Assessment of national practice for palliative radiation therapy for bone metastases suggests marked underutilization of single-fraction regimens in the United States

Pain response to palliative radiotherapy in bone metastases vs. non-bone lesions: Prospective study

BACKGROUND

This study compared the pain response to palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases and non-bone lesions based on the International Consensus on Palliative Radiotherapy Effectiveness (ICPRE) criteria.

METHODS

This two-cohort study used data from a prospective cohort of 867 registered lesions from 500 patients conducted between August 2021 and September 2023. Pain responses were assessed using the ICPRE criteria at prespecified timings of 2, 4, 12, 24, 36, and 52 weeks. The primary outcome was the pain response rate within 12 weeks, comparing two groups of patients with bone and non-bone lesions. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to adjust for confounding covariates based on opioid use, irradiation history, performance status, NRS, primary disease, and radiation dose.

RESULTS

Among 678 lesions from 440 patients who met the criteria, 541 (80 %) and 137 (20 %) were in the bone and non-bone cohort, including primary tumors, lymph node metastases, and others. The mean age was 63 years, and 45 % were female. Treatment included conventional radiotherapy of a single 8 Gy dose, 20 Gy in 5 fractions, and 30 Gy in 10 fractions, used in 89 % of lesions. While opioid use (67 %) and re-irradiation rates (22 %) were not different between cohorts, the non-bone cohort had shorter median survival (4.9 months vs. 6.3 months, P = 0.017) and more frequently fractionated irradiation (85 % vs. 67 %, P < 0.001). No differences were observed in pain response rates between the two groups (57 % vs. 62 %, P = 0.33), which remained consistent after adjusting covariates. Re-irradiation and opioid were associated with negative impacts on pain response in the bone cohort. In contrast, the increased irradiation dose was identified as potentially affecting the non-bone cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggested palliative radiotherapy is effective for painful non-bone lesions and potential dose-dependency for pain response, highlighting the need for future randomized controlled trials to determine the optimal radiation dose.

Implications of primary tumor site and fraction size on outcomes of palliative radiation for osseous metastases

Purpose

This study reviewed palliative radiation therapy (RT) practices and outcomes and compared the percentage of remaining life spent receiving RT (PRLSRT) in patients treated for osseous metastases.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted using the National Cancer Database (2010-2016) to evaluate metastatic patients who received palliative bone RT. Common palliative RT schemes were analyzed to determine treatment patterns and outcomes. Palliative outcomes, including median PRLSRT, RT completion, and mortality rates, were calculated. Binary logistic regression was performed to identify factors affecting RT completion, and a scoring system was developed to identify patients at risk for poor palliative outcomes.

Results

A total of 50,929 patients were included, with the majority diagnosed with NSCLC (45.2%), breast cancer (15.1%), or prostate cancer (10.8%). The median overall survival after palliative RT was 5.74 months. Patients receiving lower doses per fraction (2.5 Gy/Fx) tended to be younger, healthier, and yet experienced worse palliative outcomes. Binary logistic regression identified age, race, income quartile, and Gy/Fx as significant factors affecting RT completion. Median PRLSRTs were as follows: 14.95% for GI NOS, 9.89% for upper GI, 9.46% for NSCLC, 8.67% for skin, 7.06% for SCLC, 6.10% for lower GI, 5.59% for GYN, 5.44% for GU, 5.35% for HNC, 2.05% for endocrine, 2.03% for prostate cancer, and 1.82% for breast cancer. Patients receiving 2.5 and 3 Gy/Fx were less likely to complete RT compared to those receiving 4 Gy/Fx (OR, 1.429 and 3.780, respectively; p < 0.001). Age, comorbidities, primary tumor, target location, and metastatic burden were associated with PRLSRT ≥ 25%.

Conclusion

Dose regimens and patient selection influence palliative bone RT outcomes. Both factors should be carefully considered to minimize the burden of care and maximize treatment benefits.

Incidence and radiotherapy treatment patterns of complicated bone metastases

Background

Despite the encouraging results of the SCORAD trial, single fraction radiotherapy (SFRT) remains underused for patients with complicated bone metastases with rates as low as 18-39%. We aimed to evaluate the incidence and treatment patterns of these metastases in patients being referred to a tertiary centre for palliative radiotherapy.

Materials and methods

We performed a retrospective review of all bone metastases treated at our centre from January 2013 until December 2017. Lesions were classified as uncomplicated or complicated. Complicated was defined as associated with (impending) fracture, existing spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Our protocol suggests using SFRT for all patients with complicated bone metastases, except for those with symptomatic neuraxial compression and a life expectancy of ≥28 weeks.

Results

Overall, 37 % of all bone metastases were classified as complicated. Most often as a result of an (impending) fracture (56 %) or spinal cord compression (44 %). In 93 % of cases, complicated lesions were located in the spine, most commonly originating from prostate, breast and lung cancer (60 %). Median survival of patients with complicated bone metastases was 4 months. The use of SFRT for complicated bone metastases increased from 51 % to 85 % over the study period, reaching 100 % for patients with the poorest prognosis.

Conclusions

Approximately 37 % of bone metastases are classified as complicated with the majority related to (impending) fracture. Patients with complicated bone metastases have a median survival of 4 months and were mostly treated with SFRT.

Comparison of pain-relieving effects by number of irradiations, through propensity score matching and the international consensus endpoint

Background

Palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases utilizes various dose fractionation schedules. The pain-relieving effects of a single fraction (SF) and multiple fractions (MF) are largely debated due to the difficulty in matching patients' backgrounds and in assessing the effectiveness of pain relief. This study aimed to compare the pain-relieving effects of SF and MF palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases using propensity score matching and the international consensus endpoint (ICE).

Materials and methods

Our study included 195 patients irradiated for bone metastasis. The primary endpoint was the pain-relieving effects used by ICE. In addition, the evaluation was performed by using responder (complete response/partial response) and non-responder (pain progression/indeterminate response) categorization. The secondary endpoints were the discharge or transfer rate at one month after irradiation and postirradiation pathological fracture rate. Propensity score matching was used to adjust patient's characteristics and reduce selection bias.

Results

After adapting propensity score matching, the total number of patients was 74. There was no significant difference in the pain-relieving effects between SF and MF (p = 0.184). There were no significant differences in them between SF and MF when using responder and non-responder categorization (p = 0.163). Furthermore, there were no differences in the discharge or transfer rates (p = 0.693) and pathological fracture rates (p = 1.00).

Conclusions

The combination of propensity score matching and ICE revealed no significant difference in the pain-relieving effects between SF and MF for bone metastases, thus, SF has no significant disadvantage compared to MF in pain-relieving effects.

Radiation Therapy at the End of-Life: Quality of Life and Financial Toxicity Considerations

In patients with advanced cancer, radiation therapy is considered at various time points in the patient's clinical course from diagnosis to death. As some patients are living longer with metastatic cancer on novel therapeutics, radiation oncologists are increasingly using radiation therapy as an ablative therapy in appropriately selected patients. However, most patients with metastatic cancer still eventually die of their disease. For those without effective targeted therapy options or those who are not candidates for immunotherapy, the time frame from diagnosis to death is still relatively short. Given this evolving landscape, prognostication has become increasingly challenging. Thus, radiation oncologists must be diligent about defining the goals of therapy and considering all treatment options from ablative radiation to medical management and hospice care. The risks and benefits of radiation therapy vary based on an individual patient's prognosis, goals of care, and the ability of radiation to help with their cancer symptoms without undue toxicity over the course of their expected lifetime. When considering recommending a course of radiation, physicians must broaden their understanding of risks and benefits to include not only physical symptoms, but also various psychosocial burdens. These include financial burdens to the patient, to their caregiver and to the healthcare system. The burden of time spent at the end-of-life receiving radiation therapy must also be considered. Thus, the consideration of radiation therapy at the end-of-life can be complex and requires careful attention to the whole patient and their goals of care.

Implementation and Impact of Choosing Wisely Recommendations in Oncology

The Choosing Wisely (CW) campaign, launched in 2012, includes oncology-specific recommendations to promote evidence-based care and deimplementation of low-value practices. However, it is unclear to what extent the campaign has prompted practice change. We systematically reviewed the literature to evaluate the uptake of cancer-specific CW recommendations focusing on the period before the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic. We used Grimshaw's deimplementation framework to thematically group the findings and extracted information on implementation strategies, barriers, and facilitators from articles reporting on active implementation. In the 98 articles addressing 32 unique recommendations, most reported on passive changes in adherence pre-post publication of CW recommendations. Use of active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer and reduction in staging imaging for early breast cancer were the most commonly evaluated recommendations. Most articles assessing passive changes in adherence pre-post CW publication reported improvement. All articles evaluating active implementation (10 of 98) reported improved compliance (range: 3%-73% improvement). Most common implementation strategies included provider education and/or stakeholder engagement. Preconceived views and reluctance to adopt new practices were common barriers; common facilitators included the use of technology and provider education to increase provider buy-in. Given the limited uptake of oncology-specific CW recommendations thus far, more attention toward supporting active implementation is needed. Effective adoption of CW likely requires a multipronged approach that includes building stakeholder buy-in through engagement and education, using technology-enabled forced functions to facilitate change along with policy and reimbursement models that disincentivize low-value care. Professional societies have a role to play in supporting this next phase of CW.

Geographical distance and reduced access to palliative radiotherapy: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) is an effective way of reducing symptoms caused by advanced incurable cancer. Several studies have investigated factors that contribute to inequalities in access to PRT; distance to a radiotherapy centre has been identified as one potential barrier.

AIM

To assess whether there is an association between distance to a radiotherapy centre and utilisation rates of PRT in adults with cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42020190772). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and APA-PsycINFO were searched for relevant papers up to 28 February 2021.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included. Twelve studies focused on whether patients with incurable cancer received PRT, as part of their treatment package. Pooled results reported that living ≥50 km vs <50 km from the radiotherapy centre was associated with a reduced likelihood of receiving PRT (OR 0.84 (95%CI 0.80, 0.88)). Nine focused on distance from the radiotherapy centre and compared single-fraction (SF) versus multiple-fraction PRT, indicating that patients living further away were more likely to receive SF. Pooled results comparing ≥50 km versus <50 km showed increased odds of receiving SF for those living ≥50 km (OR 1.48 (95%CI 1.26,1.75)).

CONCLUSION

Patients living further away from radiotherapy centres were less likely to receive PRT and those who received PRT were more likely to receive SF PRT, providing some evidence of inequalities in access to PRT treatment based on proximity to centres providing radiotherapy. Further research is needed to understand whether these inequalities are influenced by clinical referral patterns or by patients unwilling or unable to travel longer distances.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020190772.

Palliative Radiation for Cancer Pain Management

Bone metastases are the most common cause of cancer-related pain. Radiation therapy (RT) is a very common and effective treatment to relieve pain. Conventionally fractionated RT typically consists of the following regimens: 8 Gy in a single treatment, 20 Gy in five fractions, 24 Gy in six fractions, or 30 Gy in ten fractions. All treatment regimens have similar rates of pain relief (range 50-80%), with single-fraction treatment often requiring retreatment. While many painful bony metastases can be managed with RT alone, some may be more complex, often requiring multidisciplinary management, including the need for surgical stabilization or augmentation prior to RT. There are multiple assessment tools including the neurologic, oncologic, mechanical, and systemic (NOMS) decision framework, which allows clinicians to assess the proper course of treatment for these patients. For patients with good prognosis, oligometastatic disease, or those presenting with more radioresistant tumors, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) may be another option, which offers ablative doses of radiation delivered over several treatments. This chapter reviews the fundamentals of RT for palliation.

Does a Custom Electronic Health Record Alert System Improve Physician Compliance With National Quality Measures for Palliative Bone Metastasis Radiotherapy?

PURPOSE

In an effort to promote cost-conscious, high-quality, and patient-centered care in the palliative radiation of painful bone metastases, the National Quality Forum (NQF) formed measure 1822 in 2012, which recommends the use of one of the four dose-fractionation schemes (30 Gy in 10 fractions, 24 Gy in 6 fractions, 20 Gy in 5 fractions, or 8 Gy in a single fraction). We investigated whether a custom electronic health record (EHR) alert system improved quality measure compliance among 88 physicians at a large academic center and institutional network.

METHODS

In March 2018, a multiphase alert system was embedded in a custom web-based EHR. Prior to a course of palliative bone radiation, the alert system notified the user of NQF 1822 recommendations and, once prescription was completed, either affirmed compliance or advised a change in treatment schedule. Rates of compliance were evaluated before and after implementation of alert system.

RESULTS

Of 2,399 treatment courses, 86.5% were compliant with NQF 1822 recommendations. There was no difference in rates of NQF 1822 compliance before or after implementation of the custom EHR alert (86.0% before March 2018 v 86.9% during and after March 2018, P = .551).

CONCLUSION

There was no change in rates of compliance following implementation of a custom EHR alert system designed to make treatment recommendations based on national quality measure guidelines. To be of most benefit, future palliative bone metastasis decision aids should leverage peer review, target a clear practice deficiency, center upon high-quality practice guidelines, and allow flexibility to reflect the diversity of clinical scenarios.

Radiotherapy Practice for Treatment of Bone Metastasis in Ethiopia

PUROSE

Ethiopia has one cobalt radiotherapy (RT) machine to serve a population of more than 100 million. The purpose of this study was to report on patterns of palliative RT of bone metastasis in a severely low-capacity setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patient and treatment characteristics of patients irradiated for palliation of symptomatic bone metastasis were extracted from a retrospective database of patients treated between May 2015 and January 2018. This database included a random sample of 1,823 of the estimated 4,000 patients who were treated with RT within in the study period. Associations between the applied RT schedule and patient and tumor characteristics were evaluated with the χ² test. Hypothetical savings of RT sessions and time were compared in the case of a single-fraction policy.

RESULTS

From the database, 234 patients (13%) were treated for bone metastasis. Most patients were ≤ 65 years of age (n = 189; 80%) and female (n = 125; 53%). The most common primary sites were breast (n = 82; 35%) and prostate (n = 36; 15%). Fractionated regimens were preferred over single fraction: 20 Gy in 5 fractions (n = 192; 82.1%), 30 Gy in 10 fractions (n = 7; 3%), and 8 Gy in 1 fraction (n = 28; 12%). Factors associated with single-fraction RT included nonaxial sites of bone metastasis (P < .01) and an address outside Addis Ababa (P ≤ .01). If single-fraction RT would have been given uniformly for bone metastasis, this would have resulted in a 78% reduction in the number of RT sessions and 76% reduction in total RT time.

CONCLUSION

The pattern of palliative RT for bone metastasis in Ethiopia favors fractionated regimens over single fraction. Efforts should be made to adopt evidence-based and cost-effective guidelines.

An Intensive Educational Intervention Significantly Improves the Adoption of Single Fractionation Radiotherapy in Uncomplicated Bone Metastases

Introduction:

An education strategy was employed in our department to increase the rate of patients with uncomplicated painful bone metastases undergoing single fractionation radiotherapy (SFRT). The purpose of this report is to analyze the results of this strategy over a 5 year period.

Materials and Methods:

In January 2015, two meetings were organized in our department. In the first, data from an audit on the current SFRT rate were shown. In the second, evidence of SFRT efficacy in the relief of pain from uncomplicated bone metastases was presented. In addition, during the weekly discussion of clinical cases, the opportunity to use the SFRT was systematically recalled. Using our institutional database, all patients treated with radiotherapy for uncomplicated painful bone metastases in the period between 2014 (year considered as a reference) and 2019 were retrieved. Data regarding treatment date (year), radiotherapy fractionation, and tumor, patients, and radiation oncologists characteristics were collected.

Results:

A total of 627 patients were included in the analysis. The rate of patients undergoing SFRT increased from 4.0% in 2014 to 63.5% in 2019 (p < 0.001). At multivariable analysis, the delivery of SFRT was significantly correlated with older patients age (>80 years), lung cancer as the primary tumor, treatment prescribed by a radiation oncologist dedicated to palliative treatments, and treatment date (2014 vs 2015–2019).

Conclusions:

This retrospective single-center analysis showed that a simple but intensive and prolonged departmental education strategy can increase the rate of patients treated with SFRT by nearly 16 times.

Contemporary Practice Patterns for Palliative Radiation Therapy of Bone Metastases: Impact of a Quality Improvement Project on Extended Fractionation

PURPOSE

Radiation therapy effectively palliates bone metastases, although variability exists in practice patterns. National recommendations advocate against using extended fractionation (EF) with courses greater than 10 fractions. We previously reported EF use of 14.8%. We analyzed practice patterns within a statewide quality consortium to assess EF use in a larger patient population after implementation of a quality measure focused on reducing EF.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients treated for bone metastases within a statewide radiation oncology quality consortium were prospectively enrolled from March 2018 through October 2020. The EF quality metric was implemented March 1, 2018. Data on patient, physician, and facility characteristics; fractionation schedules; and treatment planning and delivery techniques were collected. Multivariable binary logistic regression was used to assess EF.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight facilities enrolled 1445 consecutive patients treated with 1934 plans. The median number of treatment plans per facility was 52 (range, 7-307). Sixty different fractionation schedules were used. EF was delivered in 3.4% of plans. Initially, EF use was lower than expected and remained low over time. Significant predictors for EF use included complicated metastasis (odds ratio [OR], 2.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-4.02; P = .04), lack of associated central nervous system or visceral disease (OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.2-4.2; P = .01), nonteaching versus teaching facilities (OR, 8.97; 95% CI, 2.1-38.5; P < .01), and treating physicians with more years in practice (OR, 12.82; 95% CI, 3.9-42.4; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Within a large, prospective population-based data set, fractionation schedules for palliative radiation therapy of bone metastases remain highly variable. Resource-intensive treatments including EF persist, although EF use was low after implementation of a quality measure. Complicated metastases, lack of central nervous system or visceral disease, and treatment at nonteaching facilities or by physicians with more years in practice significantly predict use of EF. These results support ongoing efforts to more clearly understand and address barriers to high-value radiation approaches in the palliative setting.

Adoption of single fraction radiotherapy for uncomplicated bone metastases in a tertiary centre

•

Single fraction radiotherapy is feasible for uncomplicated bone metastases.

•

Four-week mortality was similar between single fraction and multiple fraction.

•

Our paper has the highest rate of reported single fraction radiotherapy in literature.

•

Re-irradiation were higher for single fraction radiotherapy in uncomplicated bone metastases.

Background

Single-fraction radiotherapy (SFRT) offers equal pain relief for uncomplicated painful bone metastases as compared to multiple-fraction radiotherapy (MFRT). Despite this evidence, the adoption of SFRT has been poor with published rates of SFRT for uncomplicated bone metastases ranging from <10% to 70%. We aimed to evaluate the adoption of SFRT and its evolution over time following the more formal endorsement of the international guidelines in our centre starting from 2013.

Materials and methods

We performed a retrospective review of fractionation schedules at our centre for painful uncomplicated bone metastases from January 2013 until December 2017. Only patients treated with 1 × 8 Gy (SFRT-group) or 10 × 3 Gy (MFRT-group) were included. We excluded other fractionation schedules, primary cancer of the bone and post-operative radiotherapy. Uncomplicated was defined as painful but not associated with impending fracture, existing fracture or existing neurological compression. Temporal trends in SFRT/MFRT usage and overall survival were investigated. We performed a lesion-based patterns of care analysis and a patient-based survival analysis. Mann-Whitney U and Chi-square test were used to assess differences between fractionation schedules and temporal trends in prescription, with Kaplan-Meier estimates used for survival analysis (p-value <0.05 considered significant).

Results

Overall, 352 patients and 594 uncomplicated bone metastases met inclusion criteria. Patient characteristics were comparable between SFRT and MFRT, except for age. Overall, SFRT was used in 92% of all metastases compared to 8% for MFRT. SFRT rates increased throughout the study period from 85% in 2013 to 95% in 2017 (p = 0.06). Re-irradiation rates were higher in patients treated with SFRT (14%) as compared to MFRT (4%) (p = 0.046). Four-week mortality and median overall survival did not differ significantly between SFRT and MFRT (17% vs 18%, p = 0.8 and 25 weeks vs 38 weeks, p = 0.97, respectively).

Conclusions

Adherence to the international guidelines for SFRT for uncomplicated bone metastasis was high and increased over time to 95%, which is the highest reported rate in literature.

Physician-Predicted Prognosis and Palliative Radiotherapy Treatment Utilization at the End of Life: An Audit of a Large Cancer Center Network

CONTEXT

At our institution, clinical pathways capture physicians' prognostication of patients being evaluated for palliative radiotherapy. We hypothesize a low utilization rate of long-course radiotherapy (LCRT) and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SAbR) among patients seen at the end of life, especially those with physician-predicted poor prognosis.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze utilization rates and predictors of LCRT and SAbR at the end of life.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on patients who were evaluated for palliative radiotherapy between January 2017 and August 2019 and died within 90 days of consultation. Binary logistic regression was used to identify predictors for utilization of LCRT (≥10 fractions) and SAbR.

RESULTS

A total of 1608 patients were identified, of which 1038 patients (64.6%) were predicted to die within a year. Six hundred ninety-three patients (66.8%) out of 1038 were prescribed LCRT or SAbR. On a multivariate analysis, patients were less likely to be prescribed LCRT if treated at an academic site (odds ratio [OR], 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23-0.39; P < 0.01) and treated for bone metastases (OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.05-0.11; P < 0.01) or other nonbrain/nonbone metastases (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.13-0.30; P < 0.01). SAbR was less likely to be prescribed among patients predicted to die within a year (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.06-0.16; P < 0.01), treated for bone metastases (OR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.07-0.22; P < 0.01), with poor performance status (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31-0.85; P = 0.01), and with a breast primary (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15-0.82; P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Although most patients were predicted to have a limited prognosis, LCRT and SAbR were commonly prescribed at the end of life.

Replacing 30 Gy in 10 fractions with stereotactic body radiation therapy for bone metastases: A large multi-site single institution experience 2016-2018

•

Contemporary trends in radiation technique and fractionation for bone metastases at a large academic center with a specialized metastatic program.

•

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is replacing long-course conventional RT for bone metastases.

•

Complexity of RT is increasing, particularly in the community-based regional clinic setting.

•

Single-fraction conventional RT is preferentially employed at the end of life, but prognostic algorithms are needed to further optimize use.

Background

Bone metastases cause significant morbidity in patients with cancer, and radiation therapy (RT) is an effective treatment approach. Indications for more complex ablative techniques are emerging. We sought to evaluate RT trends at a large multi-site tertiary cancer center.

Methods

Patients who received RT for bone metastases at a single institution (including regional outpatient clinics) from 2016 to 2018 were identified. Patients were grouped by RT regimen: single-fraction conventional RT (8 Gy × 1), 30 Gy in 10 fractions, SBRT, and “other”. Multinomial logistic regression was performed to assess trends in regimens over time. Binary logistic regression was performed to evaluate factors associated with receipt of SBRT.

Results

Between 2016 and 2018, 5,952 RT episodes were received by 2,969 patients with bone metastases. Overall, 76% of episodes were ≤ 5 fractions. The median number of fractions planned for SBRT and non-SBRT episodes was 3 (IQR 3–3) and 5 (IQR 5–10), respectively. Use of SBRT increased from 2016 to 2018 (39% to 53%, p < 0.01) while use of 30 Gy in 10 fractions decreased (26% to 12%, p < 0.01), and 8 Gy × 1 was stable (5.3% to 6.9%, p = 0.28). SBRT was associated with higher performance status (p < 0.01) and non-radiosensitive histology (p < 0.01). Use of SBRT increased in the regional network (19% to 48%, p < 0.01) and at the main center (52% to 59%, p = 0.02), but did not increase within 30 days of death. More patients treated with 8 Gy × 1 than SBRT died within 30 days of treatment (24% vs 3.8%, respectively, p < 0.01).

Conclusions

SBRT is replacing 30 Gy in 10 fractions for bone metastases, especially among patients with high performance status and non-radiosensitive histologies. Better prognostic algorithms could further improve patient-centered treatment selection at the end of life.

Physician Practice Variability in the Use of Extended-Fraction Radiation Therapy for Bone Metastases: Are We Choosing Wisely?

PURPOSE:

Routine use of extended-fraction (> 10 fractions) radiation therapy (RT) for palliation of bone metastases is recognized as a low-value intervention by the American Society for Radiation Oncology. We examined contemporary practice patterns of, and physician characteristics associated with extended-fraction RT use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using Medicare fee-for-service data. We included patients who underwent 2- or 3-dimensional external-beam RT for bone metastases between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018. Physicians treating > 10 patients over the study period were analyzed for their individual practice. Hierarchic logistic regression modeling was used to identify patient- and physician-level factors associated with extended-fraction RT use.

RESULTS:

A total of 12,221 patients (median age, 75.6 years; 40.9% women, 87.6% white) were included. The rate of extended-fraction RT was 23.4%. A total of 1,432 physicians treated any patient. Among the 382 physicians treating > 10 patients, 127 (33.2%) used extended-fraction RT > 30% (consensus threshold). Physician factors associated with decreased odds of extended-fraction RT were years since medical school graduation (≤ 10 years and 11-20 years v ≥ 31 years: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.32 [95% CI, 0.20 to 0.51] and 0.64 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.93]) and practicing in the Northeast or Midwest versus the South (aOR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.22 to 0.58] and 0.48 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.74]). Physicians treating > 20 patients ( v 11-14 patients) over the study period had increased odds of delivering extended-fraction RT (aOR, 1.53 [95% CI, 1.10 to 2.12]).

CONCLUSION:

In this study, almost one fourth of patients received extended-fraction RT, and one third of physicians had an extended-fraction RT use rate of > 30%. Personalized feedback of performance data, clinical pathways and peer review, and updated reimbursement models are potential mechanisms to address this low-value care.

Optimal dose-fractionation schedule of palliative radiotherapy for patients with bone metastases: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The optimal dose-fractionation schedule of palliative radiotherapy has been debated in patients with bone metastases. Our objective is to comprehensively compare multiple fraction schedules with single fraction radiotherapy in terms of efficacy and toxicities by performing a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Electronic searches of titles/abstracts of palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases will be performed, using PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, clinical trials, American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology and European Society of Radiotherapy and Oncology. The primary outcome of interest is the incidence of skeletal-related event following palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases in prospective studies. The risk of bias and quality of evidence will be evaluated based on Cochrane Collaboration's tool and Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation in the network meta-analysis. We will conduct subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis regardless of heterogeneity estimates.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will synthesise the evidence regarding dose-fractionation schedule of palliative radiotherapy in patients with bone metastases. We hope the findings from this study will help clinicians and patients select optimum palliative radiotherapy by identifying the optimal dose-fractionation schedule of palliative radiotherapy with the most value in terms of patient-important outcomes. The evidence obtained from network meta-analysis will help to guide head-to-head research in the future. The results will be disseminated through international conference reports and peer-reviewed manuscripts. Ethics review board is not required for this network meta-analysis.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019135195.

Peer Influence on Physician Use of Shorter Course External Beam Radiation Therapy for Patients with Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Social contagion among physicians may affect the dissemination of innovative and high-value cancer care. We applied social contagion theory to investigate the role of physician peer influence on the use of short courses of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for patients with breast cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Using a cohort of Medicare beneficiaries with breast cancer, we constructed physician peer groups based on patient-sharing relationships. Outcomes were a patient's receipt of (1) moderately hypofractionated adjuvant EBRT after breast-conserving surgery and (2) short-course palliative EBRT for bone metastases. Using a longitudinal design, we used mixed-effects logistic regression to examine the association between physician peer group rate of short-course EBRT in 2011 to 2012 (T1) and patients' receipt of short-course EBRT in 2013 to 2014 (T2).

RESULTS

During T2, a total of 17,248 patients received adjuvant therapy (32.3% moderately hypofractionated) from 3235 physicians in 1202 physician peer groups. Compared with patients treated within peer groups in which no moderately hypofractionated adjuvant EBRT was used in T1, patients treated by a physician in a peer group with higher T1 use of moderately hypofractionated adjuvant EBRT were more likely to receive moderately hypofractionated adjuvant EBRT in T2 (adjusted odds ratio = 2.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.62-2.54, vs adjusted odds ratio = 2.61; 95% confidence interval, 2.04-3.35, for peer groups where 21%-46% and 47%-100% of radiation oncologists used moderately hypofractionated adjuvant EBRT in T1, respectively, compared with peer groups with no use of moderately hypofractionated adjuvant EBRT). In contrast, there was no significant relationship between T1 peer group use and T2 receipt of short-course palliative EBRT for bone metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician peer groups significantly influenced use of short-course EBRT in adjuvant therapy but not in palliative therapy for patients with breast cancer.

Single- Versus Multiple-Fraction Radiation Therapy for Painful Bone Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Nonrandomized Studies

PURPOSE

Single-fraction radiation therapy (RT) is a convenient and cost-effective regimen for the palliation of painful bone metastases, but is still underused. Randomized controlled trials comparing single- versus multiple-fraction RT are limited by generalizability. We compared the pain response rates after single- versus multiple-fraction RT in nonrandomized studies.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We searched PubMed and Scopus from the inception of each database through August 2018. We sought to identify nonrandomized studies in which data on pain response rates could be extracted for single- and multiple-fraction RT. Our primary outcomes of interest were the overall and complete pain response rates in evaluable patients. The analysis was performed using a random-effects model with the Mantel-Haenszel method.

RESULTS

Of the 3933 articles identified through our search, 9 met our inclusion criteria. Five of 9 included studies did not exclude patients with features of complicated bone metastases. A 1 × 8 Gy radiation schedule was frequently used in single-fraction therapy, and schedules of 5 × 4 Gy and 10 × 3 Gy were frequently used in multiple-fraction therapy. In the 9 studies, the overall response rate was 67% (884 of 1321 patients) for patients in the single-fraction arm and 70% (953 of 1360 patients) for those in the multiple-fraction arm (pooled odds ratio [OR]: 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-1.08). In 5 studies, the complete response rate was 26% (195 of 753 patients) for patients in the single-fraction arm and 35% (289 of 821 patients) for those in the multiple-fraction arm (pooled OR: 0.89; 95% CI, 0.70-1.13).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in the overall and complete response rates between single- and multiple-fraction RT. The effectiveness of single-fraction regimens was shown in nonrandomized settings, which better reflect daily practice than randomized studies. The CIs for the pooled ORs included clinically meaningful differences, and the study results are inconclusive.

Characterizing Palliative Radiotherapy Education in Hospice and Palliative Medicine Fellowship: A Survey of Fellowship Program Directors

Background: Educational deficiencies among hospice and palliative medicine (HPM) physicians contribute to suboptimal utilization of palliative radiotherapy (PRT) for patients with advanced cancer. Objective: To survey HPM fellowship program directors regarding the need for PRT education in HPM fellowship. Design: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of HPM fellowship program directors in June 2018. We used a 5-point Likert-type scale to assess agreement with statements related to PRT education. Setting/Subjects: Program directors for all United States Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited HPM fellowship programs with at least one enrolled fellow at the time of survey distribution were included. Results: Eighty-one of 120 eligible program directors completed the survey (68% response rate). Nearly all of the respondents agreed that HPM physicians should possess a working knowledge of PRT and that the principles of PRT should be formally taught in HPM fellowship. Thirty percent of HPM fellowship programs, however, lacked a PRT curriculum and only 14% of programs provided more than two hours of PRT education. Limited didactic time, lack of interest among fellows, and lack of collaboration with radiation oncologists were not perceived to be significant barriers to incorporating PRT education into HPM fellowship. More than 75% of program directors indicated that they would consider implementing a PRT curriculum designed specifically for HPM physicians if one were available. Conclusion: There is a need for PRT education in HPM fellowship. This need may be best addressed by developing a widely accessible PRT curriculum designed to meet the needs of HPM physicians.

Palliative Radiotherapy Education for Hospice and Palliative Medicine Fellows: A National Needs Assessment

Background: Insufficient knowledge of palliative radiotherapy (PRT) among hospice and palliative medicine (HPM) physicians is thought to be a barrier to the provision of high-quality palliative care. Objective: To assess the need for PRT education in HPM fellowship. Design: A cross-sectional survey of HPM fellows was conducted in June 2018. Setting/Subjects: The survey was distributed to accredited HPM fellowship programs in the United States for distribution to enrolled fellows; 114 fellows responded to the survey. Results: Nearly all respondents agreed that the principles of PRT should be taught in HPM fellowship, yet 51% had received no PRT education and 35% had received only one or two hours. Only 25% of respondents rated their working knowledge of PRT as sufficient, 40% felt confident in identifying radiation oncology emergencies or managing radiotherapy side effects, and 52% felt confident in assessing which patients to refer for radiotherapy. More than 75% agreed that were they more knowledgeable about PRT, they would be more likely to consider referral to radiation oncology, to collaborate with radiation oncologists, and to advocate for a short course of treatment based on a patient's prognosis or goals or care. Fellows who received PRT education in fellowship had significantly greater knowledge of and more favorable attitudes toward the use of radiotherapy. This difference was the greatest among fellows who had received at least five hours of PRT education. Conclusion: There is a need for PRT education in HPM fellowship. Efforts to address this need may lead to more appropriate utilization of PRT for patients with advanced cancer.

A randomized trial of conventional fraction versus hypofraction radiotherapy for bone metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma

External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) has been reported to be effective in palliating painful bone metastases, but the optimal fractions and doses for treating bone metastases from hepatocelluar carcinoma (HCC) are not established. This study aimed to compare toxicity and efficacy for conventional fraction versus hypofraction schedules. From January 2009 through December 2014, 183 patients with HCC bone metastases were randomly assigned to conventional fraction EBRT (Group A) or hypofraction radiotherapy (Group B). Study outcomes were pain relief, response rate and duration, overall survival, and toxicity incidence. Median follow-up time was 9.3 months. Response times were 6.7 ± 3.3 fractions in Group A and 4.1 ± 1.2 fractions in Group B (p <0.001). Pain relief rates were 96.7% and 91.2% in Group A and B, respectively (p=0.116). Time to treatment failure for Group A was significantly longer than Group B (p=0.025). Median overall survival was similar between two groups (p=0.628). Toxicity incidence in both groups was minimal, with no significant differences observed.

In conclusion, hypofractionated radiotherapy is safe for patients with HCC bone metastases and may achieve earlier pain relief compared to conventional radiotherapy. This protocol should be considered for patients with shorter predicted survival times.

Travel Distance as a Barrier to Receipt of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy After Radical Prostatectomy

OBJECTIVES

Following radical prostatectomy (RP), adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) decreases biochemical recurrence and potentially improves metastasis-free and overall survival for patients with high-risk pathologic features. Since adjuvant RT typically occurs daily over several weeks, the logistical challenges of extensive traveling may be a significant barrier to its use. We examined the association between distance to treatment facility and use of adjuvant RT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified 97,568 patients in the National Cancer Database diagnosed from 2004 through 2011 with cT1-4N0-xM0-x prostate cancer and found to have high-risk pathologic features (pT3-4 stage and/or positive surgical margins) at RP. Multivariable logistic regression adjusting for sociodemographic and clinicopathologic factors was used to examine the association between travel distance and receipt of adjuvant RT, defined as radiotherapy initiated within 12 months after RP.

RESULTS

Overall, 10.6% (10,346) of the study cohort received adjuvant RT. On multivariable analysis, increasing travel distance was significantly associated with decreased use of adjuvant RT, with adjusted odds ratios of 1.0 (reference), 0.67, 0.46, 0.39, and 0.32 (all P<0.001) and prevalence of use at 12.6%, 8.8%, 6.3%, 4.9%, and 3.7% for patients living ≤25.0, 25.1 to 50.0, 50.1 to 75.0, 75.1 to 100.0, and >100.0 miles away, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing travel distance was strongly associated with decreased use of adjuvant RT in this national cohort of postprostatectomy patients with high-risk pathologic features. These results strongly suggest that the logistical challenges of extensive travel are a significant barrier to the use of adjuvant RT. Efforts aimed at improving access to radiotherapy and reducing treatment time are urgently needed.

Persistent Use of Extended Fractionation Palliative Radiotherapy for Medicare Beneficiaries With Metastatic Breast Cancer, 2011 to 2014

INTRODUCTION

With no evidence to support extended radiation courses for the palliation of bone metastases, multiple guidelines were issued discouraging its use. We assessed contemporary use and cost of prolonged palliative radiotherapy in Medicare beneficiaries with bone metastases from breast cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, longitudinal study of palliative radiotherapy use among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with bone metastasis from breast cancer who underwent palliative radiotherapy during 2011 to 2014. Patients were categorized according to the number of days (fractions) on which they received palliative radiotherapy: 1, 2 to 10, 11 to 19, or 20 to 30. We examined the association of clinical, demographic, and provider characteristics with the use of extended (≥11 fractions) or very extended (≥20 fractions) fractionation with logistic regression models. We also compared the cost of different fractionation schemes from the payer perspective.

RESULTS

Of the 7547 patients in the sample (mean age, 71 y), 3084 (40.8%) received extended fractionation. The proportion of patients receiving 11 to 19 (34.7% in 2011 and 28.1% in 2014, trend P<0.001) and 20 to 30 treatments (10.3% in 2011 to 9.0% in 2014, trend P=0.07) decreased modestly over time. Patients with comorbidities were less likely to undergo extended fractionation (34.4% for ≥3 comorbidities vs. 44.9% for 0 comorbidities; adjusted odds ratio 0.67 [95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.76]). Patients treated at free-standing practices were more likely to undergo extended fractionation (47.9%) compared with those treated at hospital-based practices (37.3%, P<0.001; adjusted odds ratio, 1.49 [95% confidence interval, 1.35-1.65]). The mean cost of treatment varied from $633 (SD $240) for single-fraction treatment, to $3566 (SD $1349) for 11 to 19 fractions, to $6597 (SD $2893) for 20 to 30 fractions.

CONCLUSION

The use of prolonged courses of palliative radiotherapy among Medicare beneficiaries with breast cancer remained high in 2011 to 2014. The association between free-standing facility status and use of extended fractionation suggests that provider financial incentives may impact choice of treatment.

Risks and consequences of travel burden on prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor administration and incidence of febrile neutropenia in an aged Medicare population

OBJECTIVE

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) decrease the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. This study examines the impact patient travel burden has on administration of prophylactic G-CSFs and the subsequent impact on FN incidence.

METHODS

Medicare claims data were used to identify a cohort of beneficiaries age 65+ with non-myeloid cancers at high risk for FN between January 2012 and December 2014. Driving distance and time were calculated from patient residence ZIP code to the location of G-CSF and/or chemotherapy administration. Regression models were used to estimate the odds of G-CSF prophylaxis relative to patient driving distance and time, and odds of FN incidence relative to timing of G-CSF administration (optimal [days 2-4 after chemotherapy], sub-optimal [same day], or none).

RESULTS

The 52,389 study patients had a mean age of 73.5 years, and were 82% female and 89% white race; 49% had female breast cancer, 12% lung cancer, 15% ovarian cancer, and 24% non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Of these high FN risk patients, 69% had at least one prophylactic G-CSF administration within at least one chemotherapy cycle. The percentage of patients receiving prophylactic G-CSFs in the first cycle was 56%. Median travel time was slightly longer for patients who did not receive G-CSFs and patients receiving short-acting vs long-acting G-CSFs. The odds of receiving no G-CSFs were 26-52% higher (depending on cancer type) for patients with a >80-min one-way travel time, compared to patients traveling <20-min. Concurrently, the odds of FN (using a "narrow" definition) were 18-93% higher for patients who did not receive G-CSFs in the first cycle of chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Travel burden, linked to clinic visits for G-CSF administration following myelosuppressive chemotherapy, is associated with sub-optimal use of G-CSF prophylaxis, which may result in a higher incidence of FN.

Outcomes and Characteristics of Patients Treated with Emergent Palliative Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

Emergent palliative radiation therapy (PRT) of symptomatic metastases can significantly increase the quality of life of patients with cancer. In some contexts, this treatment may be underused, but in others PRT may represent an excessively aggressive intervention. The characterization of the current use of emergent PRT is warranted for optimized value and patient-centered care.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This study is a cross-sectional retrospective analysis of all emergent PRT courses at a single academic tertiary institution across 1 year.

RESULTS

A total of 214 patients received a total of 238 treatment courses. The most common indications were bone (39%) and brain (14%) metastases. Compared with outpatients, inpatients had lower mean survival rates (2 months vs 6 months; P < .001), higher rates of stopping treatment early (19.1% vs 9.0%; P = .034), and greater involvement of palliative care (44.8% vs 24.1%; P < .001), but the same mean planned fractions (9.10 vs 9.40 fractions; P = .669). In a multiple predictor survival analysis, palliative care involvement (P = .025), male sex (P = .001), ending treatment early (P = .011), and having 1 of 3 serious indications (airway compromise, leptomeningeal disease, and superior/inferior vena cava involvement; P = .007) were significantly associated with worse overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival is particularly poor in patients who receive emergent PRT, and patient characteristics such as functional status and indication should be considered when determining fractionation schedule and dosing. A multi-institutional study of practice patterns and outcomes is warranted.

Single vs multiple fraction palliative radiotherapy for uncomplicated painful bone metastases treated at University of Malaya Medical Centre: A single institutional Malaysian experience

INTRODUCTION

This study was conducted to compare pain response between single and multiple fraction palliative radiotherapy and to describe prognostic factors affecting treatment response in University of Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC).

METHODS

The case records of 162 patients with uncomplicated painful bone metastases treated with palliative radiotherapy from 2006 to 2014 were analyzed. Treatment outcomes were pain score response, analgesic score response, response according to International Consensus Endpoints (complete response and overall response) at 4, 12, and 24 weeks, retreatment rate, symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs), and prognostic factors.

RESULTS

At 24 weeks, pain score response for single and multiple fraction group was 82.3% and 88.5%, analgesic score response was 54.8% and 61.5%, and overall response according to International Consensus Endpoint was 61.3% and 67.7%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in treatment response between the 2 treatment groups for all endpoints. ECOG (<2 vs ≥2: aOR 3.405, 95% CI 1.708-6.790, P = .001) and primary breast and prostate (breast vs others: aOR 5.231, 95% CI 1.973-13.869, P = .001; prostate vs others: aOR 5.522, 95% CI 1.493-20.420, P = .01) were significant variables on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Single fraction radiotherapy is as effective as multiple fraction radiotherapy for the palliation of uncomplicated bone metastases.

Palliative radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer patients with bone metastases at diagnosis: A hospital-based analysis of patterns of care, RT fractionation scheme, and overall survival

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common malignancies associated with bone metastases, and palliative radiation therapy (RT) is an effective treatment option. A total of 2641 patients were identified with PCa and bone metastases at diagnosis from 2010 to 2014 in the NCDB. Fractionation scheme was designated as short course ([SC‐RT]: 8 Gy in 1 fraction and 20 Gy in 5 fractions) vs long course ([LC‐RT]: 30 Gy in 10 fractions and 37.5 Gy in 15 fractions). Patient characteristics were correlated with fractionation scheme using logistic regression. Overall survival was analyzed using the Kaplan‐Meier method, log‐rank test, Cox proportional hazards models, and propensity score‐matched analyses. A total of 2255 (85.4%) patients were included in the LC‐RT group and 386 (14.6%) patients in the SC‐RT group. SC‐RT was more common in patients over 75 years age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32‐2.20), treatment at an academic center (OR: 1.76, 1.20‐2.57), living greater than 15 miles distance to treatment facility (OR: 1.38, 1.05‐1.83), treatment to the rib (OR: 2.99, 1.36‐6.60), and in 2014 (OR: 1.73, 1.19‐2.51). RT to the spine was more commonly long course (P < .0001). In the propensity‐matched cohort, LC‐RT was associated with improved OS (P < .0001), but no OS difference was observed between 37.5 Gy and either 8 Gy in one fraction or 20 Gy in 5 fractions (P > .5). LC‐RT remains the most common treatment fractionation scheme for palliative bone metastases in PCa patients. Use of palliative SC‐RT is increasing, particularly in more recent years, for older patients, treatment at academic centers, and with increasing distance from a treatment center.

Travel burden associated with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor administration in a Medicare aged population: a geospatial analysis

OBJECTIVE

Prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) is recommended for patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy regimens with a high risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). G-CSFs should be administered starting the day after chemotherapy, necessitating return trips to the oncology clinic at the end of each cycle. We examined the travel burden related to prophylactic G-CSF injections after chemotherapy in the US.

METHODS

We used 2012-2014 Medicare claims data to identify a national cohort of beneficiaries age 65+ with non-myeloid cancers who received both chemotherapy and prophylactic G-CSFs. Patient travel origin was based on residence ZIP code. Oncologist practice locations and hospital addresses were obtained from the Medicare Physician Compare and Hospital Compare websites and geocoded using the Google Maps Application Programming Interface (API). Driving distance and time to the care site from each patient ZIP code tabulation area (ZCTA) were calculated using Open Street Maps road networks. Geographic and socio-economic characteristics of each ZCTA from the US Census Bureau's American Community Survey were used to stratify and analyze travel estimates.

RESULTS

The mean one-way driving distance to the G-CSF provider was 23.8 (SD 30.1) miles and the mean one-way driving time was 33.3 (SD 37.8) minutes. When stratified by population density, the mean one-way travel time varied from 12.1 (SD 10.1) minutes in Very Dense Urban areas to 76.7 (SD 72.1) minutes in Super Rural areas. About 48% of patients had one-way travel times of <20 minutes, but 19% of patients traveled ≥50 minutes one way for G-CSF prophylaxis. Patients in areas with above average concentrations of aged, poor or disabled residents were more likely to experience longer travel.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of G-CSF therapy after chemotherapy can present a significant travel burden for cancer patients. Technological improvements in the form and methods of drug delivery for G-CSFs might significantly reduce this travel burden.

Palliative radiation and fractionation in medicare patients with incurable non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

Palliative radiation therapy (RT) can improve quality of life but also incurs time and financial costs. The aim of this study was to evaluate factors associated with use and intensity of palliative RT for incurable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This was a retrospective analysis of Medicare's Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results data. We identified patients who were diagnosed with incurable (American Joint Committee on Cancer 6th edition stage IIIB with malignant effusion or stage IV) NSCLC between 2004 and 2011. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify factors associated with the receipt of palliative RT and the use of >10 fractions during the first course of radiation. Among patients who were treated with radiation, freestanding versus hospital-based center information was collected on the basis of the location of the RT delivery claim.

RESULTS

Among 55,258 patients with incurable NSCLC, 38% (21,053 patients) received palliative RT during the first year after diagnosis. Among patients who received RT, 56% (11,717 patients) received >10 fractions. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with greater RT use included younger age group (overall P < .01), lower modified Charlson comorbidity score (overall P < .01), female sex (odds ratio [OR]: 1.1; P < .01), marital status (OR: 1.1; P < .01), and chemotherapy use (OR: 3.6; P < .01). Predictors for >10 fractions were chemotherapy use (OR: 1.7; P < .01) and treatment at a freestanding versus hospital-based facility (58% vs 43%; OR: 1.7; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

More than a third of patients diagnosed with incurable lung cancer receive palliative RT and 56% received >10 fractions. The use of RT varied by region and patient characteristics, and patients treated at freestanding RT centers were more likely to receive >10 fractions. Further research into factors that influence treatment decisions including potential financial incentives may contribute to the high value and strategic utilization of palliative RT.

A Palliative Radiation Oncology Consult Service Reduces Total Costs During Hospitalization

CONTEXT

Palliative radiation therapy (PRT) is a highly effective treatment in alleviating symptoms from bone metastases; however, currently used standard fractionation schedules can lead to costly care, especially when patients are treated in an inpatient setting. The Palliative Radiation Oncology Consult (PROC) service was developed in 2013 to improve appropriateness, timeliness, and care value from PRT.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to compare total costs among two cohorts of inpatients with bone metastases treated with PRT before, or after, PROC establishment. Secondarily, we evaluated drivers of cost savings including hospital length of stay, utilization of specialty-care palliative services, and PRT schedules.

METHODS

Patients were included in our observational cohort study if they received PRT for bone metastases at a single tertiary care hospital from 2010 to 2016. We compared total costs and length of stay using propensity score-adjusted analyses. Palliative care utilization and PRT schedules were compared by χ² and Mann-Whitney U tests.

RESULTS

We identified 181 inpatients, 76 treated before and 105 treated after PROC. Median total hospitalization cost was $76,792 (range $6380-$346,296) for patients treated before PROC and $50,582 (range $7585-$620,943) for patients treated after PROC. This amounted to an average savings of $20,719 in total hospitalization costs (95% CI [$3687, $37,750]). In addition, PROC was associated with shorter PRT schedules, increased palliative care utilization, and an 8.5 days reduction in hospital stay (95% CI [3.2,14]).

CONCLUSION

The PROC service, a radiation oncology model integrating palliative care practice, was associated with cost-savings, shorter treatment courses and hospitalizations, and increased palliative care.

[Radiotherapy of bone metastases in France: A descriptive monocentric retrospective study]

PURPOSE

Bone metastases cause pain and affect patients' quality of life. Radiation therapy is one of the reference analgesic treatments. The objective of this study was to compare the current practices of a French radiotherapy department for the treatment of uncomplicated bone metastases with data from the literature in order to improve and optimize the management of patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective monocentric study of patients who underwent palliative irradiation of uncomplicated bone metastases was performed.

RESULTS

Ninety-one patients had 116 treatments of uncomplicated bone metastases between January 2014 and December 2015, including 44 men (48%) and 47 women (52%) with an average age of 63years (25-88years). Primary tumours most commonly found were breast cancer (35%), lung cancer (16%) and prostate cancer (12%). The regimens used were in 29% of cases 30Gy in ten fractions (group 30Gy), in 21% of cases 20Gy in five fractions (group 20Gy), in 22% of cases 8Gy in one fraction (group 8Gy) and in 28% of cases 23.31Gy in three fractions of stereotactic body irradiation (stereotactic group). The general condition of the patient (P<0.001), pain score and analgesic (P<0.001), oligometastatic profile (P=0.003) and practitioner experience (P<0.001) were factors influencing the choice of the regimen irradiation. Age (P=0.46), sex (P=0.14), anticancer treatments (P=0.56), concomitant hospitalization (P=0.14) and the distance between the radiotherapy centre and home (P=0.87) did not influence the decision significantly. A total of three cases of spinal compression and one case of post-therapeutic fracture were observed, occurring between one and 128days and 577days after irradiation, respectively. Eight percent of all irradiated metastases were reirradiated with a delay ranging between 13 and 434days after the first irradiation. The re-irradiation rate was significantly higher after 8Gy (P=0.02). The rate of death was significantly lower in the stereotactic arm (P<0.001) and overall survival was significantly greater in the stereotactic arm (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study showed that patients' analysed was comparable to the population of different studies. Predictive factors for the choice of the treatment regimen were identified. Non-fractionnated therapy was underutilised while stereotactic treatment was increasingly prescribed, showing an evolution in the management of patients.

Implementation of hypofractionated prostate radiation therapy in the United States: A National Cancer Database analysis

PURPOSE

Preclinical and clinical research over the past several decades suggests that hypofractionated (HFxn) radiation therapy schedules produce similar treatment outcomes compared with conventionally fractionated (CFxn) radiation therapy for definitive treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa). We sought to evaluate national trends and identify factors associated with HFxn utilization using the US National Cancer Database.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We queried the National Cancer Database for men diagnosed with localized (N0,M0) PCa from 2004 through 2013 treated with external beam radiation therapy. Patients were grouped by dose per fraction (DpF) in Gray: CFxn was defined as DpF ≤2.0, moderate HFxn as DpF >2.0 but <5.0, and extreme HFxn as DpF ≥5.0. Men receiving DpF <1.5 or >15.0 were excluded, as were those receiving <25 or >90 Gy total dose. Multiple logistic regression was performed to identify demographic, clinical, and treatment factor associations.

RESULTS

A total of 132,403 men were identified, with 120,055 receiving CFxn, 7264 moderate HFxn, and 5084 extreme HFxn. Although CFxn was by far the most common approach over the analysis period, HFxn use increased from 6.2% in 2004 to 14.2% in 2013 (P < .01). Extreme HFxn use increased the most (from 0.3% to 8.5%), whereas moderate HFxn utilization was unchanged (from 5.9% to 5.7%). HFxn use was independently associated with younger age, later year of diagnosis, non-black race, non-Medicaid insurance, non-Western residence, higher income, academic treatment facility, greater distance from treatment facility, low-risk disease group (by National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria), and nonreceipt of hormone therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Although CFxn remains the most common radiation therapy schedule for localized PCa, use of HFxn appears to be increasing in the United States as a result of increased extreme HFxn use. Financial and logistical factors may accelerate adoption of shorter schedules. Considering the multiple demographic and prognostic differences identified between these groups, randomized outcome data comparing extreme HFxn to alternatives are desirable.

Update of the systematic review of palliative radiation therapy fractionation for bone metastases

PURPOSE

Radiation therapy is an effective modality for pain management of symptomatic bone metastases. We update the previous meta-analyses of randomized trials comparing single fraction to multiple fractions of radiation therapy in patients with uncomplicated bone metastases.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register. Ten new randomized trials were identified since 2010, five with adequate and appropriate data for inclusion, resulting in a total of 29 trials that were analyzed. Forest plots based on each study's odds ratios were computed using a random effects model and the Mantel-Haenszel statistic.

RESULTS

In intention-to-treat analysis, the overall response rate was similar in patients for single fraction treatments (61%; 1867/3059) and those for multiple fraction treatments (62%; 1890/3040). Similarly, complete response rates were nearly identical in both groups (23% vs 24%, respectively). Re-treatment was significantly more frequent in the single fraction treatment arm, with 20% receiving additional treatment to the same site versus 8% in the multiple fraction treatment arm (p < 0.01). No significant difference was seen in the risk of pathological fracture at the treatment site, rate of spinal cord compression at the index site, or in the rate of acute toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Single fraction and multiple fraction radiation treatment regimens continue to demonstrate similar outcomes in pain control and toxicities, but re-treatment is more common for single fraction treatment patients.

Impact of a clinical pathway tool on appropriate palliative radiation therapy for bone metastases

PURPOSE

Clinical pathways increase compliance with treatment guidelines, improve outcomes, and reduce costs. Guidelines recommend single fraction radiation therapy (SFRT) for palliation of uncomplicated bone metastases, but implementation is variable. We examined the effects of a pathway tool on SFRT rates in an academic radiation oncology practice.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Using published literature, clinical guidelines, and expert input, we designed a clinical pathway for bone metastases radiation therapy displayed on a Web-based electronic interface. In March 2016, the pathway launched on a palliative radiation service at the Dana Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center main campus and at affiliated community sites. Providers were surveyed pre- and postimplementation to assess expectations and elicit feedback. Rates of pathway utilization, compliance with SFRT recommendations, and reasons for noncompliance were assessed.

RESULTS

The final pathway includes 20 endpoints and several validated prognostic scoring systems. It was used in 38% of 723 bone metastases radiation prescriptions, with appropriate SFRT rates rising from 18% before implementation to 48% after launch (P < .01). Major reasons for rejecting recommendations included disagreement with life expectancy prognostication and patient convenience. The pathway increased physicians' confidence regarding compliance with treatment guidelines and made it easier to find well-supported treatment recommendations. Workflow disruptions and the inability to handle nuanced situations emerged as limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience demonstrates the utility of clinical pathway decision support for bone metastases radiation in complex academic settings. Next steps include increasing the pathway's ease of use, refining the pathway's prognostic abilities, and measuring cost savings related to the pathway.

Treatments for Metastatic Prostate Cancer (mPC): A Review of Costing Evidence

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PC) is the most common cancer in Western countries. More than one third of PC patients develop metastatic disease, and the 5-year expected survival in distant disease is about 35%. During the last few years, new treatments have been launched for metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to review the current literature on health economic analysis on the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer (mPC), compare the studies, summarize the findings and make the results available to administrators and decision makers.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was done for economic evaluations (cost-minimization, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, cost-of-illness, cost-of-drug, and cost-benefit analyses). We employed the PubMed^® search engine and searched for publications published between 2012 and 2016. The terms used were "prostate cancer", "metastatic" and "cost". An initial screening of all headlines was performed, selected abstracts were analysed, and finally the full papers investigated. Study characteristics, treatment and comparator, country, type of evaluation, perspective, year of value, time horizon, efficacy data, discount rate, total costs and sensitivity analysis were analysed. The quality was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument.

RESULTS

A total of 227 publications were detected and screened, 58 selected for full-text assessment and 31 included in the final analyses. Despite the significant international literature on the treatment of mCRPC, there were only 15 studies focusing on cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). Medical treatment constituted two thirds of the selected studies. Significant costs in the treatment of mCRPC were disclosed. In the pre-docetaxel setting, both abiraterone acetate (AA) and enzalutamide were concluded beyond accepted cost/quality-adjusted life year limits. In the docetaxel refractory setting, most studies concluded that enzalutamide was cost-effective and superior to AA. In most studies, cabazitaxel was not recommended, because of high cost. Looking at bone-targeting drugs, generic zoledronic acid (ZA) was recommended. External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) was analysed in three studies, and single fraction radiotherapy was concluded to be cost saving. Radium-223 was documented as beneficial, but costly. The quality of the studies was generally good, but sensitivity analyses, discounting and the measurement of health outcomes were present in less than two thirds of the selected studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment of mCRPC was associated with significant cost. In the post-docetaxel setting, single fraction radiotherapy and enzalutamide were considered cost-effective in most studies. Generic ZA was the recommended bone-targeting therapy.

A Palliative Radiation Oncology Consult Service's Impact on Care of Advanced Cancer Patients

INTRODUCTION

Palliative radiation therapy (PRT) is a commonly utilized intervention for symptom palliation among patients with metastatic cancer, yet it is under-recognized as a distinct area of subspecialty within radiation oncology.

OBJECTIVE

We developed a multidisciplinary service model within radiation oncology called the Palliative Radiation Oncology Consult (PROC) service to improve the quality of cancer care for advanced cancer patients. We assessed the service's impact on patient-related and healthcare utilization outcomes.

DESIGN

Patients were included in this observational cohort study if they received PRT at a single tertiary care hospital between 2009 and 2017. We compared outcomes of patients treated after (post-intervention group) to those treated before (control group) PROC's establishment using unadjusted and propensity score adjusted analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 450 patients in the cohort, 154 receive PRT pre- and 296 after PROC's establishment. In comparison to patients treated pre-PROC, post-PROC patients were more likely to undergo single-fraction radiation (RR: 7.74, 95% CI: 3.84-15.57) and hypofraction (2-5 fraction) radiation (RR: 10.74, 95% CI: 5.82-19.83), require shorter hospital stays (21 vs. 26.5 median days, p = 0.01), and receive more timely specialty-level palliative care (OR: 2.65, 95% CI: 1.56-4.49). Despite shortened treatments, symptom relief was similar (OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 0.80-2.28).

CONCLUSION

The PROC service was associated with more efficient radiation courses, substantially reduced hospital length of stays, and more timely palliative care consultation, without compromising symptom improvements. These results suggest that a multidisciplinary care delivery model can lead to enhanced quality of care for advanced cancer patients.

Gender and age make no difference in the re-irradiation of painful bone metastases: A secondary analysis of the NCIC CTG SC.20 randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Patient's gender and age may influence physicians in prescribing palliative radiotherapy. The purpose of this secondary analysis of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Symptom Control Trial SC.20 was to explore the gender and age differences in pain and patient reported outcomes in cancer patients with bone metastases undergoing re-irradiation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Response to radiation was evaluated using the International Bone Metastases Consensus Endpoint Definitions. Patients completed the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (C30) before and 2 months after re-irradiation.

RESULTS

A total of 847 patients were analyzed. At baseline, men had more dyspnea, and mild pain. Older patients consumed less analgesic. More women reported clinically significant improvement in mood and enjoyment of life in the BPI after radiation. Similarly, younger patients reported better improvement in enjoyment of life. There were no significant gender or age differences in overall survival, response to radiation, or in C30 scores at 2 months.

CONCLUSION

Similar benefit in terms of pain relief was observed across all patient groups. Cancer patients with bone metastases should be offered palliative re-irradiation irrespective of gender or age.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00080912; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00080912.

Patterns of Fractionation and Boost Usage in Adjuvant External Beam Radiotherapy for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ in the United States

BACKGROUND

While the roles of hypofractionated (HFxn) radiotherapy and lumpectomy boost in the adjuvant management of invasive breast cancer are supported by the results of clinical trials, randomized data supporting their use for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are forthcoming. We sought to evaluate current national trends and identify factors associated with HFxn and boost usage using the National Cancer Database.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database for women diagnosed with DCIS from 2004 to 2014 undergoing external beam radiotherapy after breast conservation surgery. Patients were categorized as receiving either conventional fractionation (CFxn) or HFxn and as either receiving or not receiving a boost. Multiple logistic regression was performed to identify demographic, clinical, and treatment factor associations.

RESULTS

A total of 101,615 women were identified, with 87,641 (86.2%) receiving CFxn, 13,974 (13.8%) receiving HFxn, and most patients in each group (84.9% and 57.7%, respectively) receiving a boost. Implementation of HFxn increased from 4.3% in 2004 to 33.0% in 2014, and the use of a boost declined from 83.3% to 74.6%. HFxn receipt was independently associated with later year of diagnosis, older age, higher income, greater distance from treatment facility, greater facility volume, academic facility type, Western residence, smaller lesions, and nonreceipt of a boost. Factors associated with boost receipt included earlier year of diagnosis, younger age, higher income, community facility type, adverse pathologic features, and nonreceipt of HFxn.

CONCLUSION

Although CFxn with a boost remains the most common external beam radiotherapy strategy for DCIS, implementation of HFxn without a boost appears to be increasing. Practice patterns at present seem to be driven by guidelines for invasive breast cancer and nonclinical factors.

A review of patterns of practice and clinical guidelines in the palliative radiation treatment of uncomplicated bone metastases

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Single fraction radiation treatment (SFRT) is recommended for its equivalence to multiple-fraction (MF) RT in the palliation of uncomplicated bone metastases (BM). However, adoption of SFRT has been slow.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature searches for studies published following 2014 were conducted using online repositories of gray literature, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and Embase Classic, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases.

RESULTS

A total of 32 articles detailing patterns of practice and clinical practice guidelines were included for final synthesis. The majority of organizations have released high level recommendations for SFRT use in treatment of uncomplicated BM, based on evidence of non-inferiority to MFRT. There are key differences between guidelines, such as varying strengths of recommendation for SFRT use over MFRT; contraindication in vertebral sites for SFRT; and risk estimation of pathologic fractures after SFRT. Differences in guidelines may be influenced by committee composition and organization mandate. Differences in patterns of practice may be influenced by individual center policies, payment modalities and consideration of patient factors such as age, prognosis, and performance status.

CONCLUSION

Although there is some variation between groups, the majority of guidelines recommend use of SFRT and others consider it to be a reasonable alternative to MFRT.