Single versus multiple fractions of repeat radiation for painful bone metastases: a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial

Incidence of distal bone metastases in patients treated for palliative radiotherapy and associations with primary tumour types

Purpose

This study assesses the incidence of distal bone metastases in palliative radiotherapy (RT) patients.

Material and methods

All courses of RT for bone metastases from 2007–2011 for patient living in British Columbia (BC) were identified in a provincial RT programme. Treated bone metastases (BoM) were categorized as distal if the BoM was located within or distal to the elbow or knee. Patients were grouped by primary tumour site as breast, lung, prostate gastrointestinal, haematological, melanoma, and other. The incidence of distal bone metastases and associations with primary tumour types were determined.

Results

From 2007 to 2011, 8008 patients were treated with 16,277 courses of RT, of which 425 (3%) were courses of RT for distal BoM. The incidence of distal BoM in decreasing order by primary tumour type was melanoma (5%), haematological (3%), lung (2%), other (2%), prostate (2%), breast (1%) and gastrointestinal (1%). Distal BoM where more commonly identified in the lower extremity (87%, p<0.001). Single fraction RT was used more commonly for distal vs non-distal BoM (66% vs. 49%; p<0.001).

Conclusion

The incidence of distal BoM among patients treated with palliative RT was 3% and most commonly identified in patients with melanoma and haematological malignancies.

Predictive model for survival in patients having repeat radiation treatment for painful bone metastases

PURPOSE

To establish a survival prediction model in the setting of a randomized trial of re-irradiation for painful bone metastases.

METHODS

Data were randomly divided into training and testing sets with an approximately 3:2 ratio. Baseline factors of gender, primary cancer site, KPS, worst-pain score and age were included with backward variable selection to derive a model using the training set. A partial score was assigned by dividing the value of each statistically significant regression coefficient by the smallest statistically significant regression coefficient. The survival prediction score (SPS) was obtained by adding together partial scores for the variables that were statistically significant. Three risk groups were modelled.

RESULTS

The training set included 460 patients and the testing set 351 patients. Only KPS and primary cancer site reached the 5%-significance level. Summing up the partial scores assigned to KPS (90-100, 0; 70-80, 1; 50-60, 2) and primary cancer site (breast, 0; prostate, 1.3; other, 2.6; lung, 3) totalled the SPS. The 1/3 and 2/3 percentiles of the SPS were 2 and 3.6. For the testing set, the median survival of the 3 groups was not reached, 11.3 (95% C.I. 8.5 - not reached) and 5.2 months (95% C.I. 3.7-6.5). The 3, 6 and 12 month survival rates for the worst group were 64.4% (95% C.I. 55.3-72.1%), 43.0% (95% C.I. 34.0-51.8%) and 19.7% (95% C.I. 12.4-28.1%) respectively, similar to that in the training set.

CONCLUSION

This survival prediction model will assist in choosing dose fractionation. We recommend a single 8 Gy in the worst group identified.

Cancer Pain Management

Safe, effective, and evidence-based management of cancer-related pain is a cornerstone of comprehensive cancer care. Despite increasing interest in and efforts to improve its management, pain remains poorly controlled in nearly half of all patients with cancer, with little change in the past 20 years. Limited training in pain assessment and management, overestimation of providers' own skills to treat pain, and failure to refer patients to pain specialists can result in suboptimal pain management with devastating effects on quality of life, physical functioning, and increased psychological distress. From a thorough assessment of cancer-related pain to appropriate treatments that may include opiates, adjuvant medications, nerve blocks, and nondrug interventions, this article is intended as a brief overview of the mechanisms and types of pain as well as a review of current, new, and promising approaches to its management.

A Multicenter Randomized Trial of Ibandronate Compared With Single-Dose Radiotherapy for Localized Metastatic Bone Pain in Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

The radiotherapy or ibandronate (RIB) trial was a randomized multicenter nonblind two-arm trial to compare intravenous ibandronate given as a single infusion with single-dose radiotherapy for metastatic bone pain.

METHODS

Four hundred seventy prostate cancer patients with metastatic bone pain who were suitable for local radiotherapy were randomly assigned to radiotherapy (single dose, 8 Gy) or intravenous infusion of ibandronate (6mg) in a noninferiority trial. Pain was measured using the Brief Pain Inventory at baseline and four, eight, 12, 26, and 52 weeks. Pain response was assessed using World Health Organization (WHO) criteria and the Effective Analgesic Score (EAS); the maximum allowable difference was ±15%. Patients failing to respond at four weeks were offered retreatment with the alternative treatment. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed at baseline and four and 12 weeks. Because the trial was designed with a 5% one-sided test, we provide 90% confidence intervals (two-sided) for differences in pain response.

RESULTS

Overall, pain response was not statistically different at four or 12 weeks (WHO: -3.7%, 90% confidence interval [CI] = -12.4% to 5.0%; and 6.7%, 90% CI = -2.6 to 16.0%, respectively). Corresponding differences using the EAS were -7.5% and -3.5%. However, a more rapid initial response with radiotherapy was observed. There was no overall difference in toxicity, although each treatment had different side effects. QoL was similar at four and 12 weeks. Overall survival was similar between the two groups but was better among patients having retreatment than those who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

A single infusion of ibandronate had outcomes similar to a single dose of radiotherapy for metastatic prostate bone pain. Ibandronate could be considered when radiotherapy is not available.

Rapid access palliative radiation therapy programs: an efficient model of care

Palliating symptoms of advanced and metastatic cancers are one of the most common indications for radiation therapy (RT), and the demand for palliative RT is increasing. Dedicated rapid access palliative RT programs improve access to care, and can deliver RT in a more efficient and evidence-based manner than standard RT programs. In this narrative review, we discuss the role of palliative RT in comprehensive cancer care, and challenges that have faced patients trying to access it. We describe how rapid access programs developed to address these challenges and provide an overview of dedicated programs worldwide. Finally, we show how these programs can serve as models for multidisciplinary care and education, and sources of exciting research opportunities in clinical care and advanced technologies.

[Radiotherapy of bone metastases: Which fractionations?]

First-line palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastases is an effective treatment whatever its fractionation (single or multiple fractions). It is also indicated after failure or insufficient effect of a first irradiation, or the appearance of new painful site. Other indications are spinal cord compression, either as an adjuvant to surgery or as sole treatment, and after surgery for long bone metastases. The development of high precision techniques (stereotactic conditions) widens the possibility of re-irradiation when tolerance doses to normal tissues have already been delivered. Local control and possibly overall survival could be improved in oligometastatic patients.

Choosing wisely: the American Society for Radiation Oncology's top 5 list

PURPOSE

To highlight 5 interventions that patients should question, as part of the Choosing Wisely campaign. This initiative, led by the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation, fosters conversations between physicians and patients about treatments and tests that may be overused, unnecessary, or potentially harmful.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Potential items were initially compiled using an online survey. They were then evaluated and refined by a work group representing the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Clinical Affairs and Quality, Health Policy, and Government Relations Councils. Literature reviews were carried out to support the recommendation and narrative, as well as to provide references for each item. A final list of 5 items was then selected by the ASTRO Board of Directors.

RESULTS

ASTRO's 5 recommendations for the Choosing Wisely campaign are the following: (1) Don't initiate whole-breast radiation therapy as a part of breast conservation therapy in women age ≥50 with early-stage invasive breast cancer without considering shorter treatment schedules; (2) don't initiate management of low-risk prostate cancer without discussing active surveillance; (3) don't routinely use extended fractionation schemes (>10 fractions) for palliation of bone metastases; (4) don't routinely recommend proton beam therapy for prostate cancer outside of a prospective clinical trial or registry; and (5) don't routinely use intensity modulated radiation therapy to deliver whole-breast radiation therapy as part of breast conservation therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The ASTRO list for the Choosing Wisely campaign highlights radiation oncology interventions that should be discussed between physicians and patients before treatment is initiated. These 5 items provide opportunities to offer higher quality and less costly care.

The Globalization of Cooperative Groups

The National Cancer Institute (NCI)-supported adult cooperative oncology research groups (now officially Network groups) have a longstanding history of participating in international collaborations throughout the world. Most frequently, the US-based cooperative groups work reciprocally with the Canadian national adult cancer clinical trial group, NCIC CTG (previously the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group). Thus, Canada is the largest contributor to cooperative groups based in the United States, and vice versa. Although international collaborations have many benefits, they are most frequently utilized to enhance patient accrual to large phase III trials originating in the United States or Canada. Within the cooperative group setting, adequate attention has not been given to the study of cancers that are unique to countries outside the United States and Canada, such as those frequently associated with infections in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. Global collaborations are limited by a number of barriers, some of which are unique to the countries involved, while others are related to financial support and to US policies that restrict drug distribution outside the United States. This article serves to detail the cooperative group experience in international research and describe how international collaboration in cancer clinical trials is a promising and important area that requires greater consideration in the future.

Evolving role of salvage reirradiation: Is global harmonization required before treatment guidelines can be developed?

Up to 90% of patients initially treated with curative-intent radiotherapy (RT) will experience locoregional failure. Historically, reirradiation (ReRT) was offered purely with palliative intent, if considered at all, due to concerns surrounding toxicity, tolerance of normal tissues, and choice of appropriate dose schedule. With technological advancements in RT delivery, coupled with longer survival in many malignancies secondary to improvements in systemic therapy, a small subset of patients presenting with localized recurrence is increasingly being offered salvage ReRT. However, this is largely on an ad hoc basis, guided mainly by small retrospective, single-institution reports. The patient population retreated, RT modality, dose received, degree of attrition and follow-up are extremely variable. The opportunity presently exists to apply lessons learned from the harmonization of the research efforts within the bone metastases community to the salvage ReRT situation: the adoption of common endpoints, minimum features to be incorporated into clinical trial design, and methods of data analysis and reporting. The ReRT data available must be harmonized so that valid, clinically applicable conclusions can be drawn. Collaboration in the form of an international registry of prospectively collected outcomes of patients reirradiated for cure for a variety of tumour sites would further support the evolution of Radiation Oncology towards personalized medicine, and away from the current “one-dose-fits-all” approach.

International consensus on use of focused ultrasound for painful bone metastases: Current status and future directions

Focused ultrasound surgery (FUS), in particular magnetic resonance guided FUS (MRgFUS), is an emerging non-invasive thermal treatment modality in oncology that has recently proven to be effective for the palliation of metastatic bone pain. A consensus panel of internationally recognised experts in focused ultrasound critically reviewed all available data and developed consensus statements to increase awareness, accelerate the development, acceptance and adoption of FUS as a treatment for painful bone metastases and provide guidance towards broader application in oncology. In this review, evidence-based consensus statements are provided for (1) current treatment goals, (2) current indications, (3) technical considerations, (4) future directions including research priorities, and (5) economic and logistical considerations.

Choosing Wisely Canada Cancer List: Ten Low-Value or Harmful Practices That Should Be Avoided In Cancer Care

Using knowledge translation and exchange efforts, this list should empower patients with cancer and physicians to participate in a targeted conversation about the appropriateness and quality of individual patient care.

30 day mortality in adult palliative radiotherapy--A retrospective population based study of 14,972 treatment episodes

Background: 30-day mortality (30DM) has been suggested as a clinical indicator of the avoidance of harm in palliative radiotherapy within the NHS, but no large-scale population-based studies exist. This large retrospective cohort study aims to investigate the factors that influence 30DM following palliative radiotherapy and consider its value as a clinical indicator.

Methods: All radiotherapy episodes delivered in a large UK cancer centre between January 2004 and April 2011 were analysed. Patterns of palliative radiotherapy, 30DM and the variables affecting 30DM were assessed. The impact of these variables was assessed using logistic regression.

Results: 14,972 palliative episodes were analysed. 6334 (42.3%) treatments were delivered to bone metastases, 2356 (15 7%) to the chest for lung cancer and 915 (5.7%) to the brain. Median treatment time was 1 day (IQR 1–7). Overall 30DM was 12.3%. Factors having a significant impact upon 30DM were sex, primary diagnosis, treatment site and fractionation schedule (p < 0.01).

Conclusion: This is the first large-scale description of 30-day mortality for unselected adult palliative radiotherapy treatments. The observed differences in early mortality by fractionation support the use of this measure in assessing clinical decision making in palliative radiotherapy and require further study in other centres and health care systems.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of single fraction of stereotactic body radiation therapy compared with single fraction of external beam radiation therapy for palliation of vertebral bone metastases

PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has been proposed for the palliation of painful vertebral bone metastases because higher radiation doses may result in superior and more durable pain control. A phase III clinical trial (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0631) comparing single fraction SBRT with single fraction external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in palliative treatment of painful vertebral bone metastases is now ongoing. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis to compare these strategies.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A Markov model, using a 1-month cycle over a lifetime horizon, was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of SBRT (16 or 18 Gy in 1 fraction) with that of 8 Gy in 1 fraction of EBRT. Transition probabilities, quality of life utilities, and costs associated with SBRT and EBRT were captured in the model. Costs were based on Medicare reimbursement in 2014. Strategies were compared using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). To account for uncertainty, 1-way, 2-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Strategies were evaluated with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000 per QALY gained.

RESULTS

Base case pain relief after the treatment was assumed as 20% higher in SBRT. Base case treatment costs for SBRT and EBRT were $9000 and $1087, respectively. In the base case analysis, SBRT resulted in an ICER of $124,552 per QALY gained. In 1-way sensitivity analyses, results were most sensitive to variation of the utility of unrelieved pain; the utility of relieved pain after initial treatment and median survival were also sensitive to variation. If median survival is ≥11 months, SBRT cost <$100,000 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

SBRT for palliation of vertebral bone metastases is not cost-effective compared with EBRT at a $100,000 per QALY gained WTP threshold. However, if median survival is ≥11 months, SBRT costs ≤$100,000 per QALY gained, suggesting that selective SBRT use in patients with longer expected survival may be the most cost-effective approach.

The current status and future of radiotherapy for spinal bone metastases

The management of spinal bone metastases is complex. In this review, the efficacy, methodology, and utilization of radiotherapy (RT) for spinal bone metastases are discussed. A number of randomized trials have evaluated the efficacy of 8 Gy, single-fraction RT for the palliation of painful bone metastases. However, RT for metastatic spinal cord compression has not been evaluated with respect to its optimal dose, palliative potential, or its ability to improve motor function. Two highly sophisticated RT techniques - stereotactic body RT (SBRT) and intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) - have recently been adapted for the treatment of spinal bone metastases, and both have the potential to achieve excellent control while minimizing acute and late toxicity. SBRT and IMRT are particularly well suited for the treatment of spinal bone metastases when they are localized or require re-irradiation, and may provide superior tumor control. Predicting the prognosis of patients with bone metastases and assessing spinal instability are both important when selecting the optimal RT method and deciding whether to perform surgery. The proper care of spinal bone metastases patients requires an interdisciplinary treatment approach.

Impact of reirradiation of painful osseous metastases on quality of life and function: a secondary analysis of the NCIC CTG SC.20 randomized trial

PURPOSE

We previously demonstrated that 48% of patients with pain at sites of previously irradiated bone metastases benefit from reirradiation. It is unknown whether alleviating pain also improves patient perception of quality of life (QOL).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used the database of a randomized trial comparing radiation treatment dose fractionation schedules to evaluate whether response, determined using the International Consensus Endpoint (ICE) and Brief Pain Inventory pain score (BPI-PS), is associated with patient perception of benefit, as measured using the European Organisation for Resesarch and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and functional interference scale of the BPI (BPI-FI). Evaluable patients completed baseline and 2-month follow-up assessments.

RESULTS

Among 850 randomly assigned patients, 528 were evaluable for response using the ICE and 605 using the BPI-PS. Using the ICE, 253 patients experienced a response and 275 did not. Responding patients had superior scores on all items of the BPI-FI (ie, general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life) and improved QOL, as determined by scores on the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales of physical, role, emotional and social functioning, global QOL, fatigue, pain, and appetite. Similar results were obtained using the BPI-PS; observed improvements were typically of lesser magnitude.

CONCLUSION

Patients responding to reirradiation of painful bone metastases experience superior QOL scores and less functional interference associated with pain. Patients should be offered re-treatment for painful bone metastases in the hope of reducing pain severity as well as improving QOL and pain interference.

Feasibility of volumetric MRI-guided high intensity focused ultrasound (MR-HIFU) for painful bone metastases

Background

Magnetic resonance-guided high intensity focused ultrasound (MR-HIFU) has recently emerged as an effective treatment option for painful bone metastases. We describe here the first experience with volumetric MR-HIFU for palliative treatment of painful bone metastases and evaluate the technique on three levels: technical feasibility, safety, and initial effectiveness.

Methods

In this observational cohort study, 11 consecutive patients (7 male and 4 female; median age, 60 years; age range, 53–86 years) underwent 13 treatments for 12 bone metastases. All patients exhibited persistent metastatic bone pain refractory to the standard of care. Patients were asked to rate their worst pain on an 11-point pain scale before treatment, 3 days after treatment, and 1 month after treatment. Complications were monitored. All data were prospectively recorded in the context of routine clinical care. Response was defined as a ≥2-point decrease in pain at the treated site without increase in analgesic intake. Baseline pain scores were compared to pain scores at 3 days and 1 month using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. For reporting, the STROBE guidelines were followed.

Results

No treatment-related major adverse events were observed. At 3 days after volumetric MR-HIFU ablation, pain scores decreased significantly (p = 0.045) and response was observed in a 6/11 (55%) patients. At 1-month follow-up, which was available for nine patients, pain scores decreased significantly compared to baseline (p = 0.028) and 6/9 patients obtained pain response (overall response rate 67% (95% confidence interval (CI) 35%–88%)).

Conclusions

This is the first study reporting on the volumetric MR-HIFU ablation for painful bone metastases. No major treatment-related adverse events were observed during follow-up. The results of our study showed that volumetric MR-HIFU ablation for painful bone metastases is technically feasible and can induce pain relief in patients with metastatic bone pain refractory to the standard of care. Future research should be aimed at standardization of the treatment procedures and treatment of larger numbers of patients to assess treatment effectiveness and comparison to the standard of care.

Developing a Service Model That Integrates Palliative Care Throughout Cancer Care: The Time Is Now

Palliative care is a fundamental component of cancer care. As part of the 2011 to 2012 Leadership Development Program (LDP) of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), a group of participants was charged with advising ASCO on how to develop a service model integrating palliative care throughout the continuum of cancer care. This article presents the findings of the LDP group. The group focused on the process of palliative care delivery in the oncology setting. We identified key elements for models of palliative care in various settings to be potentially equitable, sustainable, feasible, and acceptable, and here we describe a dynamic model for the integrated, simultaneous implementation of palliative care into oncology practice. We also discuss critical considerations to better integrate palliative care into oncology, including raising consciousness and educating both providers and the public about the importance of palliative care; coordinating palliative care efforts through strengthening affiliations and/or developing new partnerships; prospectively evaluating the impact of palliative care on patient and provider satisfaction, quality improvement, and cost savings; and ensuring sustainability through adequate reimbursement and incentives, including linkage of performance data to quality indicators, and coordination with training efforts and maintenance of certification requirements for providers. In light of these findings, we believe the confluence of increasing importance of incorporation of palliative care education in oncology education, emphasis on value-based care, growing use of technology, and potential cost savings makes developing and incorporating palliative care into current service models a meaningful goal.

Palliative radiotherapy: current status and future directions

For nearly 100 years, palliative radiotherapy has been a time-efficient, effective treatment for patients with metastatic or advanced cancer in any area where local tumors are causing symptoms. Short courses including a single fraction of radiotherapy may be effective for symptom relief with minimal side effects and maximization of convenience for patient and family. With recent advances in imaging, surgery, and other local therapies as well as systemic cancer therapies, palliative radiotherapy has been used frequently in patients who may not yet have symptoms of advanced or metastatic cancer. In this setting, more prolonged radiotherapy courses and advanced radiotherapy techniques including intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) may be useful in obtaining local control and durable palliative responses. This review will explore the use of radiotherapy across the spectrum of patients with advanced and metastatic cancer and delineate an updated, rational approach for the use of palliative radiotherapy that incorporates symptoms, prognosis, and other factors into the delivery of palliative radiotherapy.

Development of a score predicting survival after palliative reirradiation

Purpose. To develop a prognostic model for predicting survival after palliative reirradiation (PR). Methods and Materials. We analyzed all 87 PR courses administered at a dedicated palliative radiotherapy facility between 20.06.2007 (opening) and 31.12.2009. Uni- and multivariate survival analyses were performed, the previously published survival prediction score (SPS) was evaluated, and a PR-specific prognostic score was calculated. Results. In multivariate analysis, four parameters significantly influenced survival: performance status, use of steroids, presence of liver metastases, and pleural effusion. Based on these parameters, a 4-tiered score was developed. Median survival was 24.5 months for the favorable group, 9.7 and 2.8 months for the two intermediate groups, and 1.1 months for the unfavorable group (P = 0.019 for comparison between the two favorable groups and P ≤ 0.002 for all other pair-wise comparisons). All patients in the unfavorable group died within 2 months. Conclusion. The performance of PR-specific score was promising and might facilitate identification of patients who survive long enough to benefit from PR. It should be validated in independent patient groups, ideally from several institutions and countries.

Palliative radiotherapy at the end of life: a critical review

When delivered with palliative intent, radiotherapy can help to alleviate a multitude of symptoms related to advanced cancer. In general, time to symptom relief is measured in weeks to months after the completion of radiotherapy. Over the past several years, an increasing number of studies have explored rates of radiotherapy use in the final months of life and have found variable rates of radiotherapy use. The optimal rate is unclear, but would incorporate anticipated efficacy in patients whose survival allows it and minimize overuse among patients with expected short survival. Clinician prediction has been shown to overestimate the length of survival in repeated studies. Prognostic indices can provide assistance with estimations of survival length and may help to guide treatment decisions regarding palliative radiotherapy in patients with potentially short survival times. This review explores the recent studies of radiotherapy near the end of life, examines general prognostic models for patients with advanced cancer, describes specific clinical circumstances when radiotherapy may and may not be beneficial, and addresses open questions for future research to help clarify when palliative radiotherapy may be effective near the end of life.

Role of radiation therapy in palliative care of the patient with cancer

Radiotherapy is a successful, time-efficient, well-tolerated, and cost-effective intervention that is crucial for the appropriate delivery of palliative oncology care. The distinction between curative and palliative goals is blurred in many patients with cancer, requiring that treatments be chosen on the basis of factors related to the patient (ie, poor performance status, advanced age, significant weight loss, severe comorbid disease), the cancer (ie, metastatic disease, aggressive histology), or the treatment (ie, poor response to systemic therapy, previous radiotherapy). Goals may include symptom relief at the site of primary tumor or from metastatic lesions. Attention to a patient's discomfort and transportation limitations requires hypofractionated courses, when feasible. Innovative approaches include rapid response palliative care clinics as well as the formation of palliative radiotherapy specialty services in academic centers. Guidelines are providing better definitions of appropriate palliative radiotherapy interventions, and bone metastases fractionation has become the first radiotherapy quality measure accepted by the National Quality Forum. Further advances in the palliative radiation oncology subspecialty will require integration of education and training between the radiotherapy and palliative care specialties.