Skip to content

Advertisement

You're viewing the new version of our site. Please leave us feedback.

Learn more

BMC Cancer

Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

Prophylactic cranial irradiation for patients with small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis

  • Wenwen Zhang1,
  • Wenjing Jiang1,
  • Linlin Luan1,
  • Lili Wang2,
  • Xiangrong Zheng2 and
  • Gongchao Wang1Email author
BMC Cancer201414:793

https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-14-793

Received: 8 April 2013

Accepted: 17 October 2014

Published: 31 October 2014

Abstract

Background

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) accounts for about 13% of all lung cancer cases. Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) accounts for about 13% of all lung cancer cases. The purpose of the present article is to assess the role of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) by performing a systematic review of the randomized trials published in the literature.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials were identified that compared brain metastases incidence and overall survival between PCI and No PCI in patients with SCLC. Search strategies were limited to the English language and to articles published since 1997, and included: databases searched from 1997 to March 2013 –CINAHL, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and CENTRAL. Methodological quality was assessed with the Jadad scale. The main end points were brain metastasis and survival.

Results

The review identified 5 trials, although few were of high quality. Two trials reported the one-year incidence of brain metastasis. PCI reduced the incidence of brain metastasis in one year, with a pooled relative risk of 0.45 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.58; P < 0.00001). Four trials described the one year survival rate. The combined result revealed a significant (P = 0.01) survival benefit in the group assigned to PCI as compared with the control group, with a pooled relative risk of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.97). Three trials reported the three-year survival rate. The combined result revealed a great significant (P < 0.00001) survival benefit in the PCI group as compared with the No PCI group, with a pooled relative risk of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.83 to 0.91). the Five-year survival rate was compared in four trials Compared with the No PCI group, the PCI group had a significant (P < 0.00001) survival benefit with a pooled relative risk of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.88 to 0.95).

Conclusions

The present systematic review indicates that PCI decreases brain metastases incidence and that PCI improves survival in SCLC patients. Prophylactic cranial irradiation should be part of standard care for all patients with small-cell lung cancer who have a response to initial chemotherapy, and it should be part of the standard treatment in future studies involving these patients.

Keywords

Prophylactic cranial irradiationSmall-cell lung cancerMeta-analysis

Background

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) accounts for about 13% of all lung cancer cases [1]. SCLC is characterized by rapid doubling time, early dissemination and high sensitivity to chemotherapy and radiotherapy [24]. Chemotherapy has improved short-term survival, but long-term survival remains disappointing. The 2-year survival rate among patients with extensive small-cell lung cancer was 1.5% in 1973 and 4.6% in 2000 [1]. SCLC has a propensity to metastasize to the brain. About 10% of the patients initially present with brain metastases. The two-year cumulative risk rises to ≥50% [5] and brain metastases are found in up to 65% of patients at autopsy [6]. The median survival time after brain metastases diagnosis is 4 to 5 months. Because the blood–brain barrier has been considered to protect the central nervous system (CNS) from most cytotoxic agents and as SCLC is very radiosensitive, the role of PCI has been studied in several trials [7].

PCI was first tested for patients with SCLC in the 1970s following the recognition that the blood–brain barrier appeared to restrict the penetration of most chemotherapeutics into the brain leaving it as a sanctuary site for relapse [8]. The first trial about PCI demonstrated substantial reductions in brain metastases [9]. The results of the randomized trials show that PCI reduces the frequency of brain metastases although survival is not consistently improved. Some data suggest that the gain in survival is restricted to patients in complete remission (CR). A published meta-analysis [9] of PCI for SCLC in patients with CR after chemotherapy has analyzed the data of 7 randomized studies (including one abstract and one unpublished study) concerning a total of 987 patients (526 treated with PCI and 461 controls). The relative risk (RR) of death in the treatment group as compared to the control group was 0.84 (95% confidence interval CI: 0.73 to 0.97; p = 0.01). PCI decreased also the cumulative incidence of brain metastases (RR: 0.46; CI 95%: 0.38-0.57; p < 0.001).The results of these trials consistently revealed a significant decrease in the incidence of brain metastasis [10, 11]. The purpose of the present article is to assess the role of PCI in SCLC by performing a systematic review of the randomized trials published in the literature.

Methods

Trials selection

Studies eligible for inclusion were randomized controlled clinical trials fully published in journals and those identified from other sources (abstracts and proceedings of relevant meetings) for which full details are available from investigators from 1997 to March 2013. Patients of any age had randomly assigned to receive PCI or not.

We searched CINAHL (from 1981), Embase (from 1980), Medline (from 1966), Web of Science (from 1966), and CENTRAL (from 1977) to present, using search strategies developed with the support of an information specialist that included exploded MeSH terms. Please see the Additional file 1.

Two independent reviewers read titles, abstracts, and full text papers and applied the inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently extracted data from included full text papers. In case of incomplete or unclear data on study design and clinical outcome, authors were contacted. Discrepancies were resolved by a third referee.

Methodological assessment

Methodological quality of randomised controlled trials was assessed in accordance with a well-established, validated scale developed by Jadad and colleagues [12]. A Jadad score was calculated using 4 elements of consideration. 1) Was the randomization scheme described and appropriate? 2) Was the method of double-blinding appropriate? 3) Was the method of Concealment of allocation appropriate? 4) Was there a description of dropouts and withdrawals? The possible range of scores was from 0 (weakest) to 7 (strongest). Any study with a Jadad score below 3 was considered to be of poor quality.

Four authors independently evaluated the quality of the trials. Using a standardized protocol and reporting form, they extracted data on the subjects’ characteristics at baseline and data on the clinical outcomes. Any disagreement was resolved through group discussion.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using the Review Manager 5.2. Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were used as summary statistics. The pooled relative risk was calculated by using a fixed-effect model with the Mante-Haenszel method and the Breslow-Day test was used to examine the statistical evidence of heterogeneity across the studies (p < 0.1). The Der Simonian and Laird random effect model was additionally applied to calculate pooled relative risk in case of significant heterogeneity across studies.

Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the effects of selected measures of study quality. The influence of each study was estimated by deleting each in turn from the analysis and noting the degree to which the effect size and significance of the treatment effect changed. This analysis was performed for each study outcome. We considered a study influential if the exclusion of it changed our conclusion or the effect estimate by at least 20%.

Results

A total of 5 randomised trials published between 1997 and 2012 were found to be eligible for this review. This study includes two of the studies included on the Auperin meta-analysis (Gregor et al., Laplanche et al.) [9]. In addition, this meta-analysis also includes 3 newer studies that have been published well after the Auperin meta-analysis. Their main characteristics are summarized in Table 1. The total number of eligible patients included was 1601; the number of patients by study ranged from 51 to 739 patients. The time of median follow-up ranged from 9 to 72 months.
Table 1

Characteristics of the six trials included in the meta-analysis

Author

Year

Age (Years)

Median follow-up (month)

Total dose/No. of fraction (Dose/Fraction)

No. of patients

  

PCI

No PCI

   

Gregor [11]

1997

60 (37–79)

61 (28–76)

18

36 Gy/18 (2 Gy)

314

24 Gy/12 (2 Gy)

Laplanche [13]

1998

58

57

-

24-30 Gy/8-10

211

Cao KJ [14]

2005

54.69 ± 7.56

55.63 ± 7.29

60

36-40 Gy/18-20

51

Slotman [15]

2007

63 (37–75)

63 (39–75)

9

20-30 Gy/5-12

286

Schild [8]

2012

63 (34–79)

63 (37–80)

72

30 Gy/15 (2 Gy)

739

25 Gy/10 (2.5 Gy)

Methodological quality of included studies

Initial agreement among reviewers on the overall methodological quality was 90%, and after the consensus meeting, no disagreement persisted. The results of the methodological quality assessment are presented in Table 2. All the studies were considered to be of low quality by scoring 2 or 3.
Table 2

Jadad quality scores of the six trials included in the meta-analysis

 

Randomization

Concealment of allocation

Double blinding

Withdrawals and dropouts

Total

Gregor 1997 [11]

1

1

0

0

2

Laplanche 1998 [13]

1

1

0

1

3

Cao KJ 2005 [14]

1

1

0

0

2

Slotman 2007 [15]

1

1

0

1

3

Schild 2012 [8]

1

1

0

0

2

Brain metastasis

Three trials reported the one-year incidence of brain metastasis. But we included two eligible trials. If Cao KJ’s study was included, the heterogeneity would exist among the trials. So we excluded it. As shown in the Figure 1, PCI reduced the incidence of brain metastasis in one year, with a pooled relative risk of 0.45 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.58; P < 0.00001).
Figure 1

Relative-risk plots for brain metastasis of 1 year.

Overall survival

One year survival rate were described in four trials between the PCI group and the No PCI group. We combined the result by using a fixed-effect model with the Mante-Haenszel method. The combined result showed that the heterogeneity existed among the trials (Figure 2). So we excluded two trials [8, 14]. The combined result revealed a significant (P = 0.01) survival benefit in the group assigned to PCI as compared with the control group, with a pooled relative risk of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.97) (Figure 3).Three trials with a total of 1104 patients reported the three-year survival rate. As depicted in Figure 4, the combined result revealed a great significant (P < 0.00001) survival benefit in the PCI group as compared with the No PCI group, with a pooled relative risk of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.83 to 0.91). As shown in Figure 5, the five-year survival rate was compared in four trials with a total of 1151 patients. Compared with the No PCI group, the PCI group had a significant (P < 0.00001) survival benefit with a pooled relative risk of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.88 to 0.95).
Figure 2

Relative-risk plots for death of 1 year in patients with SCLC.

Figure 3

Adjusted relative-risk plots for death of 1 year.

Figure 4

Relative-risk plots for death of 3 year.

Figure 5

Relative-risk plots for death of 5 year.

Discussion

Our meta-analysis, by pooling five randomized studies that assessed PCI in 1941 patients with small-cell lung cancer, revealed a positive effect of PCI. As shown by the meta-analysis, irradiation not only significantly reduced the risk of brain metastasis, as previously revealed in individual trials, but also improved overall survival. These results confirm that PCI prevents and does not simply delay the emergence of brain metastases.

Brain metastasis is one of the most important causes of treatment failure in patients with SCLC. Most brain metastases occur within 2 years of diagnosis [1622]. And median time to relapse in the brain is about 5.7 to 11.7 months [1721]. Among the patients who survived for more than 2 years, about 50 percent of patients had brain metastasis [23]. With longer survival, brain metastases are being observed more often. PCI is effective in reducing the incidence of brain metastasis of SCLC. Several randomized studies showed that PCI reduced the rate of brain metastases in the patients with SCLC who achieved CR [10, 24, 25].Our meta-analysis also revealed that PCI reduced the incidence of brain metastasis within one year, with a pooled relative risk of 0.45 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.58; P < 0.00001). Combining with previous studies, we concluded that PCI reduced the incidence of brain metastases. Thus, patients with SCLC should be treated with PCI to reduce the incidence of brain metastasis.

In addition to thoracic radiotherapy, PCI has been shown to improve survival in SCLC patients. More recently, Patel et al. provided supporting data that PCI was associated with better survival of LSCLC patients [26]. This large retrospective analysis included 7995 patients with limited staged-SCLC. The 5-year survival was 11% without PCI versus 19% with PCI (P < 0.001). PCI also improves survival rate for the majority of extensive staged-SCLC patients. Slotman et al. conducted a randomized trial of PCI in extensive staged-SCLC patients who had had any degree of response to chemotherapy [15]. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo PCI or the control group. The cumulative risk of brain metastases within 1 year was 14.6% in the PCI group and 40.4% in the control group (HR, 0.27; P < 0.001). PCI was associated with an increase in median survival from 5.4 to 6.7 months after randomization. The 1-year survival rate was doubled at 27.1% in the PCI group and 13.3% in the control group (P = 0.003). Auperin et al. published a meta-analysis which included data from seven randomized prospective studies which compared PCI with no PCI after a CR was achieved [9]. The 3-year survival rate was 5.4% better for those who received PCI at 20.7% compared with 15.3% for those who did not receive PCI (P = 0.01). While a 5.4% improvement in survival appears small, this reflects a 35% increase in 3-year survival and is clinically meaningful. According to our meta-analysis, the combined result for one-year survival rate revealed a significant (P = 0.02) survival benefit in the group assigned to PCI as compared with the control group, with a pooled relative risk of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.97) (Figure 3). For the three-year survival rate, the pooled relative risk was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.83 to 0.91). And the pooled relative risk was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.88 to 0.95) for five-year survival rate. The findings from the present analysis provide further support to the result that survival was significantly better for patients with SCLC who received PCI compared with No PCI.

There are some toxic events after the long-PCI. The most common acute toxic events were fatigue (30% of patients in the standard-dose group versus 34% in the higher dose group), nausea or vomiting (23% versus 28%), and headache (24% versus 28%) [27]. Neurologic abnormalities seemed to be very common in long-term survivors with SCLC and may be more prominent in patients having received high-doses chemotherapy or treated with large brain radiotherapy fractions. In the 1980s, several nonrandomized studies found neuropsychological impairment and abnormalities on CT scans of the brain that were potentially related to PCI [2832], and a recent study of patients treated by PCI and concomitant chemotherapy suggested that this combination had a negative effect on cognitive function, which was assessed at the end of treatment [33]. In this systematic review, we did not discuss the toxicities of long-term PCI. The problem of neuropsychological toxicity remains unclear, leading to controversy about the indications of PCI in SCLC. So further studies about neuropsychological toxicity of the long-term PCI need studied by the researchers in the future.

Conclusions

The present systematic review indicates that PCI decreases brain metastases incidence and that PCI improves survival in SCLC patients. Prophylactic cranial irradiation should be part of standard care for all patients with small-cell lung cancer who have a response to initial chemotherapy, and it should be part of the standard treatment in future studies involving these patients.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

We greatly appreciate all the members of our group for their endeavor. And we are very grateful to Wang Gongchao for carefully reading and correcting the manuscript text.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
School of Nursing, Shandong University
(2)
School of Medicine, Shandong University

References

  1. Govindan R, Page N, Morgensztern D, Read W, Tierney R, Vlahiotis A, Spitznagel EL, Piccirillo J: Changing epidemiology of small-cell lung cancer in the United States over the last 30 years: analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiologic, and End Results database. J Clin Oncol. 2006, 24: 4539-4544. 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.4859.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Brade AM, Tannock IF: Scheduling of radiation and chemotherapy for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer: Repopulation as a cause of treatment failure?. J Clin Oncol. 2006, 24: 1020-1022. 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.9676.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Jackman DM, Johnson B: Small-cell lung cancer. Lancet. 2005, 366: 1385-1396. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67569-1.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Stupp R, Monnerat C, Turrisi AT: Small cell lung cancer: state of the art and future perspectives. Lung Cancer. 2004, 45: 105-117. 10.1016/j.lungcan.2003.12.006.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Komaki R, Cox JD, Whitson W: Risk of brain metastases from small-cell carcinoma of the lung related to the length of survival and prophylactic irradiation. Cancer Treat Rep. 1981, 65: 811-814.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Nugent JL, Bunn PA, Matthews MJ, Ihde DC, Cohen MH, Gazdar A, Minna JD: CNS metastases in small cell bronchogenic carcinoma. Cancer. 1979, 44: 1885-1893. 10.1002/1097-0142(197911)44:5<1885::AID-CNCR2820440550>3.0.CO;2-F.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Meert AP, Paesmans M, Berghmans T, Martin B, Mascaux C, Vallot F, Verdebout JM, Lafitte JJ, Sculier JP: Prophylactic cranial irradiation in small cell lung cancer: a systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis. BMC Cancer. 2001, 1: 5-10.1186/1471-2407-1-5.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Schild SE, Foster NR, Meyers JP, Ross HJ, Stella PJ, Garces YI, Olivier KR, Molina JR, Past LR, Adjei AA: Prophylactic cranial irradiation in small-cell lung cancer: Findings from a North Central Cancer Treatment Group Pooled Analysis. Ann Oncol. 2012, 23: 2919-2924. 10.1093/annonc/mds123.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Aupérin A, Arriagada R, Pignon JP, Le Péchoux C, Gregor A, Stephens RJ, Kristjansen PE, Johnson BE, Ueoka H, Wagner H, Aisner J: Prophylactic cranial irradiation for patients with small-cell lung cancer in complete remission. Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation Overview Collaborative Group. N Engl J Med. 1999, 341: 476-484. 10.1056/NEJM199908123410703.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Arriagada R, Le Chevalier T, Borie F, Rivière A, Chomy P, Monnet I, Tardivon A, Viader F, Tarayre M, Benhamou S: Prophylactic cranial irradiation for patients with small-cell lung cancer in complete remission. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995, 87: 183-290. 10.1093/jnci/87.3.183.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Gregor A, Cull A, Stephens RJ, Kirkpatrick JA, Yarnold JR, Girling DJ, Macbeth FR, Stout R, Machin D: Prophylactic cranial irradiation is indicated following complete response to induction therapy in small cell lung cancer: results of a multicentre randomised trial. Eur J Cancer. 1997, 33: 1752-1758. 10.1016/S0959-8049(97)00135-4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Ciavaghan DJ, McQJuay HJ: Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Clontrol Clin Trials. 1996, 17 (1): 1-12. 10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Laplanche A, Monnet I, Santos-Miranda JA, Bardet E, Le Péchoux C, Tarayre M, Arriagada R: Controlled clinical trial of prophylactic cranial irradiation for patients with small-cell lung cancer in complete remission. Lung Cancer. 1998, 21: 193-201. 10.1016/S0169-5002(98)00056-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Cao KJ, Huang HY, Tu MC, Pan GY: Long-term results of prophylactic cranial irradiation for limited-staged small-cell lung cancer in complete remission. Chin Med J. 2005, 118 (15): 1258-1262.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Slotman B, Faivre-Finn C, Kramer G, Rankin E, Snee M, Hatton M, Postmus P, Collette L, Musat E, Senan S: Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation in Extensive Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007, 357 (7): 664-672. 10.1056/NEJMoa071780.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Law A, Karp DD, Dipetrillo T, Daly BT: Emergence of increased cerebral metastasis after preoperative radiotherapy with chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced non–small-cell lung carcinoma. Cancer. 2001, 92: 160-164. 10.1002/1097-0142(20010701)92:1<160::AID-CNCR1304>3.0.CO;2-X.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Komaki R, Scott CB, Byhardt R, Emami B, Asbell SO, Russell AH, Roach M, Parliament MB, Gaspar LE: Failure patterns by prognostic group determined by recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) of 1547 patients on four Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) studies in inoperable non–small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998, 42: 263-267.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Carolan H, Sun AY, Bezjak A, Yi QL, Payne D, Kane G, Waldron J, Leighl N, Feld R, Burkes R, Keshavjee S, Shepherd F: Does the incidence and outcome of brain metastases in locally advanced non–small-cell lung cancer justify prophylactic cranial irradiation or early detection?. Lung Cancer. 2005, 49: 109-115. 10.1016/j.lungcan.2004.12.004.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Chen AM, Jahan TM, Jablons DM, Garcia J, Larson DA: Risk of cerebral metastases and neurological death after pathological complete response to neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced non–small-cell lung cancer: Clinical implications for the subsequent management of the brain. Cancer. 2007, 109: 1668-1675. 10.1002/cncr.22565.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Ceresoli GL, Reni M, Chiesa G, Carretta A, Schipani S, Passoni P, Bolognesi A, Zannini P, Villa E: Brain metastases in locally advanced non–small-cell lung carcinoma after multimodality treatment: Risk factors analysis. Cancer. 2002, 95: 605-612. 10.1002/cncr.10687.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Robnett TJ, Machtay M, Stevenson JP, Algazy KM, Hahn SM: Factors affecting the risk of brain metastases after definitive chemoradiation for locally advanced non–small-cell lung carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2011, 9: 1344-1349.Google Scholar
  22. Gaspar LE, Chansky K, Albain KS, Vallieres E, Rusch V, Crowley JJ, Livingston RB, Gandara DR: Time from treatment to subsequent diagnosis of brain metastases in stage III non-small cell lung cancer: A retrospective review by the Southwest Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005, 23: 2955-2961. 10.1200/JCO.2005.08.026.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Arriagada R, Le Chevalier T, Rivière A, Chomy P, Monnet I, Bardet E, Santos-Miranda JA, Le Péhoux C, Tarayre M, Benhamou S, Laplanche A: Patterns of failure after prophylactic cranial irradiation in small-cell lung cancer: analysis of 505 randomized patients. Ann Oncol. 2002, 13: 748-754. 10.1093/annonc/mdf123.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Alexopoulos CG, Vaslamltzis M, Patila E, Taranto L: Central nervous system involvement and the role of prophylactic cranial irradiation in small-cell lung cancer. Oncologist. 1979, 2: 153-159.Google Scholar
  25. Ohonoshi T, Ueoka H, Kawahara S, Ohonoshi T, Ueoka H, Kawahara S, Kiura K, Kamei H, Hiraki Y, Segawa Y, Hiraki S, Kimura I: Comparative study of prophylactic cranial irradiation in patients with small-cell lung cancer achieving a complete response: a long-term follow-up result. Lung Cancer. 1993, 10: 47-54. 10.1016/0169-5002(93)90308-K.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Patel S, Macdonald OK, Suntharalingam M: Evaluation of the use of prophylactic cranial irradiation in small cell lung cancer. Cancer. 2009, 115: 842-850. 10.1002/cncr.24105.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Wolfson AH, Bae K, Komaki R, Meyers C, Movsas B, Le Pechoux C, Werner-Wasik M, Videtic GM, Garces YI, Choy H: Primary Analysis of a Phase II Randomized Trial Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0212: impact of different total doses and schedules of prophylactic cranial irradiation on chronic neurotoxicity and quality of life for patients with limited-disease small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011, 81: 77-84. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.05.013.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Catane R, Schwade JG, Yarr I, Lichter AS, Tepper JE, Dunnick NR, Brody L, Brereton HD, Cohen M, Glatstein E: Follow-up and neurological evaluation in patients with small cell lung carcinoma treated with prophylactic cranial irradiation and chemotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1981, 7: 105-109.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Johnson BE, Patronas N, Hayes W, Grayson J, Becker B, Gnepp D, Rowland J, Anderson A, Glatstein E, Ihde DC: Neurologic, computed cranial tomographic, and magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities in patients with small-cell lung cancer: further follow-up of 6- to 13-year survivors. J Clin Oncol. 1990, 8: 48-56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Lee JS, Umsawasdi T, Lee YY, Barkley HT, Murphy WK, Welch S, Valdivieso M: Neurotoxicity in long-term survivors of small cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1986, 12: 313-321. 10.1016/0360-3016(86)90344-5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Lishner M, Feld R, Payne DG, Sagman U, Sculier JP, Pringle JF, Yeoh JL, Evans WK, Shepherd FA, Maki E: Late neurological complications after prophylactic cranial irradiation in patients with small-cell lung cancer: the Toronto experience. J Clin Oncol. 1990, 8: 215-221.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Frytak S, Shaw JN, O'Neill BP, Lee RE, Eagan RT, Shaw EG, Richardson RL, Coles DT, Jett JR: Leukoencephalopathy in small cell lung cancer patients receiving prophylactic cranial irradiation. Am J Clin Oncol. 1989, 12: 27-33. 10.1097/00000421-198902000-00007.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Ahles TA, Silberfarb PM, Herndon J, Maurer LH, Kornblith AB, Aisner J, Perry MC, Eaton WL, Zacharski LL, Green MR, Holland JC: Psychologic and neu-ropsychologic functioning of patients with limited small-cell lung cancer treated with chemotherapy and radiation therapy with or without warfarin: a study by the Cancer and Leukemia Group B. J Clin Oncol. 1998, 16: 1954-1960.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Pre-publication history

    1. The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/14/793/prepub

Copyright

© Zhang et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Advertisement