Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
In Vivo
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
In Vivo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit iiar on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies

Predicting Survival After Irradiation for Brain Metastases from Head and Neck Cancer

DIRK RADES, LIESA DZIGGEL, SAMER G. HAKIM, VOLKER RUDAT, STEFAN JANSSEN, NGO THUY TRANG, MAI TRONG KHOA and TOBIAS BARTSCHT
In Vivo September 2015, 29 (5) 525-528;
DIRK RADES
1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: Rades.Dirk{at}gmx.net
LIESA DZIGGEL
1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SAMER G. HAKIM
2Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
VOLKER RUDAT
3Department of Radiotherapy, Saad Specialist Hospital, Al Khobar, Saudi Arabia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
STEFAN JANSSEN
1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
4Medical Practice for Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Hannover, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
NGO THUY TRANG
5Nuclear Medicine and Oncology Center, Bach Mai Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
MAI TRONG KHOA
5Nuclear Medicine and Oncology Center, Bach Mai Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam
6Nuclear Medicine Department, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
TOBIAS BARTSCHT
7Department of Hematology and Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Aim: Patients with cerebral metastases from head and neck cancer are not common. This study aimed to create an instrument for estimating survival in this particular group of patients. Patients and Methods: Survival was significantly influenced by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score, number of cerebral lesions and extracranial metastatic disease. These characteristics were included in our score. Results: Scoring was based on 6-month survival data: ECOG 0-1=1 point, ECOG 2-3=0 points, 1-3 cerebral lesions=1 point, ≥4 cerebral lesions=0 points, lack of extracranial metastases=1 point, and presence of extracranial metastases=0 points. Addition of these points for each patient resulted in 0-3 points. Three groups were built comprising 0-1, 2 and 3 points. Six-month survival rates for these groups were 0%, 50% and 100%, respectively. Conclusion: This new instrument guides physicians in choosing optimal irradiation programs for patients with cerebral metastases from head-and-neck cancer.

  • Head-and-neck cancer
  • cerebral metastases
  • whole-brain irradiation
  • survival
  • instrument

Patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer have a poor prognosis, which applies particularly to patients with metastatic disease including brain metastases (1). Because patients with head and neck cancer represent a small group of patients with cerebral metastases, the optimal treatment approach for individual patients is often not properly defined for this sub-group. Treatment decision processes could be facilitated with an instrument that allows treating physicians to estimate the patient's life expectancy. Knowledge of the remaining lifetime will affect the selection of appropriate regimen, including local treatments such as neurosurgery or radiosurgery, as well as whole-brain irradiation (WBI) programs (2, 3). Such knowledge can be gained from predictive tools. Because primary tumors, particularly in a metastasized situation, are different with respect to tumor biology, metastatic pattern, and prognosis in general, each primary tumor type requires its own prognostic instrument (4, 5). The current study was performed to create such an instrument specifically for patients with cerebral metastases from head and neck cancer.

Patients and Methods

In this study, the data of 25 patients treated with WBI for cerebral metastases from head-and-neck cancer between 2000 and 2014 were analyzed. The WBI dose (4 Gy ×5 versus 3 Gy ×10 versus 2 Gy ×20) plus the following seven additional characteristics were analyzed for associations with post-WBI survival: age (≤64 versus ≥65 years, median age=64 years), gender, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score (0-1 versus 2-3), primary tumor site (nasopharynx versus oropharynx versus hypopharynx versus larynx versus parotid glands versus oral cavity/floor of mouth), time between first diagnosis of head-and-neck cancer and WBI (≤24 versus ≥25 months, median time=24 months), number of cerebral lesions (1-3 versus ≥4 lesions), and the presence of extracranial metastases (no versus yes). The distributions of all eight characteristics are shown in Table I.

The survival analysis was performed with the Kaplan–Meier method, and the p-values were obtained from the log-rank test. The characteristics which achieved significance were included in the predictive instrument. For each significant characteristic, a score of 0 (unfavorable survival prognosis) or 1 (favorable survival prognosis) was given. The prognostic score for each patient was calculated by adding the scores for the significant prognostic factors.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Patients' characteristics.

Results

In the survival analysis, three of the investigated characteristics, namely ECOG performance score, number of cerebral lesions and presence of extracranial metastases, had a significant impact on survival. The results of the analysis of survival are given in Table II. The scores obtained for the three characteristics found to be significantly associated with survival were as follows: ECOG 0-1=1 point, ECOG 2-3=0 points, 1-3 cerebral lesions=1 point, ≥4 cerebral lesions=0 points, lack of extracranial metastases=1 point and presence of extracranial metastases=0 points. The addition of the scores of the three characteristics resulted in prognostic scores of 0 to 3 points (n=12, n=3, n=2 and n=8 for scores of 0, 1, 2 and 3, respectively). The 6-month survival rates related to these scores were 0%, 0%, 50% and 100%, respectively (p=0.002). Based on these scores, the following three survival groups were built: 0-1 points, 2 points and 3 points. The corresponding 6-month survival rates were 0%, 50% and 100%, respectively. The corresponding 12-month survival rates were 0%, 0% and 63%, respectively.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Characteristics and corresponding survival rates at six and 12 months.

Discussion

In order to improve the prognosis of patients with head-and-neck cancer, considerable efforts have been made in recent years, for example by introducing new anticancer therapies (6-8). Another approach for improving the treatment results is the individualization of therapeutic approaches by including prognostic factors into treatment decisions (9-13). Knowing a patient's survival time is a very important aspect with respect to optimal individualization of their treatment. This applies particularly to patients with metastatic disease. Patients with brain metastases require particular attention, since many of these patients develop serious symptoms such as seizures, visual disorders, signs of paralysis and character changes (1). Therefore, survival tools have been developed for these patients in general and, in addition, specifically for single tumor entities (5, 14-17). However, a specific score for patients with cerebral metastases from head-and-neck cancers has been lacking.

In the present study, such a score was created. Three significant prognostic factors were identified: ECOG performance score, number of cerebral lesions and presence of extracranial metastatic disease. Our new predictive instrument was based on these three characteristics and allowed the building of three groups with 6-month survival rates of 0% (0-1 points), 50% (2 points) and 100% (3 points). Since the prognosis of patients with 0-1 points is extremely poor, these patients should ideally receive a short WBI program such as 4 Gy ×5 in one week to avoid spending more time than necessary receiving treatment. This recommendation is supported by a study of patients with cerebral metastases from different tumor entities that reported similar survival rates after 4 Gy ×5 and after 3 Gy ×10 (24% and 27%, respectively; p=0.29) (18). In the group of patients with only 0-1 points, even best supportive care alone may be an option. Patients who achieve 2 points are suitable candidates for the most commonly used WBI program worldwide of 3 Gy ×10 (1). Patients with 3 points have a much more favorable survival prognosis and could benefit from a WBI program with a total dose of greater than 30 Gy and a dose per fraction of less than 3 Gy (19, 20). A total dose beyond 30 Gy was reported to result in improved 1-year intracerebral control rates (44% vs. 28%, p=0.06) and improved 1-year survival rates (61% vs. 50%) when compared to 3 Gy ×10 (19). Furthermore, doses per fraction of less than 3 Gy are associated with less neurocognitive decline than doses of ≥3 Gy (20). Patients with 3 points and a limited number of cerebral lesions might also be considered for more intensive local treatment, including resection, radiosurgery or fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (2, 3).

In conclusion, this new score for patients with cerebral metastases from head-and-neck cancer contributes to the selection of optimal personalized treatment approaches.

Footnotes

  • Conflicts of Interest

    On behalf of all Authors, the corresponding Author states that there is no conflict of interest related to this study.

  • Received May 26, 2015.
  • Revision received July 3, 2015.
  • Accepted July 7, 2015.
  • Copyright © 2015 The Author(s). Published by the International Institute of Anticancer Research.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Khuntia D,
    2. Brown P,
    3. Li J,
    4. Mehta MP
    : Whole-brain radiotherapy in the management of brain metastasis. J Clin Oncol 24: 1295-1304, 2006.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Mut M
    : Surgical treatment of brain metastasis: a review. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 114: 1-8, 2012.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Rades D,
    2. Küter JD,
    3. Meyners T,
    4. Pluemer A,
    5. Veninga T,
    6. Gliemroth J,
    7. Schild SE
    : Single brain metastasis: Resection followed by whole-brain irradiation and a boost to the metastatic site compared to whole-brain irradiation plus radiosurgery. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 114: 326-330, 2012.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Rades D,
    2. Dunst J,
    3. Schild SE
    : A new scoring system to predicting the survival of patients treated with whole-brain radiotherapy for brain metastases. Strahlenther Onkol 184: 251-255, 2008.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Sperduto PW,
    2. Chao ST,
    3. Sneed PK,
    4. Luo X,
    5. Suh J,
    6. Roberge D,
    7. Bhatt A,
    8. Jensen AW,
    9. Brown PD,
    10. Shih H,
    11. Kirkpatrick J,
    12. Schwer A,
    13. Gaspar LE,
    14. Fiveash JB,
    15. Chiang V,
    16. Knisely J,
    17. Sperduto CM,
    18. Mehta M
    : Diagnosis-specific prognostic factors, indexes, and treatment outcomes for patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases: a multi-institutional analysis of 4,259 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 77: 655-661, 2010.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Won HS,
    2. Lee YS,
    3. Jeon EK,
    4. Hong SH,
    5. Kang JH,
    6. Kim YS,
    7. Yoo le R,
    8. Sun DI,
    9. Kim MS
    : Clinical outcome of induction chemotherapy in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Anticancer Res 34: 5709-5714, 2014.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Yang WC,
    2. Chen CH,
    3. Tang JY,
    4. Wu CF,
    5. Liu YC,
    6. Sun Y,
    7. Lin SF
    : Induction chemotherapy with docetaxel, cisplatin and fluorouracil followed by surgery and concurrent chemoradiotherapy improves outcome of recurrent advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Anticancer Res 34: 3765-3773, 2014.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Reiter M,
    2. Baumeister P,
    3. Hartmann M,
    4. Schwenk-Zieger S,
    5. Harréus U
    : Chemoprevention by celecoxib and mutagen sensitivity of cyclin D1 in patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma. In Vivo 28: 49-53, 2014.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Birk R,
    2. Sommer JU,
    3. Haas D,
    4. Faber A,
    5. Aderhold C,
    6. Schultz JD,
    7. Hoermann K,
    8. Stern-Straeter J
    : Influence of static magnetic fields combined with human insulin-like growth factor 1 on human satellite cell cultures. In Vivo 28: 795-802, 2014.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Umbreit C,
    2. Flanjak J,
    3. Weiss C,
    4. Erben P,
    5. Aderhold C,
    6. Faber A,
    7. Stern-Straeter J,
    8. Hoermann K,
    9. Schultz JD
    : Incomplete epithelial–mesenchymal transition in p16-positive squamous cell carcinoma cells correlates with β-catenin expression. Anticancer Res 34: 7061-7069, 2014.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Laskaris S,
    2. Sengas I,
    3. Maragoudakis P,
    4. Tsimplaki E,
    5. Argyri E,
    6. Manolopoulos L,
    7. Panotopoulou E
    : Prevalence of human papillomavirus infection in Greek patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the larynx. Anticancer Res 34: 5749-5753, 2014.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Yoon TM,
    2. Kim SA,
    3. Lee DH,
    4. Lee JK,
    5. Park YL,
    6. Lee KH,
    7. Chung IJ,
    8. Joo YE,
    9. Lim SC
    : Expression of Livin and the inhibition of tumor progression by Livin silencing in laryngohypopharyngeal cancer. In Vivo 28: 751-759, 2014.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Lu CT,
    2. Hsu CM,
    3. Lin PM,
    4. Lai CC,
    5. Lin HC,
    6. Yang CH,
    7. Hsiao HH,
    8. Liu YC,
    9. Lin HY,
    10. Lin SF,
    11. Yang MY
    : The potential of SIRT6 and SIRT7 as circulating markers for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Anticancer Res 34: 7137-7143, 2014.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Rades D,
    2. Dziggel L,
    3. Segedin B,
    4. Oblak I,
    5. Nagy V,
    6. Marita A,
    7. Schild SE,
    8. Trang NT,
    9. Khoa MT
    : A simple survival score for patients with brain metastases from breast cancer. Strahlenther Onkol 189: 664-667, 2013.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Rades D,
    2. Dziggel L,
    3. Segedin B,
    4. Oblak I,
    5. Nagy V,
    6. Marita A,
    7. Schild SE
    : The first survival score for patients with brain metastases from small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Clin Neurol Neurosurg 115: 2029-2032, 2013.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Dziggel L,
    2. Segedin B,
    3. Podvrsnik NH,
    4. Oblak I,
    5. Schild SE,
    6. Rades D
    : A survival score for patients with brain metastases from less radiosensitive tumors treated with whole-brain radiotherapy alone. Strahlenther Onkol 190: 54-58, 2014.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Rades D,
    2. Dziggel L,
    3. Segedin B,
    4. Oblak I,
    5. Nagy V,
    6. Marita A,
    7. Schild SE,
    8. Trang NT,
    9. Khoa MT
    : A new survival score for patients with brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer. Strahlenther Onkol 189: 777-781, 2013.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Rades D,
    2. Kieckebusch S,
    3. Lohynska R,
    4. Veninga T,
    5. Stalpers LJ,
    6. Dunst J,
    7. Schild SE
    : Reduction of overall treatment time in patients irradiated for more than three brain metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 89: 1509-1513, 2007.
    OpenUrl
  13. ↵
    1. Rades D,
    2. Panzner A,
    3. Dziggel L,
    4. Haatanen T,
    5. Lohynska R,
    6. Schild SE
    : Dose-escalation of whole-brain radiotherapy for brain metastasis in patients with a favorable survival prognosis. Cancer 118: 3852-3859, 2012.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. DeAngelis LM,
    2. Delattre JY,
    3. Posner JB
    : Radiation-induced dementia in patients cured of brain metastases. Neurology 39: 789-796, 1989.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

In Vivo
Vol. 29, Issue 5
September-October 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on In Vivo.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Predicting Survival After Irradiation for Brain Metastases from Head and Neck Cancer
(Your Name) has sent you a message from In Vivo
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the In Vivo web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
3 + 1 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Predicting Survival After Irradiation for Brain Metastases from Head and Neck Cancer
DIRK RADES, LIESA DZIGGEL, SAMER G. HAKIM, VOLKER RUDAT, STEFAN JANSSEN, NGO THUY TRANG, MAI TRONG KHOA, TOBIAS BARTSCHT
In Vivo Sep 2015, 29 (5) 525-528;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Predicting Survival After Irradiation for Brain Metastases from Head and Neck Cancer
DIRK RADES, LIESA DZIGGEL, SAMER G. HAKIM, VOLKER RUDAT, STEFAN JANSSEN, NGO THUY TRANG, MAI TRONG KHOA, TOBIAS BARTSCHT
In Vivo Sep 2015, 29 (5) 525-528;
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

  • A New Survival Score for Patients Scheduled for Palliative Irradiation of Locally Advanced Carcinoma of the Head-and-Neck
  • A Specific Survival Score for Patients Receiving Local Therapy for Single Brain Metastasis from a Gynecological Malignancy
  • A Tool to Predict the Probability of Intracerebral Recurrence or New Cerebral Metastases After Whole-brain Irradiation in Patients with Head-and-Neck Cancer
  • Performance Status and Number of Metastatic Extra-cerebral Sites Predict Survival After Radiotherapy of Brain Metastases from Thyroid Cancer
  • A Survival Score Based on Symptoms and Performance Status for Patients with High-grade Gliomas Receiving Radiochemotherapy
  • Prognostic Factors in Patients Irradiated for Recurrent Head-and-Neck Cancer
  • Outcomes After Whole-brain Radiotherapy for Brain Metastases with 5x4 Gy: Importance of Overall Treatment Time
  • Potential Impact of the Overall Treatment Time on Outcomes after Whole-brain Irradiation with 10x3 Gy for Brain Metastases
  • A Total Radiation Dose of 70 Gy Is Required After Macroscopically Incomplete Resection of Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck
  • Prognostic Factors After Definitive Radio(Chemo)Therapy of Locally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer
  • Importance of Chemotherapy and Radiation Dose After Microscopically Incomplete Resection of Stage III/IV Head and Neck Cancer
  • Outcomes After Irradiation of Epidural Spinal Cord Compression Due to Metastatic Thyroid Cancer
  • Personalized Radiotherapeutic Approaches for Elderly Patients with Epidural Cord Compression from Gastric Cancer
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Effect of Partial Splenic Embolization on Immune Environment and Hepatic Function in Cirrhosis Patients With Portal Hypertension
  • Laryngeal and Hypopharyngeal Malignancies: Where Do We Stand? A Retrospective Single-center Study
  • Modified Subtraction Technique for the Middle Hepatic Vein Tributary and Glissonean Pedicle in Right Lobe Graft Procurement
Show more Clinical Studies

Keywords

  • Head-and-neck cancer
  • cerebral metastases
  • whole-brain irradiation
  • survival
  • instrument
In Vivo

© 2026 In Vivo

Powered by HighWire