Aims:
The role of adjuvant WBRT in MBMs is controversial. This randomised trial compares WBRT with Obs after local treatment of 1-3 MBMs.
Methods:
The primary endpoint is distant intracranial failure (DIF) within 12 months of randomisation. The a priori neurocognitive function (NCF) endpoint is Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R) delayed recall at 4 months and is reported separately. Secondary endpoints include local failure (LF), overall survival (OS) and global quality of life (QoL). Analyses were conducted on intention-to-treat basis with nominal two-sided significance level 5%. Drug therapy was allowed. Effective drugs became available during trial and their impact was analysed.
Results:
Of 586 eligible patients (pts), 215 consented from 31 sites in 3 countries (Australia, UK and Norway) between 2009 and 2017. Eight (0.04%) who withdrew or had no data collected were excluded. 107 randomised to Obs and 100 to WBRT. Mean age 62 years, 67% males, 61% with single MBM of mean size 2cm, 67% had extracranial disease at randomisation. The two arms were well matched.
Within 12 months, 54 (50.5%) Obs pts had DIF compared with 42 (42.0%) WBRT pts (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.41-1.23; p=0.222). There was no difference in LF (p=0.100) or OS (log-rank p=0.861). 53% (Obs) and 59% (WBRT) pts were alive at 12 months. There was no significant between-group difference in mean intervention effect on global QoL (p=0.083). Pts who received T-cell checkpoint inhibitors and/or mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPK) pathway inhibitors and WBRT before or within 12 months of randomisation had DIF rate 29% compared with Obs and no systemic therapy had 44%, but was not significant (p=0.228).
Conclusion:
This level one evidence shows WBRT does not improve outcomes in MBMs. This practice-changing trial justifies the recent move away from WBRT that occurred during the course of the trial.