Evidence Hub

The evolving landscape of leptomeningeal metastases from NSCLC: an international, contemporary, multicenter cohort study

M. Zheng, Yong Xia, K. Pan, F. Sun, A. Tan, X.R. Dong, H. Tu, L. Tang et al.

Annals of Oncology, 2025

2,052 participants · 19 citations

Abstract

Background: Leptomeningeal metastatic disease (LMD) represents a devastating complication of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a poor prognosis. Our understanding of LMD is limited in the era of molecular testing and emerging therapeutic options for lung cancer. Patients and methods: We conducted an international, multicenter, retrospective study involving eight institutions across Asia, United States, and Europe. Patients diagnosed with LMD from advanced NSCLC were identified (2007-2024). Clinicopathological characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes were analyzed. The primary endpoint was overall survival from the LMD diagnosis (LMOS). Results: A total of 2052 patients with NSCLC and LMD were included and analyzed by molecular subtypes: epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) (n = 1610), ALK (n = 141), other actionable genomic alterations (other AGA; n = 137), and non-AGA (n = 164). The cumulative prevalence of LMD by molecular subgroups was EGFR, 11.1%; ALK, 11.2%; ROS1, 16%; ERBB2, 12.3%, non-AGA, 3.6%. A higher proportion of LMD was diagnosed >3 years after initial metastatic diagnosis. By the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO)—European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) diagnostic criteria, type I (cerebrospinal fluid cytology positive) had significantly shorter LMOS than type II (magnetic resonance imaging and/or symptom positive). Median LMOS was 10.9 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 10.0-11.8 months] in all patients. Compared with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 2,052 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free