Despite the high prevalence of brain metastases in patients with metastatic lung cancer, these patients have been excluded from enrollment in clinical trials of new therapeutic drugs. The reasons for exclusion have centered on concerns that the blood-brain barrier may impede drug delivery into brain metastases, that brain metastases confer a dismal survival for metastatic lung cancer patients, and that brain metastases carry risk for cerebrovascular hemorrhage. A focused, updated review of these issues, however, clearly shows that these particular concerns are unwarranted. An extensive review of clinical trials on the efficacy of chemotheraputic agents against lung cancer brain metastases is also provided. This collective information describes an area in need of therapeutic development and supports an initiative to evaluate novel targeted therapies for lung cancer brain metastases.
The brain is a frequent site of metastases in patients with advanced lung cancer and can be associated with substantial morbidity. Historically, poor prognosis associated with brain metastases has led to therapeutic nihilism as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Over the past 10 years, however, with earlier detection of brain metastases and improved local treatment options, survival and prognosis have improved. These improvements are two of several factors that provide justification for including patients with brain metastases in clinical trials of new systemic therapies. We address several commonly cited beliefs that have hindered the development of therapeutic agents for central nervous system malignancies, and we advance reasons that we feel justify including patients with brain metastases in clinical trials of new therapeutic approaches for lung cancer.
The Blood-Brain Barrier May Not Substantially Impede Drug Delivery Into Brain Metastases
The microvasculature of the brain parenchyma is lined by a continuous, nonfenestrated endothelium with tight junctions and has little pinocytic vesicle activity.[1,2] This blood-brain barrier (BBB) limits the entrance of circulating macromolecules into the brain parenchyma. The BBB and the lack of a lymphatic system are responsible for maintaining the brain as an immunologically privileged site and for protecting the brain against the entry of most drugs and invasion by microorganisms. This barrier has been hypothesized to be a reason why brain neoplasms and metastases are often resistant to chemotherapeutic drugs.[4,5]
The observation of brain metastases in 55% of patients who achieved a complete response (CR) with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (often developing very early after completion of therapy) has been interpreted as evidence for the brain being a pharmacologic sanctuary. Very small metastases that have not yet developed neovascularizition may be protected from chemotherapy. However, there is little if any evidence that this has any relevance in the delivery of chemotherapy to established brain metastases with highly permeable angiogenic vasculature sufficiently abnormal to permit enhancement on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans.[1-4]
Abundant evidence exists that the BBB is not fully operational in brain tumors.[7-9] First, the barrier does not prevent the entry of circulating metastatic cancer cells into the brain parenchyma. In addition, many malignancies in the brain appear to degrade the integrity of the BBB, permitting tumor drug delivery.[10,11]
Second, animal studies demonstrate that molecular tracers as large as 1.5 kD can be extravasated from tumor vasculature of experimental brain metastases.[2,12] The progressive growth of brain metastases is associated with increased expression of vascular endothelial growth factor and leads to tumor vascular permeability, uncharacteristic of surrounding normal brain parenchymal vasculature.[13,14]
Third, the BBB can be permeable in ischemic regions of the brain where increased endothelial pinocytosis, opening of the interendothelial tight junctions, and damage to endothelial cells can occur.[15,16] Degeneration and central necrosis often occur in large (0.2-mm2) brain metastases, and the BBB in these lesions is not intact, possibly due in part to endothelial cell damage or a direct effect of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF).
Even more direct data exist on the accumulation to therapeutic levels of chemotherapeutic agents in brain tumors.[17-34] These data have been obtained from analyses conducted after surgical resection, biopsy, or autopsy removal of brain tumors from chemotherapy-treated patients. Direct tissue measurement of drug levels has demonstrated that chemotherapy agents accumulate heterogeneously but often to a much greater extent than in the surrounding normal brain[12,35-37] or cerebrospinal fluid.[26,29,38-40] Pharmacokinetic and anatomic studies of the BBB have suggested that lipophilic drugs penetrate the normal central nervous system (CNS) much more readily than do hydrophilic drugs. However, there is little evidence that this is true for brain tumors, and hydrophilic drugs have shown activity against brain tumors.
The hydrophilic agent cisplatin, like most other chemotherapeutic drugs that have been studied, accumulates in human brain tumors much more than penetration into the normal CNS would predict.[40,41] After therapeutic dosing, cisplatin could be measured in brain tumors from autopsied patients at potentially cytotoxic concentrations. In patients undergoing biopsies after receiving small doses of cisplatin, the concentration of cisplatin in brain tumors, after correction for pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution, is equivalent to that in most normal tissues, except the liver and normal brain, where concentrations are higher and lower, respectively.[31,43]
Brain Metastases Do Not Necessarily Mandate a Dismal Survival for Metastatic NSCLC
Retrospective data from M. D. Anderson Cancer Center demonstrate that for patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and metastases at one or two organ sites, survival is slightly worse if the brain is involved than if it is not (median survival of 7–8 vs 9–10 months, respectively; unpublished data). However, for patients with involvement of more than two organ sites, the presence of brain metastases does not appear to influence survival at all. Thus, it appears that the total burden of cancer is a more important prognostic factor than the presence of brain metastases per se.
More routine use of MRI screening for brain metastases can detect these lesions earlier, long before they are an imminent cause of death or disability. Earlier detection of oligometastatic brain lesions allows the opportunity to treat with effective stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) techniques, which are much faster and less toxic than is traditional whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), so that systemic therapy is not delayed or compromised. The detection and treatment of brain metastases at a low volume of disease is associated with better survival.
Historically, WBRT has been the mainstay of treating brain metastases, and the median survival time after WBRT has been 2.5 to 7 months.[46-48] The prognosis for brain metastasis patients before WBRT has been categorized according to a recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) schema from the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RPA class 1 = Karnofsky performance scale [KPS] score > 70%, age < 65 years, and no extracranial disease; RPA class 2 = KPS score > 70% and age ≥ 65 years or active extracranial disease; RPA class 3 = KPS score ≤ 70%). The median survival time has been 5 to 7 months for RPA class 1, 3 to 4 months for RPA class 2, and 2.5 to 3 months for RPA class 3.[45,47,49-51]
The prognosis and patterns of treatment failure for brain metastasis patients after WBRT have been categorized according to an RPA schema based on decision nodes that include KPS score ≤ 80%, age > 60 years, radiation dose < 66 Gy, weight loss > 5%, and malignant pleural effusion. This RPA schema has demonstrated median survival differences ranging from 3.3 to 12.6 months. Surgical resection of brain metastases has been generally reserved for patients in RPA class 1 or for patients with large symptomatic metastases refractory to radiotherapy.
Since the late 1990s, SRS has been used with increasing frequency for the treatment of brain metastases.[54-61] For up to four tumors smaller than 3 cm and as small as 0.5 cm, SRS, using GammaKnife techniques (from a fixed cobalt source) or a linear accelerator, has demonstrated effective local control of brain metastases as a single-day outpatient procedure without the alopecia, fatigue, or potential neurocognitive toxicity encountered with WBRT.[58,59,61] WBRT is still essential in treating multiple or disseminated brain metastases, and neurosurgical resection is still the best option for management of large brain metastases that are resistant to radiotherapy or markedly symptomatic. However, SRS can now be used to treat most other cases of brain metastases effectively with fewer side effects, and systemic therapy can be resumed immediately.[54,58,59,61] In addition, SRS as consolidation therapy has been shown to improve survival after WBRT in patients with solitary brain metastases.
Although the efficacy of SRS has not been directly compared with neurosurgical resection for NSCLC brain metastases, local control rates have invariably been high; the median survival time after SRS has been approximately 5 to 11 months and as high as 21 months for patients without extracranial disease, which is significantly better than the historical median survival time after WBRT.[54,57-60,63-65] This improvement is likely due to the practice of SRS being used selectively to treat lower-volume, early oligometastatic disease in the brain with a better prognosis, whereas WBRT is still the gold standard therapy for bulky and extensive metastatic disease in the brain with a poorer prognosis.[55,66,67]
SRS and WBRT appear to have equivalent efficacy, however, in patients with a similar disease burden. The overall survival for patients with up to four brain metastases treated with SRS alone or with concomitant WBRT has been the same in both retrospective and prospective randomized multi-institutional trials.[58,68,69] New sites of metastases are more likely to develop after SRS than after WBRT, but SRS can be repeated at new sites if the metastases develop gradually as oligometastatic disease[70,71] and can be used to effectively treat tumors that progress after WBRT.
Other Factors Influencing Prognosis
In addition to the availability of SRS, which allows effective early intervention for NSCLC brain metastases with minimal morbidity, other factors have somewhat reduced the effect of brain metastases on prognosis. Specifically, routine MRI screening is now often detecting asymptomatic small brain metastases early, while patients have a relatively long life expectancy and a preserved performance status. Overall, the presence of brain metastases is no longer necessarily associated with the very poor prognosis that has historically been associated with them.
Because of this shift, it would be very reasonable to routinely include patients with brain metastases in clinical trials of new systemic therapies—particularly patients with small minimally symptomatic brain metastases (whether or not they have been treated with radiotherapy) and patients with oligometastatic brain disease that has been treated with SRS or surgical resection. If a new systemic therapy is effective against the small and minimally symptomatic brain metastases, the morbidity associated with WBRT might be deferred.
1. Johansson B: The physiology of the blood-brain barrier. Adv Exp Med Biol 274:25-39, 1990.
2. Gregoire N: The blood-brain barrier. J Neuroradiol 16:238-250, 1989.
3. Felgenhauer K: The blood-brain barrier redefined. J Neurol 233:193-194, 1986.
4. Shaprio WR, Shapiro JR: Principles of brain tumor chemotherapy. Semin Onc 13:56-59, 1986.
5. Zuelch K: Brain Tumors: Their Biology and Pathology, 3rd ed, pp 480-498. Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 1986.
6. Chen AM, Jahan TM, Jablons DM, et al: Risk of cerebral metastases and neurological death after pathological complete responses to neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Clinical implications for the subsequent management of the brain. Cancer 109:1668-1675, 2007.
7. Stewart DJ: Human central nervous system pharmacology of antineoplastic agents: implications for the treatment of brain tumors, in Chatel M, Darcel E, Pecker J (eds): Brain Oncology, Biology, Diagnosis and Therapy, pp 387-395. Norwell, Mass; Kluwer; 1987.
8. Ushio Y, Posner J, Shapiro WR: Chemotherapy of experimental meningeal carcinomatosis. Cancer Res 37:1232-1237, 1977.
9. Siegal T, Sandbank U, Gabizon A, et al: Alteration of blood-brain-CSF barrier in experimental meningeal carcinomatosis. J Neurooncol 4:233-242, 1987.
10. Stewart PA, Hayakawa K, Farrell CL, et al: Quantitative study of microvessel ultrastructure in human peritumoral brain tissue. Evidence for a blood-brain barrier defect. J Neurosurg 67:697-705, 1987.
11. Zagzag D, Goldenberg M, Brem S: Angiogenesis and blood-brain barrier breakdown modulate CT contrast enhancement: An experimental study in a rabbit brain-tumor model. AJR AM J Roentgenol 153:141-146, 1989.
12. Groothuis DR, Fischer JM, Vick NA, et al: Comparative permeability of different glioma models to horse-radish peroxidase. Cancer Treat Rep 65(suppl 2):13-18, 1981.
13. Feigin I, Allen LB, Lipkin L, et al: The endothelial hyperplasia of the cerebral blood vessels with brain tumors, and its sarcomatous transformation. Cancer 11:264-276, 1958.
14. Brown JM, Giaccia AJ: The unique physiology of solid tumors: Opportunities (and problems) for cancer therapy. Cancer Res 58:1408-1416, 1998.
15. Dietrich WD, Busto R, Halley M, et al: The importance of brain temperature in alterations of the blood-brain barrier following cerebral ischemia. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 49:486-497, 1990.
16. Zhang ZG, Zhang L, Jiang Q, et al: VEGF enhances angiogenesis and promotes blood-brain barrier leakage in the ischemic brain. J Clin Invest 106:829-838, 2000.
17. Stewart DJ: A critique of the role of the blood-brain barrier in the chemotheapy of human brain tumors. J Neurooncol 20:121-139, 1994.
18. Walker MD, Hilton J: Nitrosourea pharmacodynamics in relation to the central nervous system. Cancer Treat Rep 60:725-728, 1976.
19. Eckhardt S, Csetenyi J, Horvath IP, et al: Uptake of labeled dianhydrogalactitol into human gliomas and nervous tissue. Cancer Treat Rep 61:841-847, 1977.
20. Ojima Y, Sullivan RD: Pharmacology of methotrexate in the human central nervous system. Surg Gynecol Obstet 125:1035-1040, 1967.
21. Hayakawa T, Ushio Y, Morimoto K, et al: Uptake of bleomycin by human brain tumors. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 39:341-349, 1976.
22. Simon G, Graul EH, Hundeshagen H: [Tracer-studies with radioactive-labelled cyclophosphamid in brain tumors.] Acta Neurochir (Wien) 13:441-456, 1965.
23. Stewart DJ, Richard M, Hugenholtz HN, et al: Cisplatin plus cytosine arabinoside in adults with malignant gliomas. J Neurooncol 2:29-34, 1984.
24. Stewart DJ, Grewaal D, Green R, et al: Human autopsy tissue distribution of menogaril and its metabolites. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 32:373-378, 1993.
25. Stewart DJ, Grewaal D, Redmond D, et al: Human autopsy tissue distribution of the epipodophyllotoxins etoposide and teniposide. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 32:368-372, 1993.
26. Stewart DJ, Lu K, Benjamin RS, et al: Concentrations of vinblastine in human intracerebral tumor and other tissues. J Neurooncol 1:139-144, 1983.
27. Stewart DJ, Zhengang G, Lu K, et al: Human tissue distribution of 4'-(9-acridinylamino)-methanesulfon-m-aniside (NSC 14159, AMSA). Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 12:116-119, 1984.
28. Stewart DJ, Rosenblum M, Luna M, et al: Disposition of methylglyoxyl bis (Guanylhydrazone) (MGBG, NSC-32946) in man. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 7:31-35, 1981.
29. Stewart DJ, Benvenuto JA, Leavens M, et al: Penetration of 3-deazauridine into human brain, intracerebral tumor and cerebrospinal fluid. Cancer Res 39:4119-4122, 1979.
30. Stewart DJ, Grewaal D, Green R, et al: Adriamycin concentrations in human autopsy intracerebral and extracerebral tumors. J Neurooncology 7(suppl):S27, 1989.
31. Stewart DJ, Molepo M, Eapen L, et al: Cisplatin and radiation in the treatment of tumors of the central nervous system: pharmacological considerations and results of early studies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 28:531-542, 1994.
32. Stewart DJ, O'Bryan M, Al-Sarraf M, et al: Phase II study of cisplatin in recurrent astrocytomas in adults. J Neurooncology 1:145-147, 1983.
33. Stewart DJ, Benjamin RS, Luna M, et al: Human tissue distribution of platinum after cis-diamminedichloroplatinum. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 10:51-54, 1982.
34. Stewart DJ, Russell N, Quarrington A, et al: Cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and dexamethasone in primary lymphoma of brain. Cancer Treat Rep 67:287-291, 1983.
35. Levin VA: A pharmacologic basis for brain tumor chemotherapy. Semin Oncol 2:57-61, 1975.
36. Blasberg RG, Groothuis DR: Chemotherapy of brain tumors: physiological and pharmacokinetic considerations. Semin Oncol 13:70-82, 1986.
37. Levin VA, Freeman-Dove W, Landahl D: Permeability characteristics of brain adjacent to tumors in rats. Arch Neurol 32:785-791, 1975.
38. Loo TL, Friedman E, Moore EC, et al: The pharmacologic disposition of N-(phospho-N-acetyl)-L-aspartate in humans. Cancer Res 40:86-90, 1980.
39. Stewart DJ, Leavens M, Friedman J, et al: Penetration of N-(phosphoacetyl)-L-aspartate in human central nervous system and intracerebral tumor. Cancer Res 40:3163-3166, 1980.
40. Stewart DJ, Leavens M, Maor M, et al: Human central nervous system distribution of cis-diamminedichloroplatinum and use as a radiosensitizer in malignant brain tumors. Cancer Res 42:2474-2479, 1982.
41. Stewart DJ, Mikhael NZ, Nair RC, et al: Platinum concentrations in human autopsy tumor samples. Am J Clin Oncol 11:152-158, 1988.
42. Bonnem EM, Litterst CL, Smith FP: Platinum concentrations in human glioblastoma multiforme following the use of cisplatin. Cancer Treat Rep 66:1661-1663, 1982.
43. Stewart DJ, Molepo JM, Green R, et al: Factors affecting tumor cisplatin levels. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 31:180, 1990.
44. Gerosa M, Nicolato A, Foroni R, et al: Analysis of long-term outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with non-small cell lung cancer brain metastases treated by gamma knife radiosurgery. J Neurosurg 102(suppl):75-80, 2005.
45. Plataniotis GA, Theofanopoulou M, Sotiriadou K, et al: The volume of brain metastases may be of prognostic significance in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer classified as RTOG-RPA classes 2 and 3 [comment]. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 18:85-86, 2006.
46. Antoniou D, Kyprianou K, Stathopoulos GP, et al: Response to radiotherapy in brain metastases and survival of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Oncol Rep 14:733-736, 2005.
47. Kepka L, Cieslak E, Bujko K, et al: Results of the whole-brain radiotherapy for patients with brain metastases from lung cancer: The RTOG RPA intra-classes analysis. Acta Oncol 44:389-398, 2005.
48. Khuntia D, Brown P, Li J, et al: Whole-brain radiotherapy in the management of brain metastasis. J Clin Oncol 24:1295-1304, 2006.
49. Gulbas H, Erkal HS, Serin M: The use of recursive partitioning analysis grouping in patients with brain metastases from non-small-cell lung cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 36:193-196, 2006.
50. Gaspar LE, Scott C, Murray K, et al: Validation of the RTOG recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) classification for brain metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 47:1001-1006, 2000.
51. Gaspar LE, Scott C, Rotman M, et al: Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) of prognostic factors in three Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) brain metastases trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 37:745-751, 1997.
52. Komaki R, Scott CB, Byhardt R, et al: Failure patterns by prognostic group determined by recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) of 1547 patients on four radiation therapy oncology group (RTOG) studies in inoperable nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 42:263-267, 1998.
53. Martin JJ, Kondziolka D: Indications for resection and radiosurgery for brain metastases. Curr Opin Oncol 17:584-587, 2005.
54. Jawahar A, Matthew RE, Minagar A, et al: Gamma knife surgery in the management of brain metastases from lung carcinoma: A retrospective analysis of survival, local tumor control, and freedom from new brain metastasis. J Neurosurg 100:842-847, 2004.
55. Lo SS, Chang EL, Suh JH: Stereotactic radiosurgery with and without whole-brain radiotherapy for newly diagnosed brain metastases [see comment]. Exp Rev Neurother 5:487-495, 2005.
56. Sheehan J, Kondziolka D, Flickinger J, et al: Radiosurgery for patients with recurrent small cell lung carcinoma metastatic to the brain: Outcomes and prognostic factors. J Neurosurg 102(suppl):247-254, 2005.
57. Nakayama H, Tokuuye K, Komatsu Y, et al: Stereotactic radiotherapy for patients who initially presented with brain metastases from non-small cell carcinoma. Acta Oncol 43:736-739, 2004.
58. Chen JC, Petrovich Z, O'Day S, et al: Stereotactic radiosurgery in the treatment of metastatic disease to the brain. Neurosurgery 47:268-281 (incl discussion), 2000.
59. Petrovich Z, Yu C, Giannotta SL, et al: Survival and pattern of failure in brain metastasis treated with stereotactic gamma knife radiosurgery. J Neurosurg 97(5 suppl):499-506, 2002.
60. Kong DS, Lee JI, Nam DH, et al: Prognosis of non-small cell lung cancer with synchronous brain metastases treated with gamma knife radiosurgery. J Korean Med Sci 21:527-532, 2006.
61. Gupta T: Stereotactic radiosurgery for brain oligometastases: Good for some, better for all? Ann Oncol 16:1749-1754, 2005.
62. Andrews DW, Scott CB, Sperduto PW, et al: Whole brain radiation therapy with or without stereotactic radiosurgery boost for patients with one to three brain metastases: Phase III results of the RTOG 9508 randomised trial. Lancet 363:1665-1672, 2004.
63. Sneed PK, Lamborn KR, Forstner JM, et al: Radiosurgery for brain metastases: Is whole brain radiotherapy necessary? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 43:549-558, 1999.
64. Chidel M, Suh JH, Reddy CA, et al: Application of recursive partitioning analysis and evaluation of the use of whole brain radiation among patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery for newly diagnosed brain metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 47:993-999, 2000.
65. Nieder C, Grosu AL, Astner S, et al: Integration of chemotherapy into current treatment strategies for brain metastases from solid tumors. Rad Oncol 1:19-25, 2006.
66. Gupta T: Stereotactic radiosurgery for brain oligometastases: Good for some, better for all? Ann Oncol 16:1749-1754, 2005.
67. Hu C, Chang EL, Hassenbusch SJ 3rd, et al: Nonsmall cell lung cancer presenting with synchronous solitary brain metastasis. Cancer 106:1998-2004, 2006.
68. Sneed PK, Suh JH, Goetsch SJ, et al: A multi-institutional review of radiosurgery alone vs. radiosurgery with whole brain radiotherapy as the initial management of brain metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 53:519-526, 2002.
69. Aoyama H, Shirato H, Tago M, et al: Stereotactic radiosurgery plus whole-brain radiation therapy vs stereotactic radiosurgery alone for treatment of brain metastases a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 295:2483-2491, 2006.
70. McDermott MW, Sneed PK: Radiosurgery in metastatic brain cancer. Neurosurgery 57:S4-45–S4-53, 2005.
71. Manon R, O'Neill A, Knisely J, et al: Phase II trial of radiosurgery for one to three newly diagnosed brain metastases from renal cell carcinoma, melanoma, and sarcoma: An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study (E 6397). J Clin Oncol 23:8870-8876, 2005.
72. Nieder C, Grosu Al, Astner S, et al: Integration of chemotherapy into current treatment strategies for brain metastases from solid tumors. Rad Oncol 1:19, 2006.
73. Schuette W: Treatment of brain metastases from lung cancer: Chemotherapy. Lung Cancer 45(suppl 2):S253-S257, 2004.
74. Tummarello D, Lippe P, Bracci R, et al: First line chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases from non-small and small cell lung cancer. Onc Rep 5:897-900, 1998.
75. Franciosi V, Coccini G, Michiara M, et al: Front-line chemotherapy with cisplatin and etoposide for patients with brain metastases from breast carcinoma, nonsmall cell lung carcinoma, or malignant melanoma: A prospective study [see comment]. Cancer 85:1599-1605, 1999.
76. Malacarne P, Santini A, Maestri A: Response of brain metastases from lung cancer to systemic chemotherapy with carboplatin and etoposide. Oncology 53:210-213, 1996.
77. Lee JS, Pisters KM, Komaki R, et al: Paclitaxel/carboplatin chemotherapy as primary treatment of brain metastases in non-small cell lung cancer: A preliminary report. Semin Oncol 24(4 suppl 12):S12-52–S12-55, 1997.
78. Cortes J, Rodriguez J, Aramendia JM, et al: Front-line paclitaxel/cisplatin-based chemotherapy in brain metastases from non-small-cell lung cancer. Oncology 64:28-35, 2003.
79. Bernardo G, Cuzzoni Q, Strada MR, et al: First-line chemotherapy with vinorelbine, gemcitabine, and carboplatin in the treatment of brain metastases from non-small-cell lung cancer: A phase II study. Cancer Invest 20:293-302, 2002.
80. Namba Y, Kijima T, Yokota S, et al: Gefitinib in patients with brain metastases from non-small-cell lung cancer: review of 15 clinical cases. Clin Lung Cancer 6:123-128, 2004.
81. Ceresoli GL, Cappuzzo F, Gregorc F, et al: Gefitinib in patients with brain metastases from non-small-cell lung cancer: a prospective trial. Ann Oncol 15:1042-1047, 2004.
82. Stemmler HJ, Weigert O, Krych M, et al: Brain metastases in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer responding to single-agent gefitinib: A case report. Anticancer Drugs 16:747-749, 2005.
83. Choong NW, Dietrich S, Seiwert TY, et al: Gefitinib response of erlotinib-refractory lung cancer involving meninges—role of EGFR mutation. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 3:50-57, 2006.
84. Lai CSL, Boshoff C, Falzon M, et al: Complete response to erlotinib treatment in brain metastases from recurrent NSCLC. Thorax 61:91, 2006.
85. Kristjansen PE, Soelberg Sorensen P, Skov Hansen M, et al: Prospective evaluation of the effect on initial brain metastases from small cell lung cancer of platinum-etoposide based induction chemotherapy followed by an alternating multidrug regimen. Ann Oncol 4:579-583, 1993.
86. Seute T, Leffers P, Wilmink JT, et al: Response of asymptomatic brain metastases from small-cell lung cancer to systemic first-line chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 24:2079-2083, 2006.
87. Lee JS, Murphy WK, Glisson BS, et al: Primary chemotherapy of brain metastasis in small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 7:916-922, 1989.
88. Ardizzoni A, Manegold C, Debruyne C: European organization for research and treatment of cancer (EORTC) 08957 phase II study of topotecan in combination with cisplatin as second-line treatment of refractory and sensitive small cell lung cancer. Clin Cancer Res 9:143-50, 2003.
89. Korfel A, Oehm C, von Pawel J, et al: Response to topotecan of symptomatic brain metastases of small-cell lung cancer also after whole-brain irradiation. A multicentre phase II study. Eur J Cancer 38:1724-1729, 2002.
90. Chou R, Chen A, Lau D: Complete response of brain metastases to irinotecan-based chemotherapy. J Clin Neurosci 12:242-245, 2005.
91. Fujita A, Fukuoka S, Takabatake H, et al: Combination chemotherapy of cisplatin, ifosfamide, and irinotecan with rhG-CSF support in patients with brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer. Oncology 59:291-295, 2000.
92. Abrey LE, Olson JD, Raizer JJ, et al: A phase II trial of temozolomide for patients with recurrent or progressive brain metastases. J Neurooncol 53:259-265, 2001.
93. Giorgio CG, Giuffrida D, Pappalardo A, et al: Oral temozolomide in heavily pre-treated brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer: Phase II study. Lung Cancer 50:247-254, 2005.
94. Dziadziuszko R, Ardizzoni A, Postmus PE, et al: Temozolomide in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer with and without brain metastases: A phase II study of the EORTC Lung Cancer Group (08965). Eur J Cancer 39:1271-1276, 2003.
95. Christodoulou C, Bafaloukos D, Linardou H, et al: Temozolomide (TMZ) combined with cisplatin (CDDP) in patients with brain metastases from solid tumors: A Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group (HeCOG) Phase II study. J Neurooncol 71:61-65, 2005.
96. Cotto C, Berille J, Souquet PJ, et al: A phase II trial of fotemustine and cisplatin in central nervous system metastases from non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cancer 32A:69-71, 1996.
97. Khayat D, Giroux B, Berille J, et al: Fotemustine in the treatment of brain primary tumors and metastases. Cancer Invest 12:414-420, 1994.
98. Kaba SE, Kyritsis AP, Hess K, et al: TPDC-FuHu chemotherapy for the treatment of recurrent metastatic brain tumors. J Clin Oncol 15:1063-1070, 1997.
99. Minotti V, Crino L, Meacci ML, et al: Chemotherapy with cisplatin and teniposide for cerebral metastases in non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 20:93-98, 1998.
100. Ushio Y, Arita N, Hayawaka T, et al: Chemotherapy of brain metastases from lung carcinoma: A controlled randomized study. Neurosurgery 28:201-205, 1991.
101. Harita S, Mizuta A, Kuyama S, et al: Long-term survival following concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with concomitant brain metastases only. Int J Clin Oncol 10:63-68, 2005.
102. Pronzato P, Bruna F, Neri E, et al: Radiotherapy plus carboplatin and teniposide in patients with brain metastases from non small cell lung cancer. Anticancer Res 15:517-519, 1995.
103. University of Alberta Drug Bank Database, 2006.
104. Nugent JL, Bunn PA Jr, Matthews MJ, et al: CNS metastases in small cell bronchogenic carcinoma: Increasing frequency and changing pattern with lengthening survival. Cancer 44:1885-1893, 1979.
105. Bunn PA Jr, Nugent JL, Matthews MJ: Central nervous system metastases in small cell bronchogenic carcinoma. Semin Oncol 5:314-322, 1978.
106. Komaki R, Cox JD, Stark R: Frequency of brain metastasis in adenocarcinoma and large cell carcinoma of the lung: Correlation with survival. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 9:1467-1470, 1983.
107. Seute T, Leffers P, Wilmink JT, et al: Response of asymptomatic brain metastases from small-cell lung cancer to systemic first-line chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 24:2079-2083, 2006.
108. Sorensen JB, Hansen HH, Hansen M, et al: Brain metastases in adenocarcinoma of the lung: Frequency, risk groups, and prognosis. J Clin Oncol 6:1474-1480, 1988.
109. Barlesi F, Jacot W, Astoul P, et al: Second-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review. Lung Cancer 51:159-172, 2006.
110. Mandybur TI: Intracranial hemorrhage caused by metastatic tumors. Neurology 27:650-655, 1977.
111. Bitoh S, Hasegawa H, Ohtsuki H, et al: Cerebral neoplasms initially presenting with massive intracerebral hemorrhage. Surg Neurol 22:57-62, 1984.
112. Maor MH, Dubey P, Tucker SL, et al: Stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases: results and prognostic factors. Int J Cancer 90:157-162, 2000.
113. Noel G, Medioni J, Valery CA, et al: Three irradiation treatment options including radiosurgery for brain metastases from primary lung cancer. Lung Cancer 41:333-343, 2003.
114. Andrews DW, Scott CB, Sperduto PW, et al: Whole brain radiation therapy with or without stereotactic radiosurgery boost for patients with one to three brain metastases: Phase III results of the RTOG 9508 randomized trial. Lancet 363:1665-1672, 2004.
115. Suzuki H, Toyoda S, Muramatus M, et al: Spontaneous haemorrhage into metastatic brain tumours after stereotactic radiosurgery using a linear accelerator. J Neurol Neurosurg Phsychaitry 74:908-912, 2003.
116. Licata C, Turazzi S: Bleeding cerebral neoplasm with symptomatic hematoma. J Neurosurg Sci 47:201-210, 2003.
117. Srivastava G, Rana V, Allen S, et al: The risk of spontaneous hemorrhage from non-small cell lung cancer brain metastases. Submitted 2007.
118. Kinch MS, Moore MB, Harpole DH Jr: Predictive value of the EphA2 receptor tyrosine kinase in lung cancer recurrence and survival. Clin Cancer Res 9:613-618, 2003.