Evidence Hub

Improved Progression-Free Survival Following Dose-Escalated Versus Standard-Dose Postoperative Radiation Therapy for High-Risk Meningiomas: An International Multicenter Individual Patient-Level Meta-Analysis (FIRESTORM)

Singh R, Koempel A, French B, Crawford C, Perlow HK, Rauh S, Kutuk T, Beyer S et al.

International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2026

248 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Purpose: We performed an individual patient-level meta-analysis of high-risk meningiomas to compare the outcomes of dose-escalated radiation therapy (DE-RT) versus standard-dose postoperative radiation therapy (SD-RT).

Methods and materials: A total of 7 institutions participated. DE-RT was defined as treatment with a biologically effective dose of ≥79.2 Gy (equivalent of 66 Gy in 33 fractions). We compared progression-free survival (PFS) with DE-RT versus SD-RT via Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank t tests, a Cox proportional hazards multivariable model, and propensity score analyses with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). We also compared incidences of central nervous system radionecrosis (RN) with DE-RT versus SD-RT.

Results: The analysis included 248 patients with high-risk meningioma (59 received DE-RT and 189 received SD-RT). One hundred and eighty-eight cases (75.8%) were World Health Organization grade 2, and 103 cases (41.5%) were recurrent meningiomas. Extent of resection was subtotal resection in 182 of 248 (75.2%). Three- and 5-year PFS rates were 62.8% (95% CI, 55.8%-69.0%) and 45.0% (95% CI, 37.3%-52.3%), respectively. DE-RT was associated with superior PFS rates (P = .0022), with 3-year (86.4% vs 55.6%) and 5-year (65.8% vs 38.8%) PFS rates favoring DE-RT. On multivariable analysis, DE-RT was associated with superior PFS (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.24-0.69; P = .001). On IPTW, DE-RT continued to be associated with superior PFS (hazard…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 248 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