Evidence Hub

Refining Patient Selection for Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation in Limited-Stage SCLC: A Multicenter Cohort Study

Hye In Lee, J. Noh, Tae Hoon Lee, Eun Kyung Choi, Su Ssan Kim, Y. Shin, Y. Ahn, H. Pyo et al.

The Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 2025

1,302 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in the contemporary management of limited-stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) and to identify optimal strategies for patient selection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This multi-institutional cohort study included patients with LS-SCLC who underwent definitive chemoradiation between 2006 and 2022, all staged using brain MRI and PET. We compared the incidence of brain metastases (BM) and overall survival (OS) between patients who received PCI and those who did not. Additionally, we analyzed the differential effect of PCI across 22 subgroups. BM was classified as either isolated or nonisolated, with cumulative incidence calculated using a competing risk model. Outcomes of salvage treatments for isolated BM were also assessed.

RESULTS

Among the 1,302 study patients, 672 (51.6%) received PCI and 630 (48.4%) did not. During a median follow-up of 30.5 months (range, 4.2-227.2), PCI significantly reduced the cumulative incidence of BM (17.4% vs 27.6% at 2 years; P<.001), primarily by decreasing isolated BM (6.5% vs 16.1% at 2 years; P<.001), but had no significant effect on nonisolated BM. PCI consistently reduced the incidence of isolated BM across all subgroups, which led to improved OS except among patients who achieved complete response (CR) to primary treatment (hazard ratio [HR], 1.03; P=.865). Patients experiencing CR who developed isolated BM and received local salvage treatment achieved an…

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: 1,302 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