Evidence Hub

Systematic review and meta-analysis of adjuvant radiation dose for pediatric patients (≤22y) with non-metastatic intracranial ependymomas

Melanie L. Rose, R. Sachdeva, Y. Mezgueldi, Renata W. Yen, L. Serraj, Kelly L. Corbett, T. Yock

International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 2024

1,321 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Ependymomas are the third most common brain tumors in children. Standard of care is surgery followed by adjuvant radiotherapy. Controversy in the literature still exists over optimal radiotherapy dose. We completed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the optimal dose for local control (LC), event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS) in pediatric patients.

MATERIALS & METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Web of Science through January 2024. We included cohort studies that compared adjuvant radiotherapy of ≤54Gy to >54Gy in pediatric patients (≤22 years) with non-metastatic intracranial ependymomas. We assessed study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale of Cohort Studies. We pooled studies using a random effects meta-analysis for hazard ratios (HR), 95% confidence intervals (CI), and assessed statistical heterogeneity via I2. When HRs were unavailable, we transformed risks using established methods. We narratively summarized qualitative outcomes.

RESULTS

Seven studies met our inclusion criteria, covering a combined 1321 patients. Studies included a range of doses from 45-66.6Gy. Compared with >54Gy, we found no difference in LC for those receiving ≤54Gy (HR=0.83, 95% CI 0.56-1.24, I2=49.1%), in EFS (HR=1.02, 95% CI 0.95-1.09, I2=0.00%), and OS (HR=0.99, 95% CI 0.82-1.20, I2=37.5%). Two studies reported on subtotal resection by radiotherapy dose, neither study…

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: 1,321 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