Pain Response Rates After Conventional Radiation Therapy for Bone Metastases in Prospective Nonrandomized Studies: A Systematic Review

Real-World Implementation of Simulation-Free Radiation Therapy (SFRT-1000): A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of 1000 Consecutive Palliative Courses Delivered in Routine Care

PURPOSE

The feasibility of simulation-free radiation therapy (SFRT) has been demonstrated but information regarding its routine care impact and scalability is lacking.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In this single-institution, retrospective cohort study, all patients receiving palliative radiation therapy at an Australian tertiary cancer center were eligible for consideration of SFRT unless mask immobilization, a stereotactic technique, or a definitive dose was indicated. Coprimary endpoints were SFRT utilization, impact on consultation-to-RT time, and on-couch treatment duration. Timing metrics were compared with a contemporary local cohort that received simulation-based palliative radiation therapy using unadjusted Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and a propensity score-matched regression. Electronic patient-reported outcomes captured 2-week toxicity and pain response.  RESULTS:  Between April 2018 and February 2024, 2849 palliative radiation courses were delivered, of which 1904 were eligible. Of the 1904 courses, 1000 (52.5% SFRT utilization) received SFRT, including 668 using intensity-modulated radiation therapy/volumetric-modulated arc therapy. A total of 788 individual patients received SFRT and the median age was 71 years (IQR, 61-80) with 59% being male and 42% being Eastern Collaborative Oncology Group 2-4. SFRT utilization increased from 41% to 54% between years 2018-2019 and 2022-2024.  SFRT reduced median consultation-to-RT time from 7.0 to 5.1 days (P < .0001) corresponding to an adjusted average treatment effect in the treated of -2.1 days (95% CI, -2.8 to -1.3). SFRT increased median on-couch treatment duration from 17.8 to 20.5 minutes (P < .0001; adjusted average treatment effect in the treated 2.6 minutes, 95% CI, 1.3-3.9). Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 acute toxicity was 9% and at 4 weeks after RT, patients with moderate/severe pain at baseline (≥5/10) had a mean pain reduction of 3.5 points (7.1-3.6; P < .0001).  CONCLUSIONS:  Using widely available technologies, the SFRT-1000 cohort demonstrates routine care scalability with patient-centered and workflow benefits. SFRT is an attractive new paradigm implementable in most settings following adaptation to local requirements. Thus, SFRT opens new avenues to potentially improve access to palliative RT, which remains a global area of need.

Bridging the care gap: radiation therapy in elderly and frail cancer patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to address the gap in radiation therapy (RT) care for elderly cancer patients. It will discuss the barriers to implementing effective RT in elderly and frail patients with a focus on breast cancer and metastatic settings.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies indicate that SBRT provides better pain control for bone metastases compared to cEBRT, but elderly patients are underrepresented in these trials. Evidence on the effectiveness of geriatric assessment tools in predicting RT tolerance and toxicity is mixed, with some studies showing a correlation while others do not. Comprehensive geriatric assessments, though promising, are often impractical due to time and resource constraints.

SUMMARY

There is a critical need for more inclusive research to better understand the risks and benefits of RT in elderly patients. Developing streamlined geriatric assessment tools and integrating them into clinical practice can enhance treatment personalization. Future studies should prioritize elderly populations to generate robust data, thereby improving RT outcomes and quality of life for this growing patient group.

Palliative radiotherapy for painful non-bone lesions in patients with advanced cancer: a single center retrospective study

PURPOSE

This retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of palliative radiotherapy for painful non-bone lesions in patients with advanced cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We enrolled patients with painful non-bone lesions who underwent conventional palliative radiotherapy between September 2018 and September 2022. The treatment targets included primary tumor lesions, lymph node metastases, non-bone hematogenous metastases, and other lesions. The primary endpoint was the overall pain response rate in evaluable patients, determined based on the International Consensus Pain Response Endpoint criteria. The secondary endpoints included overall survival, pain recurrence, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Of the 420 screened patients, 142 received palliative radiotherapy for painful non-bone lesions, and 112 were evaluable. A pain response was achieved in 67 patients (60%) of the 112 evaluable patients within a median of 1.2 months. Among these patients, 25 exhibited complete response, 42 partial response, 18 indeterminate response, and 27 pain progression. The median survival time was 5.5 months, recorded at a median follow-up of 6.0 months, during which 67 patients died. Multivariate analysis identified poor performance status scores of 2-4, opioid use, and re-irradiation as independent factors associated with a reduced likelihood of achieving a pain response. Pain recurrence occurred in 18 patients over a median of 4.1 months. Seventeen patients had grade 1-2 adverse events, while none experienced grade 3 or higher toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Palliative radiotherapy can potentially be a safe and well-tolerated modality for managing painful non-bone lesions, with a low rate of adverse events.

Short-term pain control after palliative radiotherapy for uncomplicated bone metastases: a prospective cohort study

This study aimed at evaluating the efficacy of different radiotherapy (RT) fractionation regimens in managing uncomplicated painful bone metastases (BM) and identifying predictive factors for pain control. Patients with 1 to 4 symptomatic BM from any primary solid tumors and a life expectancy exceeding 3 months were included in the study and received palliative RT, with SBRT restricted in the context of oligometastatic disease or in patients with good prognosis. Pain analysis using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) tool was conducted at baseline, 1 and 3 months after RT. Analgesic intake was recorded as morphine-equivalent doses (OME). Pain response was assessed using the International Consensus on Palliative Radiotherapy Endpoint (ICPRE). Multivariate logistic regression analyzed patient-related, tumor-related, and treatment-related factors predicting BM pain control at 3 months post-RT. From Feb 2022 to Feb 2023, 44 patients with 65 symptomatic BM were investigated. Breast (32%) and lung (24%) tumors were the most common primary tumors. Treatment plans included 3DCRT (60%) and VMAT (40%), with a median biological effective dose for tumors (BED) of 29 Gy [14-108]. All patients completed the 3-month follow-up. Pain response rates were 62% at 1 month and 60% at 3 months. Responders had better PS ECOG scores (67%; P = 0.008) and received active systemic therapies (67%: P = 0.036). Non-responders had lower pretreatment BPI (mean: 13.7 vs. 58.2; P = 0.032), with significantly higher values after 1 month (mean: 9.1 vs. 5.3, P = 0.033). Baseline BPI (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.032-1.327; P = 0.014) and BPI at 1 month (OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.698-0.976; P = 0.025) were independent predictors of pain response at 3 months. Our findings show that palliative RT ensured short-term pain control in patients with BM, regardless of tumor type and dose-fractionation regimen. A larger sample size and a longer follow-up could potentially identify which patients are likely to benefit most from RT, and which fractionation might be indicated for achieving a durable pain relief. A multidisciplinary approach is paramount to provide a better care to BM patients.

Pain Response Rates After Conventional Radiation Therapy for Bone Metastases Assessed Using International Consensus Pain Response Endpoints: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Initial Radiation Therapy and Reirradiation

Previous meta-analysis of conventional radiation therapy for painful bone metastases showed overall response (OR) rates of 72% to 75% (evaluable patients), 61% to 62% (intent-to-treat patients) for initial radiation therapy, and 68% for reirradiation (evaluable patients). However, the definition of pain response differed among the studies included. Hence, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the pain response rates assessed by the International Consensus Pain Response Endpoints (ICPRE) for both initial radiation therapy and reirradiation. The PubMed and Scopus databases were searched for articles published between 2002 and 2021. The inclusion criteria were (1) prospective studies or studies based on prospectively collected data and (2) studies in which pain response was assessed using ICPRE. Our primary outcomes of interest were the OR rates (sum of the complete and partial response rates) for both initial radiation therapy and reirradiation. Of the 6470 articles identified in our database search, 32 and 3 met the inclusion criteria for the analysis of initial radiation therapy and reirradiation, respectively. The OR rates of initial radiation therapy in evaluable patients (n = 4775) and intent-to-treat patients (n = 6775) were 60.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55.2-65.4) and 45.4% (95% CI, 38.7-52.4), respectively. The OR rates of reirradiation in evaluable patients (n = 733) and intent-to-treat patients (n = 1085) were 70.8% (95% CI, 15.7-96.9) and 62.2% (95% CI, 5.3-98.0), respectively. Subgroup analyses of initial radiation therapy including the comparison of randomized and nonrandomized studies showed no significant differences in any comparison, indicating similar response rates across different study designs. For initial radiation therapy, we determined the ICPRE-assessed response rates, which were lower than previously reported. The OR and complete response rates should be benchmarks for future randomized and nonrandomized studies. For reirradiation, the wide CIs demonstrate that the response rates based on ICPRE require further investigation.

Focused Ultrasound and RadioTHERapy for non-invasive palliative pain treatment in patients with bone metastasis: a study protocol for the three armed randomized controlled FURTHER trial

BACKGROUND

Cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP), caused by bone metastases, is a common complication of cancer and strongly impairs quality of life (QoL). External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is the current standard of care for treatment of CIBP. However, approximately 45% of patients have no adequate pain response after EBRT. Magnetic resonance image-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (MR-HIFU) may improve pain palliation in this patient population. The main objective of this trial was to compare MR-HIFU, EBRT, and MR-HIFU + EBRT for the palliative treatment of bone metastases.

METHODS/DESIGN

The FURTHER trial is an international multicenter, three-armed randomized controlled trial. A total of 216 patients with painful bone metastases will be randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive EBRT only, MR-HIFU only, or combined treatment with EBRT followed by MR-HIFU. During a follow-up period of 6 months, patients will be contacted at eight time points to retrieve information about their level of pain, QoL, and the occurrence of (serious) adverse events. The primary outcome of the trial is pain response at 14 days after start of treatment. Secondary outcomes include pain response at 14 days after trial enrolment, pain scores (daily until the 21st day and at 4, 6, 12 and 24 weeks), toxicity, adverse events, QoL, and survival. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis will be conducted.

DISCUSSION

The FURTHER trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of MR-HIFU-alone or in combination with EBRT-compared to EBRT to relieve CIBP. The trial will be performed in six hospitals in four European countries, all of which are partners in the FURTHER consortium.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The FURTHER trial is registered under the Netherlands Trials Register number NL71303.041.19 and ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT04307914. Date of trial registration is 13-01-2020.

Palliative radiotherapy for painful lymph node metastases

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence concerning radiotherapy for painful lymph node metastases (PLM). We evaluated the effectiveness of radiotherapy for PLM using the International Consensus Endpoint in a subgroup analysis of a prospective observational study.

METHODS

In the primary study, 302 patients received radiotherapy for painful tumors. Among them, those treated with palliative radiotherapy for PLM were analyzed in the present study. We used the Brief Pain Inventory short form to evaluate the intensity of pain and the pain interference in patient's life. We collected the Brief Pain Inventory and analgesic data at baseline and at 1, 2, and 3 months after the start of radiotherapy. Pain response was assessed using the International Consensus Endpoint. Patients were diagnosed with a predominance of other pain (POP) if non-index pain of a malignant or unknown origin was present and had a greater 'worst pain' score than the index pain.

RESULTS

Radiotherapy for PLM was performed on 25 patients. In total, 15 (60%) patients experienced a pain response. The pain response rates for evaluable patients were 66%, 67%, and 57% at 1-, 2-, and 3-month follow-ups, respectively. At baseline and at 1, 2, and 3 months, the median index pain scores were 7, 2, 0, and 0.5, respectively. At 1 month, all pain interference scores were significantly reduced from baseline. Four (16%) patients experienced POP within three months.

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapy for PLM improved pain intensity and pain interference. Palliative radiotherapy may be a viable treatment option for PLM.

Practice patterns for postoperative radiation therapy in patients with metastases to the long bones: a survey of the Japanese Radiation Oncology Study Group

Evidence regarding postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) for metastases to the long bones is lacking. Characterizing the current practice patterns and identifying factors that influence dose-fractionation schedules are essential for future clinical trials. An internet-based survey of the palliative RT subgroup of the Japanese Radiation Oncology Study Group was performed in 2017 to collect data regarding PORT prescription practices and dose-fractionation schedules. Responders were also asked to recommend dose-fractionation schedules for four hypothetical cases that involved a patient with impending pathological fractures and one of four clinical features (poor prognosis, solitary metastasis, radio-resistant primary tumor or expected long-term survival). Responders were asked to indicate their preferred irradiation fields and the reasons for the dose fractionation schedule they chose. Responses were obtained from 89 radiation oncologists (67 institutions and 151 RT plans) who used 22 dose-fractionation schedules, with the most commonly used and recommended schedule being 30 Gy in 10 fractions. Local control was the most common reason for preferring longer-course RT. High-dose fractionated schedules were preferred for oligometastasis, and low-dose regimens were preferred for patients with a poor prognosis; however, single-fraction RT was not preferred. Most respondents recommended targeting the entire orthopedic prosthesis. These results indicated that PORT using 30 Gy in 10 fractions to the entire orthopedic prosthesis is preferred in current Japanese practice and that single-fraction RT was not preferred. Oligometastasis and poor prognosis influenced the selection of high- or low-dose regimens.

Introducing Computed Tomography Simulation-Free and Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes-Monitored Palliative Radiation Therapy into Routine Care: Clinical Outcomes and Implementation Experience

Purpose

Our purpose was to report outcomes of a novel palliative radiation therapy protocol that omits computed tomography simulation and prospectively collects electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs).

Methods and Materials

Patients receiving extracranial, nonstereotactic, linear accelerator-based palliative radiation therapy who met inclusion criteria (no mask-based immobilization and a diagnostic computed tomography within 4 weeks) were eligible. Global pain was scored with the 11-point numerical pain rating scale (NPRS). Patients were coded as having osseous or soft tissue metastases and no/mild versus severe baseline pain (NPRS ≥ 5). Pain response at 4 weeks was measured according to the international consensus (no analgesia adjustment). Transition to ePRO questionnaires was completed in 3 phases. Initially, pain assessments were collected on paper for 11 months, then pilot ePROs for 1 month and then, after adjustments, revised ePROs from 1 year onwards. ePRO feasibility criteria were established with reference to the paper-based process and published evidence.

Results

Between May 2018 and November 2019, 542 consecutive patients were screened, of whom 163 were eligible (30%), and 160 patients were successfully treated. The proportion of patients eligible for the study improved from approximately 20% to 50% by study end. Routine care pain monitoring via ePROs was feasible. One hundred twenty-seven patients had a baseline NPRS recording. Ninety-five patients had osseous (61% severe pain) and 32 had soft tissue (25% severe pain) metastases. Eighty-four patients (66%) were assessable for pain response at 4 weeks. In the 41 patients with severe osseous pain, overall and complete pain response was 78% and 22%, respectively.

Conclusions

By study completion, 50% of patients receiving palliative extracranial radiation therapy avoided simulation, streamlining the treatment process and maximizing patient convenience. Pain response for patients with severe pain from osseous lesions was equivalent to published evidence.

Pain response and quality of life assessment in patients with moderate/severe neuropathic pain due to bone metastasis undergoing treatment with palliative radiotherapy and tapentadol: A prospective multicentre pilot study

INTRODUCTION

To assess pain response rate (RR) and quality of life (QoL), in patients with moderate/severe neuropathic pain (NP) due to bone metastasis (BM) undergoing palliative 3D radiotherapy plus tapentadol.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective multicentre pilot study. Patients were assessed before radiotherapy using the validated questionnaire (Douleur Neuropathique en 4 questions). Response to radiotherapy (8 Gy-30 Gy/1-10fr) at one and two months was assessed according the International Bone Metastases Consensus criteria.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

radiological evidence of BM, NP according to DN4 (cut-off score ≥ 4), no spinal cord compression, worst pain score ≥ 5/10. Nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test compared changes in QoL among response groups.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients (13 men, 4 woman), median age 67 years (42-81), were included. Pre-treatment median pain severity was 7.5 (5-10). Median dose of tapentadol administered before radiotherapy was 100 mg/24 h (100-300 mg). Overall RR 1 month after radiotherapy was 10/16 = 62.5%: 3/16 (18.8%) achieving a complete response (CR) and 7/16 (43.8%) a partial response (PR). Overall RR 2 months after RT was 5/10 (50%): 10% a CR and 40% a PR. ITT RR for this study at 1 and 2 months was 10/17 = 59% and 5/17 = 29%, respectively. Patients responding to radiotherapy had significant improvement in EORTC QLQ-C30 emotional functioning (EF) (p = 0.025) and fatigue symptom scale scores (p = 0.035) one month after radiotherapy. Painful site symptom QLQ-BM22 scores improved 2 months after radiotherapy (p = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

Palliative radiotherapy plus tapentadol shows an acceptable pain response and QoL improvement especially regarding EF, fatigue and painful site symptom scales in patients with moderate/severe NP due to BM. Therefore, it could be an alternative to manage NP in daily practice.

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.