1
|
Alcorn S, Cortés ÁA, Bradfield L, Brennan M, Dennis K, Diaz DA, Doung YC, Elmore S, Hertan L, Johnstone C, Jones J, Larrier N, Lo SS, Nguyen QN, Tseng YD, Yerramilli D, Zaky S, Balboni T. External Beam Radiation Therapy for Palliation of Symptomatic Bone Metastases: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol 2024:S1879-8500(24)00099-7. [PMID: 38788923 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2024.04.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2024] [Revised: 04/24/2024] [Accepted: 04/25/2024] [Indexed: 05/26/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for palliative external beam radiation therapy (RT) in symptomatic bone metastases. METHODS The American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) convened a task force to address 5 key questions regarding palliative RT in symptomatic bone metastases. Based on a systemic review by the Agency for Health Research and Quality, recommendations using predefined consensus-building methodology were established; evidence quality and recommendation strength were also assessed. RESULTS For palliative RT for symptomatic bone metastases, RT is recommended for managing pain from bone metastases and spine metastases with or without spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Regarding other modalities with RT, for patients with spine metastases causing spinal cord or cauda equina compression, surgery and postoperative RT are conditionally recommended over RT alone. Furthermore, dexamethasone is recommended for spine metastases with spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Patients with non-spine bone metastases requiring surgery are recommended postoperative RT. Symptomatic bone metastases treated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy in 1 fraction (800 cGy/1fx), 2000 cGy/5fx, 2400 cGy/6fx, or 3000 cGy/10fx. Spinal cord or cauda equina compression in patients ineligible for surgery and receiving conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1fx, 1600 cGy/2fx, 2000 cGy/5fx, or 3000 cGy/10fx. Symptomatic bone metastases in selected patients with good performance status without surgery or neurological symptoms/signs are conditionally recommended SBRT over conventional palliative RT. Spine bone metastases re-irradiated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1fx, 2000 cGy/5fx, 2400 cGy/6fx, or 2000 cGy/8fx; non-spine bone metastases re-irradiated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1fx, 2000 cGy/5fx, or 2400 cGy/6fx. Determination of an optimal RT approach/regimen requires whole person assessment, including prognosis, previous RT dose if applicable, risks to normal tissues, quality of life, cost implications, and patient goals and values. Relatedly, for patient-centered optimization of treatment-related toxicities and quality of life, shared decision-making is recommended. CONCLUSIONS Based on published data, the ASTRO task force's recommendations inform best clinical practices on palliative RT for symptomatic bone metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Alcorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
| | - Ángel Artal Cortés
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet, Zaragoza, Spain
| | - Lisa Bradfield
- American Society for Radiation Oncology, Arlington, Virginia
| | | | - Kristopher Dennis
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Dayssy A Diaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Yee-Cheen Doung
- Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon
| | - Shekinah Elmore
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Lauren Hertan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Candice Johnstone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
| | - Joshua Jones
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rochester Regional Health, Rochester, New York
| | - Nicole Larrier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Simon S Lo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Quynh-Nhu Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas - MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Yolanda D Tseng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Divya Yerramilli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Sandra Zaky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| | - Tracy Balboni
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Harvard University Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Montero A, Alvarez B. The 5Rs dilemma of radiotherapy for non-malignant diseases: 5Rs to darken OR 5Rs to shine. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2023; 28:74-78. [PMID: 37122917 PMCID: PMC10132200 DOI: 10.5603/rpor.a2023.0001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2022] [Accepted: 12/15/2022] [Indexed: 05/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Many benign diseases, so called because they are not a direct cause of death, nevertheless cause significant damage to the health of patients due to the associated pain, reduced functionality, increased disability and the negative impact they have on quality of life, which, together with the limited efficacy of many of the available treatments, make their management a challenge for every specialist. Radiotherapy, which has demonstrated its efficacy not only against cancer but also in many non-tumorous diseases, appears as a therapeutic option that deserves to be taken into account. However, there is still much resistance to considering the use of radiotherapy as a valid and acceptable alternative. The 5Rs to darken summarize the doubts and contradictions many specialists face to accept radiotherapy in non-neoplastic diseases. However, other 5Rs (to shine) can be argued to claim for the safety, reliability, and usefulness of radiation treatment for benign disease and as radiotherapy specialists we have to help the evidence shine and the darkness disappear.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angel Montero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Camilo José Cela, Madrid, Spain
| | - Beatriz Alvarez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Camilo José Cela, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bahouth SM, Yeboa DN, Ghia AJ, Tatsui CE, Alvarez-Breckenridge CA, Beckham TH, Bishop AJ, Li J, McAleer MF, North RY, Rhines LD, Swanson TA, Chenyang W, Amini B. Advances in the management of spinal metastases: what the radiologist needs to know. Br J Radiol 2023; 96:20220267. [PMID: 35946551 PMCID: PMC10997009 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20220267] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2022] [Revised: 07/21/2022] [Accepted: 07/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Spine is the most frequently involved site of osseous metastases. With improved disease-specific survival in patients with Stage IV cancer, durability of local disease control has become an important goal for treatment of spinal metastases. Herein, we review the multidisciplinary management of spine metastases, including conventional external beam radiation therapy, spine stereotactic radiosurgery, and minimally invasive and open surgical treatment options. We also present a simplified framework for management of spinal metastases used at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, focusing on the important decision points where the radiologist can contribute.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah M Bahouth
- Musculoskeletal Imaging and Intervention Department, Brigham
and Women’s Hospital, Boston, United States
| | - Debra N Yeboa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Amol J Ghia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Claudio E Tatsui
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | | | - Thomas H Beckham
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Andrew J Bishop
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Jing Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Mary Frances McAleer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Robert Y North
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Laurence D Rhines
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Todd A Swanson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Wang Chenyang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Behrang Amini
- Department of Musculoskeletal Imaging, The University of Texas
MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United
States
| |
Collapse
|