3A19%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20evaluation%20of%20outcomes%20amongst%20different%20radiosurgery%20management%20paradigms%20for%20patients%20with%20large%20brain%20metastasis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20neuro-oncology&rft.au=Kutuk,%20Tugce&rft.date=2024-08-01&rft.volume=169&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=105&rft.epage=117&rft.pages=105-117&rft.issn=0167-594X&rft.eissn=1573-7373&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11060-024-04706-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3064920856%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3084101492&rft_id=info:pmid/38837019&rfr_iscdi=true |