Risk Stratification for Imminent Risk of Death at the Time of Palliative Radiotherapy Consultation

Thirty-day mortality as a metric for palliative radiotherapy in pediatric patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Thirty-day mortality (30DM) is an emerging consideration for determining whether terminally ill adult patients may benefit from palliative radiotherapy (RT). However, the efficacy and ethics of delivering palliative RT at the end of life (EOL) in children are seldom discussed and not well-established.

RECENT FINDINGS

Palliative RT is perhaps underutilized among patients ≤21 years old with rates as low as 11%. While effective when delivered early, clinical benefit decreases when administered within the last 30 days of life. Pediatric 30DM rates vary widely between institutions (0.7-30%), highlighting the need for standardized practices. Accurate prognosis estimation remains challenging and prognostic models specific to palliative pediatric patients are limited. Discordance between provider and patient/parent perceptions of prognosis further complicates decision-making.

SUMMARY

RT offers effective symptom control in pediatric patients when administered early. However, delivering RT within the last 30 days of life may provide limited clinical benefit and hinder optimal EOL planning and care. Early referral for palliative RT, preferably with fewer fractions (five or fewer), along with multidisciplinary supportive care, optimizes the likelihood of maintaining patients' quality of life. Prognosis estimation remains difficult, and improving patient and family understanding is crucial. Further research is needed to refine prognostic models and enhance patient-centered care.

Palliative radiotherapy: survival prognostic factors - single-centre retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Patients with non-curative malignancy can receive palliative radiotherapy (PR) to alleviate symptoms. However, choosing the right patient to receive PR can be challenging, as some patients may not survive long enough to gain benefit. This study aims to identify prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and 30-day mortality (30DM) following PR and to test these in a real-world cohort.

METHOD

A retrospectively collected data set of all adults completing PR between 1 August 2018 and 31 December 2018 at a single centre (n=214, Southend University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, UK) was used to test prognostic factors. Factors such as demographics, tumour primary, treatment area, fractionation regime, performance status (PS), progressive disease (PD), opioid or steroid use and haemoglobin level, as well as overall survival, were collected. Cox regression was used to examine survival predictors, and logistic regression was used to determine the predictive strength of factors for 30DM.

RESULTS

Overall 30DM was 14%. There was significantly worse survival in patients with poor PS (HR 1.2406, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.64. p=0.01). Patients with PS 3 had a median OS of 75 days and were more likely to experience 30DM (OR 6.2, 95% CI 1.226 to 45.42, p=0.03). Patients with PD outside of the radiation field (46%, 30 out of 65 documented) had significantly worse OS (HR 5.24, 95% CI 2.19 to 12.5, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Poor PS and PD were prognostic of OS and 30DM. Future work should include validation with a prospectively collected cohort.

Early death after palliative radiation treatment: 30-, 35- and 40-day mortality data and statistically robust predictors

BACKGROUND

This study analyzed mortality after radiotherapy for bone metastases (287 courses). Endpoints such as treatment in the last month of life and death within 30, 35 and 40 days from start of radiotherapy were evaluated.

METHODS

Different baseline parameters including but not limited to blood test results and patterns of metastases were assessed for association with early death. After univariate analyses, multi-nominal logistic regression was employed.

RESULTS

Of 287 treatment courses, 42 (15%) took place in the last month of life. Mortality from start of radiotherapy was 13% (30-day), 15% (35-day) and 18% (40-day), respectively. We identified three significant predictors of 30-day mortality (performance status (≤ 50, 60-70, 80-100), weight loss of at least 10% within 6 months (yes/no), pleural effusion (present/absent)) and employed these to construct a predictive model with 5 strata and mortality rates of 0-75%. All predictors of 30-day mortality were also associated with both, 35- and 40-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

Early death was not limited to the first 30 days after start of radiotherapy. For different cut-off points, similar predictive factors emerged. A model based on three robust predictors was developed.

Prognostication for Patients Receiving Palliative Radiation Therapy

Estimation of patient prognosis plays a central role in guiding decision making for the palliative management of metastatic disease, and a number of statistical models have been developed to provide survival estimates for patients in this context. In this review, we discuss several well-validated survival prediction models for patients receiving palliative radiotherapy to sites outside of the brain. Key considerations include the type of statistical model, model performance measures and validation procedures, studies' source populations, time points used for prognostication, and details of model output. We then briefly discuss underutilization of these models, the role of decision support aids, and the need to incorporate patient preference in shared decision making for patients with metastatic disease who are candidates for palliative radiotherapy.

The LabPS score: Inexpensive, Fast, and Site-agnostic Survival Prediction

OBJECTIVES

To provide a widely applicable, blood-biomarker-based and performance-status-based prognostic model, which predicts the survival of patients undergoing palliative non-brain radiotherapy. This model has already been examined in a cohort of patients treated for brain metastases and performed well.

METHODS

This was a retrospective single-institution analysis of 375 patients, managed with non-ablative radiotherapy to extracranial targets, such as bone, lung, or lymph nodes. Survival was stratified by LabPS score, a model including serum hemoglobin, platelets, albumin, C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, and performance status. Zero, 0.5, or 1 point was assigned and the final point sum calculated. A higher point sum indicates shorter survival.

RESULTS

The LabPS score predicted overall survival very well (median 0.6 to 26.5 mo, 3-month rate 0% to 100%, 1-year rate 0% to 89%), P =0.0001. However, the group with the poorest prognosis (4.5 points) was very small. Most patients with comparably short survival or radiotherapy administered in the last month of life had a lower point sum. Additional prognostic factors, such as liver metastases, opioid analgesic use, and/or corticosteroid medication, were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

If busy clinicians prefer a general prognostic model rather than a panel of separate diagnosis-specific/target-specific scores, they may consider validating the LabPS score in their own practice. In resource-constrained settings, inexpensive standard blood tests may be preferable over imaging-derived prognostic information. Just like other available scores, the LabPS cannot identify all patients with very short survival.

Palliative appropriateness criteria: external validation of a new method to evaluate the suitability of palliative radiotherapy fractionation

BACKGROUND

Recently, the palliative appropriateness criteria (PAC) score, a novel metric to aid clinical decision-making between different palliative radiotherapy fractionation regimens, has been developed. It includes baseline parameters including but not limited to performance status. The researchers behind the PAC score analyzed the percent of remaining life (PRL) on treatment. The latter was accomplished by calculating the time between start and finish of palliative radiotherapy (minimum 1 day in case of a single-fraction regimen) and dividing it by overall survival in days from start of radiotherapy. The purpose of the present study was to validate this novel metric.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The retrospective validation study included 219 patients (287 courses of palliative radiotherapy). The methods were identical to those employed in the score development study. The score was calculated by assigning 1 point each to several factors identified in the original study and using the online calculator provided by the PAC developers.

RESULTS

Median survival was 6 months and death within 30 days from start of radiotherapy was recorded in 13% of courses. PRL on treatment ranged from 1 to 23%, median 8%. Significant associations were confirmed between online-calculated PAC score, observed survival, and risk of death within 30 days from the start of radiotherapy. Patients with score 0 had distinctly better survival than all other groups. The score-predicted median risk of death within 30 days from start of radiotherapy was 22% in our cohort. A statistically significant correlation was found between predicted and observed risk (p < 0.001). The original and present study were not perfectly concordant regarding number and type of baseline parameters that should be included when calculating the PAC score.

CONCLUSION

This study supports the dual strategy of PRL and risk of early death calculation, with results stratified for fractionation regimen, in line with the original PAC score study. When considering multifraction regimens, the PAC score identifies patients who may benefit from shorter courses. Additional work is needed to answer open questions surrounding the underlying components of the score, because the original and validation study were only partially aligned.

Clinical Factors Associated with 30-Day Mortality Among Patients Undergoing Brain Metastases Radiotherapy

Purpose

Existing brain metastasis prognostic models do not identify patients at risk of very poor survival after radiation therapy (RT). Identifying patient and disease risk factors for 30-day mortality (30-DM) after RT may help identify patients who would not benefit from RT.

Methods and Materials

All patients who received stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or whole-brain RT (WBRT) for brain metastases from January 1, 2017, to September 30, 2020, at a single tertiary care center were included. Variables regarding demographics, systemic and intracranial disease characteristics, symptoms, RT, palliative care, and death were recorded. Thirty-day mortality was defined as death within 30 days of RT completion. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate median overall survival. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess associations between demographic, tumor, and treatment factors and 30-DM.

Results

A total of 636 patients with brain metastases were treated with either WBRT (n = 117) or SRS (n = 519). The most common primary disease types were non-small cell lung (46.7%) and breast (19.8%) cancer. Median survival time was 6 months (95% CI, 5-7 months). Of the 636 patients, 75 (11.7%) died within 30 days of RT. On multivariable analysis, progressive intrathoracic disease (hazard ratio [HR], 4.67; 95% CI, 2.06-10.60; P = .002), progressive liver and/or adrenal metastases (HR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.16-3.68; P = .02), and inpatient status (HR, 4.51; 95% CI, 1.78-11.42; P = .002) were associated with dying within 30 days of RT. A higher Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) score (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93-0.97; P < .001), synchronous brain metastases at time of initial diagnosis (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.21-0.96; P = .04), and outpatient palliative care utilization (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.20-1.00; P = .05) were associated with surviving more than 30 days after RT.

Conclusions

Multiple factors including a lower KPS, progressive intrathoracic disease, progressive liver and/or adrenal metastases, and inpatient status were associated with 30-DM after RT. A higher KPS, brain metastases at initial diagnosis, and outpatient palliative care utilization were associated with survival beyond 30 days. These data may aid in identifying which patients may benefit from brain metastasis-directed RT.

Palliative Appropriateness Criteria: A Pragmatic Method to Evaluate the Suitability of Palliative Radiotherapy Fractionation

Purpose: To describe a novel metric to aid clinical decision making between shorter versus longer palliative radiotherapy (PRT) regimens using objective patient factors. Materials and Methods: Patients receiving PRT at a single institution between 2014 and 2018 were reviewed. The time between PRT start and finish was calculated and divided by overall survival (in days from start of PRT) to generate the percent of remaining life (PRL). This value was compared across various clinical factors using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Factors identified with a significance level p < 0.01 were included in a novel Palliative Appropriateness Criteria Score (PACS) and were included in an online risk assessment tool to assist clinicians in patient-specific fractionation decisions. Results: Totally 1027 courses of PRT were analyzed. Median age was 64 years; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status was 3-4 in 22%. Primary malignancies included were lung (38%), breast (13.8%), prostate (9.3%), and other (39%). The indication for PRT was pain (61%), neurological (21%), or other (18%). Palliative regimens included 199 (19.4%) receiving single fraction, 176 (17.1%) receiving 2-5 fractions, and 652 (63.5%) receiving 10 fractions. Median follow-up was 83 days overall and 437 days for patients alive at last follow-up. Factors significantly associated with increased PRL (and included in the PACS) were male gender, ECOG 3-4, lung or "other" primary diagnosis (vs. breast or prostate), PRT indication (neurological dysfunction vs. pain/other), inpatient status, and extraosseous sites treatment. Death within 30 days was significantly associated with high-risk PACS categorization, regardless of fractionation scheme (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The PACS is a novel metric for evaluating the utility of PRT regimens to improve clinical decision making. Single fraction is associated with low PRL. When considering multifraction PRT regimens, the PACS identifies patients who may benefit from shorter courses of PRT and alternatively, low-risk patients for whom a more protracted course is reasonable. Prospective external validation is warranted.

Percent of remaining life on palliative radiation treatment: solely a function of fractionation?

Background

This study analyzed the percent of remaining life (PRL) on treatment in patients irradiated for bone metastases. Bone metastases were treated together with other target volumes, if indicated, e.g. a 10-fraction treatment course that included brain and bone metastases. PRL was determined by calculating the time between start and finish of palliative radiotherapy (minimum 1 day in case of a single-fraction regimen) and dividing it by overall survival in days from start of radiotherapy.

Materials and methods

Different baseline parameters were assessed for association with dichotomized PRL (< 5% vs. ≥ 5%). The retrospective study included 219 patients (287 courses of palliative radiotherapy). After univariate analyses, multi-nominal logistic regression was employed.

Results

PRL on treatment ranged from 1-23%. Single-fraction radiotherapy resulted in < 5% PRL on treatment in all cases. All courses with 10 fractions resulted in at least 5% PRL on treatment. Significant associations were found between various baseline parameters and PRL category. With fractionation included in the regression model, 3 parameters retained significant p-values: Karnofsky performance status (KPS), none-bone target volume and fractionation (all with p < 0.001). If analyzed without fractionation, none-bone target volume (p < 0.001), hemoglobin (p < 0.001), KPS (p = 0.01), lack of additional systemic treatment (p = 0.01), and hypercalcemia (p = 0.04) were significant.

Conclusions

Fractionation is an easily modifiable factor with high impact on PRL. Patients with KPS < 70 and those treated for additional target types during the same course are at high risk of spending a larger proportion of their remaining life on treatment.

Use and Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Trials of Palliative Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

Approximately 50% of all patients with cancer have an indication for radiotherapy, and approximately 50% of radiotherapy is delivered with palliative intent, with the aim of alleviating symptoms. Symptoms are best assessed by patient-reported outcomes (PROs), yet their reliable interpretation requires adequate reporting in publications.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the use and reporting of PROs in clinical trials of palliative radiotherapy.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

This preregistered systematic review searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trials for clinical trials of palliative radiotherapy published from 1990 to 2020. Key eligibility criteria were palliative setting, palliative radiotherapy as treatment modality, and clinical trial design (per National Institutes of Health definition). Two authors independently assessed eligibility. Trial characteristics were extracted and standard of PRO reporting was assessed in adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) PRO extension. The association of the year of publication with the use of PROs was assessed by logistic regression. Factors associated with higher CONSORT-PRO adherence were analyzed by multiple regression. This study is reported following the PRISMA guidelines.

FINDINGS

Among 7377 records screened, 225 published clinical trials representing 24 281 patients were eligible. Of these, 45 trials (20%) used a PRO as a primary end point and 71 trials (31%) used a PRO as a secondary end point. The most prevalent PRO measures were the Numeric Rating Scale/Visual Analogue Scale (38 trials), European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (32 trials), and trial-specific unvalidated measures (25 trials). A more recent year of publication was significantly associated with a higher chance of PROs as a secondary end point (odds ratio [OR], 1.04 [95% CI, 1.00-1.07]; P = .03) but not as primary end point. Adherence to CONSORT-PRO was poor or moderate for most items. Mean (SD) adherence to the extension adherence score was 46.2% (19.6%) for trials with PROs as primary end point and 31.8% (19.8%) for trials with PROs as a secondary end point. PROs as a primary end point (regression coefficient, 9.755 [95% CI, 2.270-17.240]; P = .01), brachytherapy as radiotherapy modality (regression coefficient, 16.795 [95% CI, 5.840-27.751]; P = .003), and larger sample size (regression coefficient, 0.028 [95% CI, 0.006-0.049]; P = .01) were significantly associated with better PRO reporting per extension adherence score.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this systematic review of palliative radiotherapy trials, the use and reporting of PROs had room for improvement for future trials, preferably with PROs as a primary end point.

Identifying patients with malignant spinal cord compression (MSCC) near end of life who can benefit from palliative radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

A previous score predicted death ≤ 2 months following radiotherapy for MSCC. For patients with a high probability of early death, best supportive care was recommended. However, some of these patients may benefit from radiotherapy regarding preservation or improvement of motor function. To identify these patients, an additional score was developed.

METHODS

Pre-treatment factors plus radiotherapy regimen were retrospectively evaluated for successful treatment (improved motor function or remaining ambulatory without aid) and post-treatment ambulatory status in 545 patients who died ≤ 2 months. Factors included age, interval from tumor diagnosis until MSCC, visceral metastases, further bone metastases, primary tumor type, sex, time developing motor deficits, pre-treatment ambulatory status, and number of affected vertebrae. Factors significant on both multivariable analyses were included in the score (worse outcomes 0 points, better outcomes 1 point).

RESULTS

On multivariable analyses, myeloma/lymphoma, time developing motor deficits > 14 days, and pre-treatment ambulatory status were significantly associated with both successful treatment and ambulatory status, affection of 1-2 vertebrae with successful treatment only. On univariable analyses, 1 × 8 and 5 × 4 Gy were not inferior to 5 × 5 Gy and longer-course regimens. Considering the three factors significant for both endpoints, three groups were designed (0, 1, 2-3 points) with treatment success rates of 4%, 15% and 39%, respectively (p < 0.0001), and post-treatment ambulatory rates of 4%, 43% and 86%, respectively (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

This score helps identify patients with MSCC who appear to benefit from palliative radiotherapy in terms of improved motor function or remaining ambulatory in spite of being near end of life.