Interventional stereotactic radiotherapy (brachytherapy) for unresected brain metastases: Systematic review of outcome and toxicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stereotactic brachytherapy (SBT) is an underutilized treatment for brain metastases. This systematic review evaluates SBT's clinical outcomes, toxicity, and procedural characteristics for intact brain metastases in radiation-naive and radiation-recurrent patients. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines and the PICOS framework. Studies published until June 30, 2024, were identified through searches of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases. Retrospective studies and prospective trials were included. Key extracted data included patient characteristics, treatment protocols, local control (LC), distant-intracranial control (DIC), overall survival (OS), and procedure-related toxicity. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Eight retrospective single-center studies involving 427 patients and 456 metastases met inclusion criteria. Median patient age ranged from 47 to 60 years, with most having a Karnofsky Performance Status ≥ 70. SBT mostly demonstrated high 1-year LC rates (93.3 %-100 %) and a 1-year DIC from 52 % to 90 %. Median OS for radiation-naive patients ranged from 8 to 17 vs. 6-28.4 months for radio-recurrent patients, with RPA class 1 showing the best outcomes. Toxicity was minimal, with no reported fatal complications or significant late toxicity. Across all studies, I-125 seeds were utilized, with temporary implantation predominating, while permanent implantation involved higher doses, up to 150 Gy, and extended treatment durations. Postoperative morbidity within 30 days ranged from 0 % to 6.6 % across different studies. No G3/G4 acute toxicities were reported. CONCLUSIONS: SBT is a highly effective and safe option for treating intact brain metastases, particularly in patients with large or radiation-recurrent lesions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".