This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Marc C. Chamberlain, MD
Department of Neurosciences University of California, San Diego 9500 Gilman Dr La Jolla, CA 92093

Arch Neurol. 1997;54(1):16-17.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The article by Balm and Hammack¹ in a recent issue of the ARCHIVES is a commendable effort and reviews the recent study at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. However, the study suffers from being a retrospective analysis and from the lack of a consistent approach to patients with leptomeningeal metastasis (LM).

For example, it is not clear why some patients were treated aggressively (n=52), vs offered no treatment (n=35) or radiation therapy only (n=37). Because their article suggests that aggressive treatment with intracerebrospinal fluid (intra-CSF) chemotherapy plus involved-field central nervous system radiation is associated with a better outcome, I believe it is incumbent on neurooncologists to conduct a randomized prospective study regarding the benefits of aggressive treatment. Several recent studies of the treatment of LM have suggested that administration of systemic chemotherapy plus involved-field central nervous system radiotherapy may be sufficient treatment.²

Furthermore, in the study by Balm . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?