experimental systemic therapies instead of reirradiation for
this patient population.
The recent use of conformal RT for the treatment of chil-
dren with EP has decreased the volume of normal tissues re-
ceiving the highest doses and increased our knowledge of
dose to normal tissues volumes, leaving open the possibility
for reirradiation in the setting of failure after conventional
treatment. We have taken advantage of this information to
perform additional surgery and reirradiation by using a frac-
tionated treatment approach.
We attempted to present results of this series according to
RT
2
type: SRS, FFRT, and CSI, with additional subgroup
analysis according to RT
1
failure type. The major findings
from this review are the lack of long-term disease control
and morbidity of patients undergoing SRS, the durability of
disease control and lack of major toxicity for patients under-
going CSI, and the excellent rate of disease control for pa-
tients with local recurrences re-treated by using fractionated
therapy.
The effectiveness of reirradiation is ultimately measured
by the rate of long-term disease control and functional out-
come. Although this series spans nearly 20 years, 28 of 32 pa-
tients had their RT
2
administered during the past 10 years,
making the results preliminary. In this preliminary series,
the PFS
RT2
/PFS
RT1
ratio was greater than unity for 20 of
38 patients, including 4 of 6 SRS patients, 5 of 13 patients
with local failure treated by using FFRT, and 8 of 12 patients
with metastatic failure treated by using CSI.
Exploring normal tissue tolerance with reirradiation can
lead to lethal complications or tremendous morbidity. This
is readily apparent from the SRS group and remains a concern
for patients treated by using fractionated reirradiation regard-
less of the follow-up interval. Although changes in imaging
and, to a lesser extent, symptoms were apparent within 6
months of RT in the SRS group, their persistence resulted
in morbidity and mortality even years after treatment. Two
patients treated by using CSI experienced signs and symp-
toms suggestive of necrosis. As noted, 1 patient experienced
progression to necrosis in the cerebellum requiring surgery
and HBOT. This case was notable because the event might
have been predicted based on the short interval between the
RT
1
and RT
2
treatment courses. However, because our tech-
nique of reirradiation using a combination of CSI and boost
treatment seeks comprehensive coverage of the neuraxis,
shielding large volumes of previously irradiated tissue invites
reseeding. The other case was a patient who underwent meta-
stasectomy of a cervical spinal cord metastasis and developed
signs of myelopathy. She was successfully treated by using
HBOT.
The interval between courses of radiation is recognized,
along with such other clinical factors as the specific region
of the brain or spinal cord, as an important variable to con-
sider when offering re-treatment
(6) .Although investigators
showed by experimentation or in clinical studies that the spi-
nal cord may tolerate reirradiation to relatively high doses
(7, 8), we restricted re-treatment to the spinal cord when admin-
istering CSI to patients who had undergone previous infraten-
torial irradiation that involved the upper cervical spinal cord.
The addition of CSI to a dose of 39.6 Gy and to regions
treated to less than 30% of the previously prescribed 54 Gy
achieves a biological equivalant dose (BED) of approxi-
mately 96 Gy
2
, whereas overlap of the entire cervical cord
with the combined doses of 54 and 39.6 Gy would achieve
a biological equivalent dose (BED) of approximately 246
Gy
2
. The former value is within the lower range and the latter
is within the upper range of the previously reported cumula-
tive spinal cord doses of 102–181.5 Gy
2
, for which the risk of
myelopathy was estimated at 25%. In our patients, catego-
rized as intermediate risk based on cumulative dose, the
BED of the first course of treatment was about 129 Gy
2
(8) .Indications for reirradiation require exploration. In addi-
tion, guidelines need to be established with regard to dose
and volume. Patients who experience progression with com-
bined local and metastatic failure after previous RT fare
poorly with RT
2
and should be considered for experimental
therapy or a combined-modality approach involving CSI. Pa-
tients who experience progression with metastatic disease,
but remain controlled at the primary site, should be consid-
ered for aggressive metastasectomy and CSI, with attention
given to the timing of reirradiation, normal tissue tolerances,
and adequate treatment of the volume at risk. Progression at
sites of metastasectomy and high-dose irradiation with dura-
ble control at the primary site suggest the need for more
aggressive surgery to achieve negative margins, greater
cumulative doses of radiation to the metastatic site, or a com-
bined-modality approach that would include agents synergis-
tic with RT.
Patients who experience progression with local failure
require careful neuraxis surveillance for metastatic disease
and aggressive local resection with definitive evidence that
144
120
96
72
48
24
0
Time (months)
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
Overall Survival
(1)
(2)
(3)
Fig. 5. Overall survival dated from the start of reirradiation accord-
ing to treatment method and initial tumor pattern failure (blue (1) =
12 patients with initial metastatic failure treated with craniospinal re-
irradiation; green (2) = 13 patients with local failure retreated with
focal fractionated irradiation; red (3) = 5 patients with local failure
treated with radiosurgery).
Ependymoma reirradiation
d
T. E. M
ERCHANT
et al
.
95