Table 1. Open in new tab Studies on...

First Author, y	N	Fraction. Regimen (Isodose Line)	Age Mean; Range	Prior Therapy	NF2 (%)	Tumor Vol. (cc); Max. d (mm)	Mean FU; Range (mo)	Tumor Control (5-y PFS)	CN V Deficit		CN VII Deficit		Serviceable Hearing		Tinnitus		Post-XRT Hydrocephalus
Vernimmen,²⁰ 2008^a	51	3 × 4.7-11 Gy (85%)	50; 20-85	27%	10%	5.9; N/A	72; 24-149	96% (98%)	23.5%	23.5%	39.2%	31.4%	43.1%	42%	N/A	N/A	N/A
Gallogly,²⁹ 2018^a	22	3 × 7 Gy (80%)	53.7; N/A	N/A	0%	N/A; 1.4	52.3; N/A	86.4% (76.9%)	0%	4.6%	0%	0%	50.%	36.4%	45%	45%	0%
Williams,⁴⁴ 2002^b	111	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54.1; 22-81	3.2%	0.8%	1.4; N/A	21.6; 12-68.4	N/A	Serviceable hearing: 64.3%GR: 1 = 16; 2 = 20; 3 = 16; 4 = 2; 5 = 2				Serviceable hearing: 58.9%GR: 1 = 9; 2 = 24; 3 = 14; 4 = 6; 5 = 3				N/A
	14	10 × 3 Gy (80%)				8.1; N/A											N/A
Williams,⁴² 2003^b	70	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	56.6; 24.3-81.6	5%	1·25%	N/A; 1.4	19.2; 3.6-45.6	N/A	0%	0% (2.5% transient)	0%	0%	19%SDS: 68.4%SReT: 37.5	18%SDS: 67.6%SReT: 40.7	N/A	N/A	N/A
	10	10 × 3 Gy (80%)				N/A; 2.8		N/A							N/A	N/A	N/A
Song,³⁶ 1999^a	30	5 × 5 Gy (80-90%)	57; 22-77	13.3%	3.3%	1.1; (0.5-2.7)	N/A; 6-44	100% (N/A)	6.7%	3.3%	16.7%	16.7%	40%	52% new loss	N/A	N/A	N/A
Chen,¹⁸ 2018^a	47	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	61; 25-82	45.6%	N/A	2.0; 2.7	61; 9-92	N/A (90%)	23.4%	27.7%	19%	19%	40.0%	31.6%	49%	N/A	2.1%
Patel,⁴¹ 2017^a	383	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54.3; 18-82	N/A	N/A	N/A	72; 13.6-181.5	78.3% (N/A)	16.4%	N/A	4.2%	12%	66%	36.2%	67.9%	69.5%	0.3%
Kapoor,³⁰ 2011^b	340	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54; N/A	N/A	N/A	2.7; N/A	56; 18-138	67% (91.7 PFS)	17.3%	2.8%	2.4%	1.6% better; 1.6% worse	N/A	N/A	58.5%	N/A	N/A
	36	10 × 3 Gy (80%)											N/A	N/A
Kranzinger,¹⁹ 2014^b	29	7 × 4 Gy (90%)	57; 32-75	27.6%	0%	0.9; 1.4	89.5; N/A	96.6% (N/A)	0%	6.9%	0%	10.3%	79.3%SDS: 74.3%PTA: 39.3	50%SDS: 38.1%PTA: 65.9	Almost all patients, unchanged		N/A
Mahadevan,³⁴ 2011^a,c	10	5 × 5 Gy (83%)	N/A	N/A	N/A	1.9; N/A	19; N/A	100% (N/A)	N/A	N/A	0%	0%	100%	100%	N/A	N/A	N/A
Sakanaka,³⁵ 2010^a	12	13 × 3 Gy (N/A)	52; 32-73	53.8%	0%	1.7; 1.3	87; 24-133	100% (N/A)	N/A	0%	N/A	0% (7.7% transient)	15.4%PTA: 32	0%PTA: 59.5	N/A	N/A	0%
	1	10 × 3 Gy (N/A)
	11	5 × 4 Gy (N/A)	51.5; 30-75	33.3%	0%	5.2; 1.9	39.5; 24-64	91.7% (N/A)	N/A	0%	N/A	0%	41.7%PTA: 18	80%PTA: 40	N/A	N/A	8.3% (not shunted)
	1	6 × 4 Gy (N/A)
Williams,³⁸ 2002^b	131	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54.1; 22.1-81.0	4.7%	2.·7%	1.5; 1.5	22.8; 12-70.8	N/A	0%	0% (1.3% transient)	0%	0%	63.9%SDS: 61.3%PTA: 44.8SReT: 44.9	55.6%SDS: 78.1%PTA: 59.5SReT: 46.4	N/A	N/A	N/A
	18	10 × 3 Gy (80%)				8.7; 2.9					0%	0%					N/A
	1	20 × 2 Gy (80%)				26.3; 4.1					0%	0%					N/A
Teo,³⁷ 2016^a	30	3 × 6 Gy (80%)	44; 17-82	36.7%	20%	N/A; 3.49	97; 7-175	80% (81%)	N/A	N/A	16.7%	23.3%	43.3%GR 1 + 2: 83.3%	16.7%GR 1 + 2: 76.7%	N/A	N/A	10%
Chang,²⁸ 2005^b	61	3 × 6-7 Gy (N/A)	54; 27-79	13.1%	0%	N/A; 18.5	48; 36-62	98% (91.4%)	0%	0%	1.5%	1.5%	57.3%SDS: 72.2%PTA: 34.9	74.3%SDS: 60.6%PTA: 48.8	N/A	N/A	N/A
Kocak,³² 2016^a	41	1-7 × 4.25-13 Gy (85%)	53; 21-80	22.0%	0%	N/A; 20	25; 9-44	97·6% (N/A)	0%	0%	19.5%	22.0%	N/A	21.9%	63.4%	43.9%	2.4%
Lederman,³³ 1997^a	23	4-5 × 4-6 Gy (90%)	62; 35-83	N/A	N/A	1.8; 17	27; 6-37	100% (N/A)	N/A	N/A	N/A	No new change	N/A	4.3% new loss	N/A	N/A	N/A
	16	4-5 × 4-5 Gy (90%)	56; 35-88	N/A	N/A	14.4; 37	28; 14-35	100% (N/A)	N/A	N/A	N/A	No new change	N/A	6.3% new loss	N/A	N/A	N/A
Casentini,²⁷ 2015^a	25	2-3 × 6-7 Gy (70-85%)	65; N/A	15.2%	6.1%	9.3; N/A	48; 12-111	58% (83%)	21.2%	24.2%	27.3%	30.3%	24%	21%	61%	61%	6%
	3	4 × 3.5-4.2 Gy (70-85%)	69; N/A			10.4; N/A
	5	5 × 3.9-4 Gy (70-85%)	74; N/A			13.4; N/A
Hansasuta,⁴⁰ 2011^a	383	1-5 × 4.8 Gy (80%)	54; 11-91	10.7%	3.9%	1.1; N/A	43.2; 12-120	97% (96%)	9.7%	10.7%	8.9%	9.1%	78%	76%	49.1%	N/A	1.0%
Feng,³⁹ 2019^a	41	3 × 6 Gy (80%)	57.4; 26-90	N/A	0%	4.9; N/A	56.6; 35-88	N/A (82.5%)	N/A	17.1%	N/A	4.9%	100%	75.5%	N/A	N/A	N/A
Ju,⁴³ 2008^a	21	3 × 6-6.6 Gy (83%)	54; 27-79	4.8%	33.3%	5.4; N/A	15; 6-25	100% (N/A)	4.8%	4.8%	14.3%	14.3%	4.8%^d	4.8%^d	81.0%	81.0%	0%
Karam,³¹ 2013^a	37	3-5 × 5-7 Gy (80%)	58; 31-85	0%	0%	1.0; N/A	52.2; 9-108	100% (N/A)	3%	5.4%	0%	5.4%	73.7%	57.9%	43.2%	48.6%	0%

First Author, y

Fraction. Regimen (Isodose Line)

Age Mean; Range

Prior Therapy

NF2 (%)

Tumor Vol. (cc); Max. d (mm)

Mean FU; Range (mo)

Tumor Control (5-y PFS)

CN V Deficit

CN VII Deficit

Serviceable Hearing

Tinnitus

Post-XRT Hydrocephalus

Pre-RDT

Post-RDT

Pre-RDT

Post-RDT

Pre-RDT

Post-RDT

Pre-RDT

Post-RDT

Vernimmen,²⁰ 2008^a

3 × 4.7-11 Gy (85%)

50; 20-85

27%

10%

5.9; N/A

72; 24-149

96% (98%)

23.5%

39.2%

31.4%

43.1%

42%

N/A

Gallogly,²⁹ 2018^a

3 × 7 Gy (80%)

53.7; N/A

N/A

N/A; 1.4

52.3; N/A

86.4% (76.9%)

4.6%

50.%

36.4%

45%

Williams,⁴⁴ 2002^b

111

5 × 5 Gy (80%)

54.1; 22-81

3.2%

0.8%

1.4; N/A

21.6; 12-68.4

N/A

Serviceable hearing: 64.3%GR: 1 = 16; 2 = 20; 3 = 16; 4 = 2; 5 = 2

Serviceable hearing: 58.9%GR: 1 = 9; 2 = 24; 3 = 14; 4 = 6; 5 = 3

N/A

10 × 3 Gy (80%)

8.1; N/A

N/A

Williams,⁴² 2003^b

5 × 5 Gy (80%)

56.6; 24.3-81.6

1·25%

N/A; 1.4

19.2; 3.6-45.6

N/A

0% (2.5% transient)

19%SDS: 68.4%SReT: 37.5

18%SDS: 67.6%SReT: 40.7

N/A

10 × 3 Gy (80%)

N/A; 2.8

N/A

Song,³⁶ 1999^a

5 × 5 Gy (80-90%)

57; 22-77

13.3%

3.3%

1.1; (0.5-2.7)

N/A; 6-44

100% (N/A)

6.7%

3.3%

16.7%

40%

52% new loss

N/A

Chen,¹⁸ 2018^a

5 × 5 Gy (80%)

61; 25-82

45.6%

N/A

2.0; 2.7

61; 9-92

N/A (90%)

23.4%

27.7%

19%

40.0%

31.6%

49%

N/A

2.1%

Patel,⁴¹ 2017^a

383

5 × 5 Gy (80%)

54.3; 18-82

N/A

72; 13.6-181.5

78.3% (N/A)

16.4%

N/A

4.2%

12%

66%

36.2%

67.9%

69.5%

0.3%

Kapoor,³⁰ 2011^b

340

5 × 5 Gy (80%)

54; N/A

N/A

2.7; N/A

56; 18-138

67% (91.7 PFS)

17.3%

2.8%

2.4%

1.6% better; 1.6% worse

N/A

58.5%

N/A

10 × 3 Gy (80%)

N/A

Kranzinger,¹⁹ 2014^b

7 × 4 Gy (90%)

57; 32-75

27.6%

0.9; 1.4

89.5; N/A

96.6% (N/A)

6.9%

10.3%

79.3%SDS: 74.3%PTA: 39.3

50%SDS: 38.1%PTA: 65.9

Almost all patients, unchanged

N/A

Mahadevan,³⁴ 2011^a,c

5 × 5 Gy (83%)

N/A

1.9; N/A

19; N/A

100% (N/A)

N/A

100%

N/A

Sakanaka,³⁵ 2010^a

13 × 3 Gy (N/A)

52; 32-73

53.8%

1.7; 1.3

87; 24-133

100% (N/A)

N/A

0% (7.7% transient)

15.4%PTA: 32

0%PTA: 59.5

N/A

10 × 3 Gy (N/A)

5 × 4 Gy (N/A)

51.5; 30-75

33.3%

5.2; 1.9

39.5; 24-64

91.7% (N/A)

N/A

41.7%PTA: 18

80%PTA: 40

N/A

8.3% (not shunted)

6 × 4 Gy (N/A)

Williams,³⁸ 2002^b

131

5 × 5 Gy (80%)

54.1; 22.1-81.0

4.7%

2.·7%

1.5; 1.5

22.8; 12-70.8

N/A

0% (1.3% transient)

63.9%SDS: 61.3%PTA: 44.8SReT: 44.9

55.6%SDS: 78.1%PTA: 59.5SReT: 46.4

N/A

10 × 3 Gy (80%)

8.7; 2.9

N/A

20 × 2 Gy (80%)

26.3; 4.1

N/A

Teo,³⁷ 2016^a

3 × 6 Gy (80%)

44; 17-82

36.7%

20%

N/A; 3.49

97; 7-175

80% (81%)

N/A

16.7%

23.3%

43.3%GR 1 + 2: 83.3%

16.7%GR 1 + 2: 76.7%

N/A

10%

Chang,²⁸ 2005^b

3 × 6-7 Gy (N/A)

54; 27-79

13.1%

N/A; 18.5

48; 36-62

98% (91.4%)

1.5%

57.3%SDS: 72.2%PTA: 34.9

74.3%SDS: 60.6%PTA: 48.8

N/A

Kocak,³² 2016^a

1-7 × 4.25-13 Gy (85%)

53; 21-80

22.0%

N/A; 20

25; 9-44

97·6% (N/A)

19.5%

22.0%

N/A

21.9%

63.4%

43.9%

2.4%

Lederman,³³ 1997^a

4-5 × 4-6 Gy (90%)

62; 35-83

N/A

1.8; 17

27; 6-37

100% (N/A)

N/A

No new change

N/A

4.3% new loss

N/A

4-5 × 4-5 Gy (90%)

56; 35-88

N/A

14.4; 37

28; 14-35

100% (N/A)

N/A

No new change

N/A

6.3% new loss

N/A

Casentini,²⁷ 2015^a

2-3 × 6-7 Gy (70-85%)

65; N/A

15.2%

6.1%

9.3; N/A

48; 12-111

58% (83%)

21.2%

24.2%

27.3%

30.3%

24%

21%

61%

4 × 3.5-4.2 Gy (70-85%)

69; N/A

10.4; N/A

5 × 3.9-4 Gy (70-85%)

74; N/A

13.4; N/A

Hansasuta,⁴⁰ 2011^a

383

1-5 × 4.8 Gy (80%)

54; 11-91

10.7%

3.9%

1.1; N/A

43.2; 12-120

97% (96%)

9.7%

10.7%

8.9%

9.1%

78%

76%

49.1%

N/A

1.0%

Feng,³⁹ 2019^a

3 × 6 Gy (80%)

57.4; 26-90

N/A

4.9; N/A

56.6; 35-88

N/A (82.5%)

N/A

17.1%

N/A

4.9%

100%

75.5%

N/A

Ju,⁴³ 2008^a

3 × 6-6.6 Gy (83%)

54; 27-79

4.8%

33.3%

5.4; N/A

15; 6-25

100% (N/A)

4.8%

14.3%

4.8%^d

81.0%

Karam,³¹ 2013^a

3-5 × 5-7 Gy (80%)

58; 31-85

1.0; N/A

52.2; 9-108

100% (N/A)

5.4%

73.7%

57.9%

43.2%

48.6%

First Author, y	N	Fraction. Regimen (Isodose Line)	Age Mean; Range	Prior Therapy	NF2 (%)	Tumor Vol. (cc); Max. d (mm)	Mean FU; Range (mo)	Tumor Control (5-y PFS)	CN V Deficit		CN VII Deficit		Serviceable Hearing		Tinnitus		Post-XRT Hydrocephalus
Vernimmen,²⁰ 2008^a	51	3 × 4.7-11 Gy (85%)	50; 20-85	27%	10%	5.9; N/A	72; 24-149	96% (98%)	23.5%	23.5%	39.2%	31.4%	43.1%	42%	N/A	N/A	N/A
Gallogly,²⁹ 2018^a	22	3 × 7 Gy (80%)	53.7; N/A	N/A	0%	N/A; 1.4	52.3; N/A	86.4% (76.9%)	0%	4.6%	0%	0%	50.%	36.4%	45%	45%	0%
Williams,⁴⁴ 2002^b	111	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54.1; 22-81	3.2%	0.8%	1.4; N/A	21.6; 12-68.4	N/A	Serviceable hearing: 64.3%GR: 1 = 16; 2 = 20; 3 = 16; 4 = 2; 5 = 2				Serviceable hearing: 58.9%GR: 1 = 9; 2 = 24; 3 = 14; 4 = 6; 5 = 3				N/A
	14	10 × 3 Gy (80%)				8.1; N/A											N/A
Williams,⁴² 2003^b	70	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	56.6; 24.3-81.6	5%	1·25%	N/A; 1.4	19.2; 3.6-45.6	N/A	0%	0% (2.5% transient)	0%	0%	19%SDS: 68.4%SReT: 37.5	18%SDS: 67.6%SReT: 40.7	N/A	N/A	N/A
	10	10 × 3 Gy (80%)				N/A; 2.8		N/A							N/A	N/A	N/A
Song,³⁶ 1999^a	30	5 × 5 Gy (80-90%)	57; 22-77	13.3%	3.3%	1.1; (0.5-2.7)	N/A; 6-44	100% (N/A)	6.7%	3.3%	16.7%	16.7%	40%	52% new loss	N/A	N/A	N/A
Chen,¹⁸ 2018^a	47	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	61; 25-82	45.6%	N/A	2.0; 2.7	61; 9-92	N/A (90%)	23.4%	27.7%	19%	19%	40.0%	31.6%	49%	N/A	2.1%
Patel,⁴¹ 2017^a	383	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54.3; 18-82	N/A	N/A	N/A	72; 13.6-181.5	78.3% (N/A)	16.4%	N/A	4.2%	12%	66%	36.2%	67.9%	69.5%	0.3%
Kapoor,³⁰ 2011^b	340	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54; N/A	N/A	N/A	2.7; N/A	56; 18-138	67% (91.7 PFS)	17.3%	2.8%	2.4%	1.6% better; 1.6% worse	N/A	N/A	58.5%	N/A	N/A
	36	10 × 3 Gy (80%)											N/A	N/A
Kranzinger,¹⁹ 2014^b	29	7 × 4 Gy (90%)	57; 32-75	27.6%	0%	0.9; 1.4	89.5; N/A	96.6% (N/A)	0%	6.9%	0%	10.3%	79.3%SDS: 74.3%PTA: 39.3	50%SDS: 38.1%PTA: 65.9	Almost all patients, unchanged		N/A
Mahadevan,³⁴ 2011^a,c	10	5 × 5 Gy (83%)	N/A	N/A	N/A	1.9; N/A	19; N/A	100% (N/A)	N/A	N/A	0%	0%	100%	100%	N/A	N/A	N/A
Sakanaka,³⁵ 2010^a	12	13 × 3 Gy (N/A)	52; 32-73	53.8%	0%	1.7; 1.3	87; 24-133	100% (N/A)	N/A	0%	N/A	0% (7.7% transient)	15.4%PTA: 32	0%PTA: 59.5	N/A	N/A	0%
	1	10 × 3 Gy (N/A)
	11	5 × 4 Gy (N/A)	51.5; 30-75	33.3%	0%	5.2; 1.9	39.5; 24-64	91.7% (N/A)	N/A	0%	N/A	0%	41.7%PTA: 18	80%PTA: 40	N/A	N/A	8.3% (not shunted)
	1	6 × 4 Gy (N/A)
Williams,³⁸ 2002^b	131	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54.1; 22.1-81.0	4.7%	2.·7%	1.5; 1.5	22.8; 12-70.8	N/A	0%	0% (1.3% transient)	0%	0%	63.9%SDS: 61.3%PTA: 44.8SReT: 44.9	55.6%SDS: 78.1%PTA: 59.5SReT: 46.4	N/A	N/A	N/A
	18	10 × 3 Gy (80%)				8.7; 2.9					0%	0%					N/A
	1	20 × 2 Gy (80%)				26.3; 4.1					0%	0%					N/A
Teo,³⁷ 2016^a	30	3 × 6 Gy (80%)	44; 17-82	36.7%	20%	N/A; 3.49	97; 7-175	80% (81%)	N/A	N/A	16.7%	23.3%	43.3%GR 1 + 2: 83.3%	16.7%GR 1 + 2: 76.7%	N/A	N/A	10%
Chang,²⁸ 2005^b	61	3 × 6-7 Gy (N/A)	54; 27-79	13.1%	0%	N/A; 18.5	48; 36-62	98% (91.4%)	0%	0%	1.5%	1.5%	57.3%SDS: 72.2%PTA: 34.9	74.3%SDS: 60.6%PTA: 48.8	N/A	N/A	N/A
Kocak,³² 2016^a	41	1-7 × 4.25-13 Gy (85%)	53; 21-80	22.0%	0%	N/A; 20	25; 9-44	97·6% (N/A)	0%	0%	19.5%	22.0%	N/A	21.9%	63.4%	43.9%	2.4%
Lederman,³³ 1997^a	23	4-5 × 4-6 Gy (90%)	62; 35-83	N/A	N/A	1.8; 17	27; 6-37	100% (N/A)	N/A	N/A	N/A	No new change	N/A	4.3% new loss	N/A	N/A	N/A
	16	4-5 × 4-5 Gy (90%)	56; 35-88	N/A	N/A	14.4; 37	28; 14-35	100% (N/A)	N/A	N/A	N/A	No new change	N/A	6.3% new loss	N/A	N/A	N/A
Casentini,²⁷ 2015^a	25	2-3 × 6-7 Gy (70-85%)	65; N/A	15.2%	6.1%	9.3; N/A	48; 12-111	58% (83%)	21.2%	24.2%	27.3%	30.3%	24%	21%	61%	61%	6%
	3	4 × 3.5-4.2 Gy (70-85%)	69; N/A			10.4; N/A
	5	5 × 3.9-4 Gy (70-85%)	74; N/A			13.4; N/A
Hansasuta,⁴⁰ 2011^a	383	1-5 × 4.8 Gy (80%)	54; 11-91	10.7%	3.9%	1.1; N/A	43.2; 12-120	97% (96%)	9.7%	10.7%	8.9%	9.1%	78%	76%	49.1%	N/A	1.0%
Feng,³⁹ 2019^a	41	3 × 6 Gy (80%)	57.4; 26-90	N/A	0%	4.9; N/A	56.6; 35-88	N/A (82.5%)	N/A	17.1%	N/A	4.9%	100%	75.5%	N/A	N/A	N/A
Ju,⁴³ 2008^a	21	3 × 6-6.6 Gy (83%)	54; 27-79	4.8%	33.3%	5.4; N/A	15; 6-25	100% (N/A)	4.8%	4.8%	14.3%	14.3%	4.8%^d	4.8%^d	81.0%	81.0%	0%
Karam,³¹ 2013^a	37	3-5 × 5-7 Gy (80%)	58; 31-85	0%	0%	1.0; N/A	52.2; 9-108	100% (N/A)	3%	5.4%	0%	5.4%	73.7%	57.9%	43.2%	48.6%	0%

First Author, y

Fraction. Regimen (Isodose Line)

Age Mean; Range

Prior Therapy

NF2 (%)

Tumor Vol. (cc); Max. d (mm)

Mean FU; Range (mo)

Tumor Control (5-y PFS)

CN V Deficit

CN VII Deficit

Serviceable Hearing

Tinnitus

Post-XRT Hydrocephalus

Pre-RDT

Post-RDT

Pre-RDT

Post-RDT

Pre-RDT

Post-RDT

Pre-RDT

Post-RDT

Vernimmen,²⁰ 2008^a

3 × 4.7-11 Gy (85%)

50; 20-85

27%

10%

5.9; N/A

72; 24-149

96% (98%)

23.5%

39.2%

31.4%

43.1%

42%

N/A

Gallogly,²⁹ 2018^a

3 × 7 Gy (80%)

53.7; N/A

N/A

N/A; 1.4

52.3; N/A

86.4% (76.9%)

4.6%

50.%

36.4%

45%

Williams,⁴⁴ 2002^b

111

5 × 5 Gy (80%)

54.1; 22-81

3.2%

0.8%

1.4; N/A

21.6; 12-68.4

N/A

Serviceable hearing: 64.3%GR: 1 = 16; 2 = 20; 3 = 16; 4 = 2; 5 = 2

Serviceable hearing: 58.9%GR: 1 = 9; 2 = 24; 3 = 14; 4 = 6; 5 = 3

N/A

10 × 3 Gy (80%)

8.1; N/A

N/A

Williams,⁴² 2003^b

5 × 5 Gy (80%)

56.6; 24.3-81.6

1·25%

N/A; 1.4

19.2; 3.6-45.6

N/A

0% (2.5% transient)

19%SDS: 68.4%SReT: 37.5

18%SDS: 67.6%SReT: 40.7

N/A

10 × 3 Gy (80%)

N/A; 2.8

N/A

Song,³⁶ 1999^a

5 × 5 Gy (80-90%)

57; 22-77

13.3%

3.3%

1.1; (0.5-2.7)

N/A; 6-44

100% (N/A)

6.7%

3.3%

16.7%

40%

52% new loss

N/A

Chen,¹⁸ 2018^a

5 × 5 Gy (80%)

61; 25-82

45.6%

N/A

2.0; 2.7

61; 9-92

N/A (90%)

23.4%

27.7%

19%

40.0%

31.6%

49%

N/A

2.1%

Patel,⁴¹ 2017^a

383

5 × 5 Gy (80%)

54.3; 18-82

N/A

72; 13.6-181.5

78.3% (N/A)

16.4%

N/A

4.2%

12%

66%

36.2%

67.9%

69.5%

0.3%

Kapoor,³⁰ 2011^b

340

5 × 5 Gy (80%)

54; N/A

N/A

2.7; N/A

56; 18-138

67% (91.7 PFS)

17.3%

2.8%

2.4%

1.6% better; 1.6% worse

N/A

58.5%

N/A

10 × 3 Gy (80%)

N/A

Kranzinger,¹⁹ 2014^b

7 × 4 Gy (90%)

57; 32-75

27.6%

0.9; 1.4

89.5; N/A

96.6% (N/A)

6.9%

10.3%

79.3%SDS: 74.3%PTA: 39.3

50%SDS: 38.1%PTA: 65.9

Almost all patients, unchanged

N/A

Mahadevan,³⁴ 2011^a,c

5 × 5 Gy (83%)

N/A

1.9; N/A

19; N/A

100% (N/A)

N/A

100%

N/A

Sakanaka,³⁵ 2010^a

13 × 3 Gy (N/A)

52; 32-73

53.8%

1.7; 1.3

87; 24-133

100% (N/A)

N/A

0% (7.7% transient)

15.4%PTA: 32

0%PTA: 59.5

N/A

10 × 3 Gy (N/A)

5 × 4 Gy (N/A)

51.5; 30-75

33.3%

5.2; 1.9

39.5; 24-64

91.7% (N/A)

N/A

41.7%PTA: 18

80%PTA: 40

N/A

8.3% (not shunted)

6 × 4 Gy (N/A)

Williams,³⁸ 2002^b

131

5 × 5 Gy (80%)

54.1; 22.1-81.0

4.7%

2.·7%

1.5; 1.5

22.8; 12-70.8

N/A

0% (1.3% transient)

63.9%SDS: 61.3%PTA: 44.8SReT: 44.9

55.6%SDS: 78.1%PTA: 59.5SReT: 46.4

N/A

10 × 3 Gy (80%)

8.7; 2.9

N/A

20 × 2 Gy (80%)

26.3; 4.1

N/A

Teo,³⁷ 2016^a

3 × 6 Gy (80%)

44; 17-82

36.7%

20%

N/A; 3.49

97; 7-175

80% (81%)

N/A

16.7%

23.3%

43.3%GR 1 + 2: 83.3%

16.7%GR 1 + 2: 76.7%

N/A

10%

Chang,²⁸ 2005^b

3 × 6-7 Gy (N/A)

54; 27-79

13.1%

N/A; 18.5

48; 36-62

98% (91.4%)

1.5%

57.3%SDS: 72.2%PTA: 34.9

74.3%SDS: 60.6%PTA: 48.8

N/A

Kocak,³² 2016^a

1-7 × 4.25-13 Gy (85%)

53; 21-80

22.0%

N/A; 20

25; 9-44

97·6% (N/A)

19.5%

22.0%

N/A

21.9%

63.4%

43.9%

2.4%

Lederman,³³ 1997^a

4-5 × 4-6 Gy (90%)

62; 35-83

N/A

1.8; 17

27; 6-37

100% (N/A)

N/A

No new change

N/A

4.3% new loss

N/A

4-5 × 4-5 Gy (90%)

56; 35-88

N/A

14.4; 37

28; 14-35

100% (N/A)

N/A

No new change

N/A

6.3% new loss

N/A

Casentini,²⁷ 2015^a

2-3 × 6-7 Gy (70-85%)

65; N/A

15.2%

6.1%

9.3; N/A

48; 12-111

58% (83%)

21.2%

24.2%

27.3%

30.3%

24%

21%

61%

4 × 3.5-4.2 Gy (70-85%)

69; N/A

10.4; N/A

5 × 3.9-4 Gy (70-85%)

74; N/A

13.4; N/A

Hansasuta,⁴⁰ 2011^a

383

1-5 × 4.8 Gy (80%)

54; 11-91

10.7%

3.9%

1.1; N/A

43.2; 12-120

97% (96%)

9.7%

10.7%

8.9%

9.1%

78%

76%

49.1%

N/A

1.0%

Feng,³⁹ 2019^a

3 × 6 Gy (80%)

57.4; 26-90

N/A

4.9; N/A

56.6; 35-88

N/A (82.5%)

N/A

17.1%

N/A

4.9%

100%

75.5%

N/A

Ju,⁴³ 2008^a

3 × 6-6.6 Gy (83%)

54; 27-79

4.8%

33.3%

5.4; N/A

15; 6-25

100% (N/A)

4.8%

14.3%

4.8%^d

81.0%

Karam,³¹ 2013^a

3-5 × 5-7 Gy (80%)

58; 31-85

1.0; N/A

52.2; 9-108

100% (N/A)

5.4%

73.7%

57.9%

43.2%

48.6%

Table 1.

Open in new tab

Studies on Hypofractionation

First Author, y	N	Fraction. Regimen (Isodose Line)	Age Mean; Range	Prior Therapy	NF2 (%)	Tumor Vol. (cc); Max. d (mm)	Mean FU; Range (mo)	Tumor Control (5-y PFS)	CN V Deficit		CN VII Deficit		Serviceable Hearing		Tinnitus		Post-XRT Hydrocephalus
									Pre-RDT	Post-RDT	Pre-RDT	Post-RDT	Pre-RDT	Post-RDT	Pre-RDT	Post-RDT
Vernimmen,²⁰ 2008^a	51	3 × 4.7-11 Gy (85%)	50; 20-85	27%	10%	5.9; N/A	72; 24-149	96% (98%)	23.5%	23.5%	39.2%	31.4%	43.1%	42%	N/A	N/A	N/A
Gallogly,²⁹ 2018^a	22	3 × 7 Gy (80%)	53.7; N/A	N/A	0%	N/A; 1.4	52.3; N/A	86.4% (76.9%)	0%	4.6%	0%	0%	50.%	36.4%	45%	45%	0%
Williams,⁴⁴ 2002^b	111	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54.1; 22-81	3.2%	0.8%	1.4; N/A	21.6; 12-68.4	N/A	Serviceable hearing: 64.3%GR: 1 = 16; 2 = 20; 3 = 16; 4 = 2; 5 = 2				Serviceable hearing: 58.9%GR: 1 = 9; 2 = 24; 3 = 14; 4 = 6; 5 = 3				N/A
	14	10 × 3 Gy (80%)				8.1; N/A											N/A
Williams,⁴² 2003^b	70	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	56.6; 24.3-81.6	5%	1·25%	N/A; 1.4	19.2; 3.6-45.6	N/A	0%	0% (2.5% transient)	0%	0%	19%SDS: 68.4%SReT: 37.5	18%SDS: 67.6%SReT: 40.7	N/A	N/A	N/A
	10	10 × 3 Gy (80%)				N/A; 2.8		N/A							N/A	N/A	N/A
Song,³⁶ 1999^a	30	5 × 5 Gy (80-90%)	57; 22-77	13.3%	3.3%	1.1; (0.5-2.7)	N/A; 6-44	100% (N/A)	6.7%	3.3%	16.7%	16.7%	40%	52% new loss	N/A	N/A	N/A
Chen,¹⁸ 2018^a	47	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	61; 25-82	45.6%	N/A	2.0; 2.7	61; 9-92	N/A (90%)	23.4%	27.7%	19%	19%	40.0%	31.6%	49%	N/A	2.1%
Patel,⁴¹ 2017^a	383	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54.3; 18-82	N/A	N/A	N/A	72; 13.6-181.5	78.3% (N/A)	16.4%	N/A	4.2%	12%	66%	36.2%	67.9%	69.5%	0.3%
Kapoor,³⁰ 2011^b	340	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54; N/A	N/A	N/A	2.7; N/A	56; 18-138	67% (91.7 PFS)	17.3%	2.8%	2.4%	1.6% better; 1.6% worse	N/A	N/A	58.5%	N/A	N/A
	36	10 × 3 Gy (80%)											N/A	N/A
Kranzinger,¹⁹ 2014^b	29	7 × 4 Gy (90%)	57; 32-75	27.6%	0%	0.9; 1.4	89.5; N/A	96.6% (N/A)	0%	6.9%	0%	10.3%	79.3%SDS: 74.3%PTA: 39.3	50%SDS: 38.1%PTA: 65.9	Almost all patients, unchanged		N/A
Mahadevan,³⁴ 2011^a,c	10	5 × 5 Gy (83%)	N/A	N/A	N/A	1.9; N/A	19; N/A	100% (N/A)	N/A	N/A	0%	0%	100%	100%	N/A	N/A	N/A
Sakanaka,³⁵ 2010^a	12	13 × 3 Gy (N/A)	52; 32-73	53.8%	0%	1.7; 1.3	87; 24-133	100% (N/A)	N/A	0%	N/A	0% (7.7% transient)	15.4%PTA: 32	0%PTA: 59.5	N/A	N/A	0%
	1	10 × 3 Gy (N/A)
	11	5 × 4 Gy (N/A)	51.5; 30-75	33.3%	0%	5.2; 1.9	39.5; 24-64	91.7% (N/A)	N/A	0%	N/A	0%	41.7%PTA: 18	80%PTA: 40	N/A	N/A	8.3% (not shunted)
	1	6 × 4 Gy (N/A)
Williams,³⁸ 2002^b	131	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54.1; 22.1-81.0	4.7%	2.·7%	1.5; 1.5	22.8; 12-70.8	N/A	0%	0% (1.3% transient)	0%	0%	63.9%SDS: 61.3%PTA: 44.8SReT: 44.9	55.6%SDS: 78.1%PTA: 59.5SReT: 46.4	N/A	N/A	N/A
	18	10 × 3 Gy (80%)				8.7; 2.9					0%	0%					N/A
	1	20 × 2 Gy (80%)				26.3; 4.1					0%	0%					N/A
Teo,³⁷ 2016^a	30	3 × 6 Gy (80%)	44; 17-82	36.7%	20%	N/A; 3.49	97; 7-175	80% (81%)	N/A	N/A	16.7%	23.3%	43.3%GR 1 + 2: 83.3%	16.7%GR 1 + 2: 76.7%	N/A	N/A	10%
Chang,²⁸ 2005^b	61	3 × 6-7 Gy (N/A)	54; 27-79	13.1%	0%	N/A; 18.5	48; 36-62	98% (91.4%)	0%	0%	1.5%	1.5%	57.3%SDS: 72.2%PTA: 34.9	74.3%SDS: 60.6%PTA: 48.8	N/A	N/A	N/A
Kocak,³² 2016^a	41	1-7 × 4.25-13 Gy (85%)	53; 21-80	22.0%	0%	N/A; 20	25; 9-44	97·6% (N/A)	0%	0%	19.5%	22.0%	N/A	21.9%	63.4%	43.9%	2.4%
Lederman,³³ 1997^a	23	4-5 × 4-6 Gy (90%)	62; 35-83	N/A	N/A	1.8; 17	27; 6-37	100% (N/A)	N/A	N/A	N/A	No new change	N/A	4.3% new loss	N/A	N/A	N/A
	16	4-5 × 4-5 Gy (90%)	56; 35-88	N/A	N/A	14.4; 37	28; 14-35	100% (N/A)	N/A	N/A	N/A	No new change	N/A	6.3% new loss	N/A	N/A	N/A
Casentini,²⁷ 2015^a	25	2-3 × 6-7 Gy (70-85%)	65; N/A	15.2%	6.1%	9.3; N/A	48; 12-111	58% (83%)	21.2%	24.2%	27.3%	30.3%	24%	21%	61%	61%	6%
	3	4 × 3.5-4.2 Gy (70-85%)	69; N/A			10.4; N/A
	5	5 × 3.9-4 Gy (70-85%)	74; N/A			13.4; N/A
Hansasuta,⁴⁰ 2011^a	383	1-5 × 4.8 Gy (80%)	54; 11-91	10.7%	3.9%	1.1; N/A	43.2; 12-120	97% (96%)	9.7%	10.7%	8.9%	9.1%	78%	76%	49.1%	N/A	1.0%
Feng,³⁹ 2019^a	41	3 × 6 Gy (80%)	57.4; 26-90	N/A	0%	4.9; N/A	56.6; 35-88	N/A (82.5%)	N/A	17.1%	N/A	4.9%	100%	75.5%	N/A	N/A	N/A
Ju,⁴³ 2008^a	21	3 × 6-6.6 Gy (83%)	54; 27-79	4.8%	33.3%	5.4; N/A	15; 6-25	100% (N/A)	4.8%	4.8%	14.3%	14.3%	4.8%^d	4.8%^d	81.0%	81.0%	0%
Karam,³¹ 2013^a	37	3-5 × 5-7 Gy (80%)	58; 31-85	0%	0%	1.0; N/A	52.2; 9-108	100% (N/A)	3%	5.4%	0%	5.4%	73.7%	57.9%	43.2%	48.6%	0%

First Author, y	N	Fraction. Regimen (Isodose Line)	Age Mean; Range	Prior Therapy	NF2 (%)	Tumor Vol. (cc); Max. d (mm)	Mean FU; Range (mo)	Tumor Control (5-y PFS)	CN V Deficit		CN VII Deficit		Serviceable Hearing		Tinnitus		Post-XRT Hydrocephalus
									Pre-RDT	Post-RDT	Pre-RDT	Post-RDT	Pre-RDT	Post-RDT	Pre-RDT	Post-RDT
Vernimmen,²⁰ 2008^a	51	3 × 4.7-11 Gy (85%)	50; 20-85	27%	10%	5.9; N/A	72; 24-149	96% (98%)	23.5%	23.5%	39.2%	31.4%	43.1%	42%	N/A	N/A	N/A
Gallogly,²⁹ 2018^a	22	3 × 7 Gy (80%)	53.7; N/A	N/A	0%	N/A; 1.4	52.3; N/A	86.4% (76.9%)	0%	4.6%	0%	0%	50.%	36.4%	45%	45%	0%
Williams,⁴⁴ 2002^b	111	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54.1; 22-81	3.2%	0.8%	1.4; N/A	21.6; 12-68.4	N/A	Serviceable hearing: 64.3%GR: 1 = 16; 2 = 20; 3 = 16; 4 = 2; 5 = 2				Serviceable hearing: 58.9%GR: 1 = 9; 2 = 24; 3 = 14; 4 = 6; 5 = 3				N/A
	14	10 × 3 Gy (80%)				8.1; N/A											N/A
Williams,⁴² 2003^b	70	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	56.6; 24.3-81.6	5%	1·25%	N/A; 1.4	19.2; 3.6-45.6	N/A	0%	0% (2.5% transient)	0%	0%	19%SDS: 68.4%SReT: 37.5	18%SDS: 67.6%SReT: 40.7	N/A	N/A	N/A
	10	10 × 3 Gy (80%)				N/A; 2.8		N/A							N/A	N/A	N/A
Song,³⁶ 1999^a	30	5 × 5 Gy (80-90%)	57; 22-77	13.3%	3.3%	1.1; (0.5-2.7)	N/A; 6-44	100% (N/A)	6.7%	3.3%	16.7%	16.7%	40%	52% new loss	N/A	N/A	N/A
Chen,¹⁸ 2018^a	47	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	61; 25-82	45.6%	N/A	2.0; 2.7	61; 9-92	N/A (90%)	23.4%	27.7%	19%	19%	40.0%	31.6%	49%	N/A	2.1%
Patel,⁴¹ 2017^a	383	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54.3; 18-82	N/A	N/A	N/A	72; 13.6-181.5	78.3% (N/A)	16.4%	N/A	4.2%	12%	66%	36.2%	67.9%	69.5%	0.3%
Kapoor,³⁰ 2011^b	340	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54; N/A	N/A	N/A	2.7; N/A	56; 18-138	67% (91.7 PFS)	17.3%	2.8%	2.4%	1.6% better; 1.6% worse	N/A	N/A	58.5%	N/A	N/A
	36	10 × 3 Gy (80%)											N/A	N/A
Kranzinger,¹⁹ 2014^b	29	7 × 4 Gy (90%)	57; 32-75	27.6%	0%	0.9; 1.4	89.5; N/A	96.6% (N/A)	0%	6.9%	0%	10.3%	79.3%SDS: 74.3%PTA: 39.3	50%SDS: 38.1%PTA: 65.9	Almost all patients, unchanged		N/A
Mahadevan,³⁴ 2011^a,c	10	5 × 5 Gy (83%)	N/A	N/A	N/A	1.9; N/A	19; N/A	100% (N/A)	N/A	N/A	0%	0%	100%	100%	N/A	N/A	N/A
Sakanaka,³⁵ 2010^a	12	13 × 3 Gy (N/A)	52; 32-73	53.8%	0%	1.7; 1.3	87; 24-133	100% (N/A)	N/A	0%	N/A	0% (7.7% transient)	15.4%PTA: 32	0%PTA: 59.5	N/A	N/A	0%
	1	10 × 3 Gy (N/A)
	11	5 × 4 Gy (N/A)	51.5; 30-75	33.3%	0%	5.2; 1.9	39.5; 24-64	91.7% (N/A)	N/A	0%	N/A	0%	41.7%PTA: 18	80%PTA: 40	N/A	N/A	8.3% (not shunted)
	1	6 × 4 Gy (N/A)
Williams,³⁸ 2002^b	131	5 × 5 Gy (80%)	54.1; 22.1-81.0	4.7%	2.·7%	1.5; 1.5	22.8; 12-70.8	N/A	0%	0% (1.3% transient)	0%	0%	63.9%SDS: 61.3%PTA: 44.8SReT: 44.9	55.6%SDS: 78.1%PTA: 59.5SReT: 46.4	N/A	N/A	N/A
	18	10 × 3 Gy (80%)				8.7; 2.9					0%	0%					N/A
	1	20 × 2 Gy (80%)				26.3; 4.1					0%	0%					N/A
Teo,³⁷ 2016^a	30	3 × 6 Gy (80%)	44; 17-82	36.7%	20%	N/A; 3.49	97; 7-175	80% (81%)	N/A	N/A	16.7%	23.3%	43.3%GR 1 + 2: 83.3%	16.7%GR 1 + 2: 76.7%	N/A	N/A	10%
Chang,²⁸ 2005^b	61	3 × 6-7 Gy (N/A)	54; 27-79	13.1%	0%	N/A; 18.5	48; 36-62	98% (91.4%)	0%	0%	1.5%	1.5%	57.3%SDS: 72.2%PTA: 34.9	74.3%SDS: 60.6%PTA: 48.8	N/A	N/A	N/A
Kocak,³² 2016^a	41	1-7 × 4.25-13 Gy (85%)	53; 21-80	22.0%	0%	N/A; 20	25; 9-44	97·6% (N/A)	0%	0%	19.5%	22.0%	N/A	21.9%	63.4%	43.9%	2.4%
Lederman,³³ 1997^a	23	4-5 × 4-6 Gy (90%)	62; 35-83	N/A	N/A	1.8; 17	27; 6-37	100% (N/A)	N/A	N/A	N/A	No new change	N/A	4.3% new loss	N/A	N/A	N/A
	16	4-5 × 4-5 Gy (90%)	56; 35-88	N/A	N/A	14.4; 37	28; 14-35	100% (N/A)	N/A	N/A	N/A	No new change	N/A	6.3% new loss	N/A	N/A	N/A
Casentini,²⁷ 2015^a	25	2-3 × 6-7 Gy (70-85%)	65; N/A	15.2%	6.1%	9.3; N/A	48; 12-111	58% (83%)	21.2%	24.2%	27.3%	30.3%	24%	21%	61%	61%	6%
	3	4 × 3.5-4.2 Gy (70-85%)	69; N/A			10.4; N/A
	5	5 × 3.9-4 Gy (70-85%)	74; N/A			13.4; N/A
Hansasuta,⁴⁰ 2011^a	383	1-5 × 4.8 Gy (80%)	54; 11-91	10.7%	3.9%	1.1; N/A	43.2; 12-120	97% (96%)	9.7%	10.7%	8.9%	9.1%	78%	76%	49.1%	N/A	1.0%
Feng,³⁹ 2019^a	41	3 × 6 Gy (80%)	57.4; 26-90	N/A	0%	4.9; N/A	56.6; 35-88	N/A (82.5%)	N/A	17.1%	N/A	4.9%	100%	75.5%	N/A	N/A	N/A
Ju,⁴³ 2008^a	21	3 × 6-6.6 Gy (83%)	54; 27-79	4.8%	33.3%	5.4; N/A	15; 6-25	100% (N/A)	4.8%	4.8%	14.3%	14.3%	4.8%^d	4.8%^d	81.0%	81.0%	0%
Karam,³¹ 2013^a	37	3-5 × 5-7 Gy (80%)	58; 31-85	0%	0%	1.0; N/A	52.2; 9-108	100% (N/A)	3%	5.4%	0%	5.4%	73.7%	57.9%	43.2%	48.6%	0%

Abbreviations: CN, cranial nerve; FU, follow up; GR, Gardner-Robertson; NF2, neurofibromatosis type 2; PFS, progression-free survival; PTA, pure-tone audiometry; RDT, radiotherapy; SDS, speech discrimination score; SReT, speech reception threshold; XRT, radiation..

^aIndicates retrospective study.

^bIndicates prospective study.

^cStudy assessed meningiomas as well. Patients were intact upon entry.

^dDid not differentiate between serviceable and non-serviceable hearing. Percentages refer to “impairment.”

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only