1x8 Gy versus 5x4 Gy for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression: a matched-pair study of three prognostic patient subgroups

Sustainability in radiation oncology: opportunities for enhancing patient care and reducing CO2 emissions in breast cancer radiotherapy at selected German centers

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Radiotherapy often entails a substantial travel burden for patients accessing radiation oncology centers. The total travel distance for such treatments is primarily influenced by two factors: fractionation schedules and the distances traveled. Specific data on these aspects are not well documented in Germany. This study aims to quantify the travel distances for routine breast cancer patients of five radiation oncology centers located in metropolitan, urban, and rural areas of Germany and to record the CO2 emissions resulting from travel.

METHODS

We analyzed the geographic data of breast cancer patients attending their radiotherapy treatments and calculated travelling distances using Google Maps. Carbon dioxide emissions were estimated assuming a standard 40-miles-per-gallon petrol car emitting 0.168 kg of CO2 per kilometer.

RESULT

Addresses of 4198 breast cancer patients treated between 2018 and 2022 were analyzed. Our sample traveled an average of 37.2 km (minimum average: 14.2 km, maximum average: 58.3 km) for each radiation fraction. This yielded an estimated total of 6.2 kg of CO2 emissions per visit, resulting in 156.2 kg of CO2 emissions when assuming 25 visits (planning, treatment, and follow-up).

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the environmental consequences associated with patient commutes for external-beam radiotherapy, indicating that reducing the number of treatment fractions can notably decrease CO2 emissions. Despite certain assumptions such as the mode of transport and possible inaccuracies in patient addresses, optimizing fractionation schedules not only reduces travel requirements but also achieves greater CO2 reductions while keeping improved patient outcomes as the main focus.

Who should receive single-fraction palliative radiotherapy for gastric cancer bleeding?: An exploratory analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study (JROSG 17-3)

Purpose

Although the Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI) has been used to predict survival in various cancers, to our knowledge, no study has examined its applicability in gastric cancer. This study aimed to determine the baseline PPI cutoff value for recommending single-fraction radiotherapy in patients with bleeding gastric cancer.

Materials and methods

This was a secondary analysis of the Japanese Radiation Oncology Study Group (JROSG) 17-3, a multicenter prospective study of palliative radiotherapy for bleeding gastric cancer. Discrimination was evaluated using a time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve, and the optimal cutoff value was determined using the Youden index. A calibration plot was used to assess the agreement between predicted and observed survival.

Results

We enrolled 55 patients in JROSG 17-3. The respective median survival times were 6.7, 2.8, and 1.0 months (p = 0.021) for patients with baseline PPI scores of ≤ 2, 2 < PPI ≤ 4, and PPI > 4. The areas under the curve for predicting death within 2, 3, 4, and 5 months were 0.813, 0.787, 0.775, and 0.721, respectively. The negative predictive value was highest when survival < 2 months was predicted and the Youden index was highest when the cutoff PPI value was 2. The calibration curve showed a reasonable agreement between the predicted and observed survival.

Conclusion

Baseline PPI is useful for estimating short-term prognosis in patients treated with palliative radiotherapy for gastric cancer bleeding. A cutoff PPI value of 2 for estimating survival ≤ 2 months should be used to recommend single-fraction radiotherapy.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

[Bone metastasis: Efficacy and technical modalities of classical radiotherapy]

Conventional radiotherapy is a pivotal treatment in the management of bone metastasis. It is indicated primarily for palliative, analgesic, or decompressive purposes and in the prevention of severe bone events such as fractures and spinal cord compressions. It should be performed as early as possible from the onset of symptoms or within 14days following a surgical procedure of decompression or bone stabilization. Except in some cases, a pattern of 8Gy single dose is currently recommended, possibly renewable, by being vigilant on associated treatments which some, like antiangiogenics, must be imperatively suspended.

Creation of clinical algorithms for decision-making in oncology: an example with dose prescription in radiation oncology

In oncology, decision-making in individual situations is often very complex. To deal with such complexity, people tend to reduce it by relying on their initial intuition. The downside of this intuitive, subjective way of decision-making is that it is prone to cognitive and emotional biases such as overestimating the quality of its judgements or being influenced by one’s current mood. Hence, clinical predictions based on intuition often turn out to be wrong and to be outperformed by statistical predictions. Structuring and objectivizing oncological decision-making may thus overcome some of these issues and have advantages such as avoidance of unwarranted clinical practice variance or error-prevention. Even for uncertain situations with limited medical evidence available or controversies about the best treatment option, structured decision-making approaches like clinical algorithms could outperform intuitive decision-making. However, the idea of such algorithms is not to prescribe the clinician which decision to make nor to abolish medical judgement, but to support physicians in making decisions in a systematic and structured manner. An example for a use-case scenario where such an approach may be feasible is the selection of treatment dose in radiation oncology. In this paper, we will describe how a clinical algorithm for selection of a fractionation scheme for palliative irradiation of bone metastases can be created. We explain which steps in the creation process of a clinical algorithm for supporting decision-making need to be  performed and which challenges and limitations have to be considered.

Predictors of overall survival in non-small-cell lung cancer patients with metastatic spinal cord compression treated with short-course radiotherapy

Metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) is a condition that impacts directly on the patient's prognosis.

OBJECTIVE

The study purpose was to identify predictors of overall survival in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with MSCC.

METHODS

A cohort study involving NSCLC patients enrolled between 2008 and 2017 was performed. Sixty-four patients treated with short-course radiotherapy were included. Clinical and socio-demographic data were extracted from medical records. Data were analysed using survival analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression analysis.

RESULTS

The median survival time was 2.5 months (95% CI: 1.6-3.5). Patients >60 years had shorter survival than younger patients (HR 1.85; 95% CI 1.06-3.24; p = 0.02), and patients with performance status (PS) >2 had shorter survival than those with PS≤2 (HR 1.93; 95% CI 1.12-3.33; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This study found worse PS and higher age are independent predictors of overall survival in NSCLC patients with MSCC treated with short-course radiotherapy after adjusting the potential confounding factors (PS, age and target therapy).

Radiotherapy challenges in COVID era

The pandemic caused by the new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) associated with a disease named COVID-19 by the World Health Organization that began in late 2019 in Wuhan city has become a global public health problem. Only 2 months later, the new virus affected most countries of the world, the consequence being an overload of health systems, especially Intensive Care Units. Considered a category of patients at high risk of developing severe forms of the disease, cancer patients can develop a severe form of the disease, complicated by acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring mechanical ventilation. Radiotherapy, as a treatment included in the multidisciplinary management of cancer for both curative and palliative purposes, is also affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19-positive or -suspected patients are a special category for which the decision to postpone treatment should be made based on the particularities of tumor biology and the radiobiological effect of a gap in radiation fractions delivery. Emergencies including spinal cord compressions, tumor bleeding, and brain metastases not responsive to corticosteroid treatment, should be considered a priority but the palliative treatment should be limited from one single fraction to maximum five fractions for spinal cord compression and whole brain radiotherapy. Radiotherapy for brain metastases does not bring a benefit in terms of overall survival for patients with life expectancy of days or weeks and dexamethasone treatment is the correct choice in this situation. In all settings, the approach of radiotherapy treatment must be adapted for both scenarios of an outbreak pandemic, when general measures of social distancing and protection by specific equipment of patients and radiotherapy staff are a priority, but also for a long period of coexistence with the virus with possible new “pandemic waves.”

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.

Adapting palliative radiation therapy for bone metastases during the Covid-19 pandemic: GEMO position paper

•

The COVID-19 crisis requires a reorganization of the health system, particularly in radiotherapy.

•

Metastatic patients are particularly fragile.

•

A single 8Gy fraction is recommended for most clinical situations.

The current health crisis caused by COVID-19 is a challenge for oncology treatment, especially when it comes to radiotherapy. Cancer patients are already known to be very fragile and COVID-19 brings about the risk of severe respiratory complications. In order to treat patients safely while protecting medical teams, the entire health care system must optimize the way it approaches prevention and treatment at a time when social distancing is key to stemming this pandemic. All indications and treatment modalities must be re-discussed. This is particularly the case for radiotherapy of bone metastases for which it is possible to reduce the number of sessions, the frequency of transport and the complexity of treatments. These changes will have to be discussed according to the organization of each radiotherapy department and the health situation, while medical teams must remain vigilant about the risks of complications of bone metastases, particularly spinal metastases. In this short piece, the members of the GEMO (the European Study Group of Bone Metastases) offer a number of recommendations to achieve the above objectives, both in general and in relation to five of the most common situations on radiation therapy for bone metastases.

A scoring system to predict local progression-free survival in patients irradiated with 20 Gy in 5 fractions for malignant spinal cord compression

Background

Local progression-free survival (LPFS = stable or improved motor function/resolution of paraplegia during RT without in-field recurrence following RT) is important when treating metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC). An instrument to estimate LPFS was created to identify patients appropriately treated with short-course RT instead of longer-course RT plus/minus decompressive surgery.

Methods

In 686 patients treated with 20 Gy in 5 fractions alone, ten characteristics were retrospectively analyzed for LPFS including age, interval between tumor diagnosis and RT of MSCC, visceral metastases, other bone metastases, primary tumor type, gender, time developing motor deficits, pre-RT gait function, number of vertebrae affected by MSCC, and performance score. Characteristics significantly (p < 0.05) associated with LPFS on multivariate analyses were incorporated in the scoring system. Six-month LPFS rates for significant characteristics were divided by 10, and corresponding points were added.

Results

On multivariate analyses, visceral metastases (p < 0.001), tumor type (p = 0.009), time developing motor deficits (p < 0.001) and performance score (p = 0.009) were associated with LPFS and used for the scoring system. Scores for patients ranged between 24 and 35 points. Three groups were designed: 24–28 (A), 29–31 (B) and 32–35 (C) points. Six-month LPFS rates were 46, 69 and 92%, 12-month LPFS rates 46, 63 and 83%. Median survival times were 2 months (61% died within 2 months), 4 months and ≥ 11 months (median not reached).

Conclusions

Most group A patients appeared sub-optimally treated with 20 Gy in 5 fractions. Patients with survival prognoses ≤2 months may be considered for best supportive care or single-fraction RT, those with prognoses ≥3 months for longer-course RT plus/minus upfront decompressive surgery. Many group B and most group C patients achieved long-time LPFS and appeared sufficiently treated with 20 Gy in 5 fractions. However, based on previous data, long-term survivors may benefit from longer-course RT.