Next Article in Journal
When Impatience Is a Virtue
Previous Article in Journal
Use of Low-Value Radiotherapy Practices in Canada: An Analysis of Provincial Cancer Registry Data
 
 
Current Oncology is published by MDPI from Volume 28 Issue 1 (2021). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with Multimed Inc..
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Clinical Surveillance Compared with Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Surveillance for Brain Metastasis: A Feasibility Survey

by
K.C.Y. Yiu
1,* and
J.N. Greenspoon
1,2
1
McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8V 5C2, Canada
2
Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, ON, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Curr. Oncol. 2016, 23(5), 356-360; https://doi.org/10.3747/co.23.3155
Submission received: 7 July 2016 / Revised: 12 August 2016 / Accepted: 11 September 2016 / Published: 1 October 2016

Abstract

Introduction: After stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases, patients are routinely monitored with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The high rate of new brain metastases after SRS treatment alone might not be as concerning with modern MRI and target localization treatment. Intensive surveillance might induce anxiety, lowering the patient’s quality of life (QOL). The present work is the feasibility component of a prospective study evaluating the role of surveillance MRI on QOL in patients with limited (1–3) brain metastases. Methods: Patients with limited brain metastases treated with SRS alone, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, and documented stability in treated lesions, with no new lesions seen on MRI at weeks 6–10 after SRS, were eligible. All were asked about their interest in participating in the control (MRI and clinical surveillance) or the experimental arm (symptom-directed MRI and clinical surveillance). If 33% or more agreed to participate in the experimental arm, it would be considered feasible to conduct the prospective study. Results: From November 2014 to July 2015, 45% of patients (10 of 22) agreed to participate in the experimental arm. Subgroup analyses found that the decision to participate has no statistically significant association with time of presentation (p = 0.696), display of symptoms (p = 0.840), age (p = 0.135), or number of lesions (p = 0.171). Conclusions: Results show that it is feasible to conduct the prospective cohort study. Because of the small sample size, we are limited in the conclusions able to be drawn in the subgroup analyses. However, the future study would allow for a better understanding of the attitudes of patients toward mri and its effect on qol.
Keywords: clinical surveillance; magnetic resonance imaging; quality of life clinical surveillance; magnetic resonance imaging; quality of life

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yiu, K.C.Y.; Greenspoon, J.N. Clinical Surveillance Compared with Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Surveillance for Brain Metastasis: A Feasibility Survey. Curr. Oncol. 2016, 23, 356-360. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.23.3155

AMA Style

Yiu KCY, Greenspoon JN. Clinical Surveillance Compared with Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Surveillance for Brain Metastasis: A Feasibility Survey. Current Oncology. 2016; 23(5):356-360. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.23.3155

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yiu, K.C.Y., and J.N. Greenspoon. 2016. "Clinical Surveillance Compared with Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Surveillance for Brain Metastasis: A Feasibility Survey" Current Oncology 23, no. 5: 356-360. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.23.3155

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop