Emergency radiation therapy in modern-day practice: Now or never, or never again ?

Radiation therapy plays a fundamental role in oncological emergencies such as superior vena cava syndrome (SVCS) and metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC). These are two examples of critical complications of metastatic cancer in terms of pain and functional impact (respiratory and/or neurological). The aim of this review is to explore the current indications, treatment options and outcomes for emergency radiotherapy regarding to these complications.Regarding SVCS, studies are mostly retrospective and unanimously demonstrated a beneficial effect of radiotherapy on symptom relief. Spinal cord compression remains an indication for urgent radiotherapy, and should be combined with surgery when possible. The innovative stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) showed promising results, however this technique requires small volumes and more time preparation and therefore is often unsuitable for SVCS and MESCC emergencies.This review concluded that radiotherapy has a central role to play within a multimodal approach for SVCS and MESCC treatment. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of radiation and establish the criteria for selecting patients to benefit from this treatment option.

An Analysis of Clinical and Systemic Factors Associated with Palliative Radiotherapy Delivery and Completion at the End of Life in Alberta, Canada

Radiotherapy (RT) is often utilized for symptom control at the end of life. Palliative RT (pRT) may not be taken to completion by patients, thus decreasing clinical benefits and adversely impacting resource allocation. We determined rates of incomplete pRT and examined predictors of non-completion using an electronic questionnaire. Methods: A questionnaire was embedded within the RT electronic prescribing system for all five cancer centers of Alberta, Canada, between 2017 and 2020. Prescribing radiation oncologists (ROs) were tasked with completing the questionnaire. Treatment variables were collected for 2040 patients prescribed pRT. Details on pRT courses delivered and completed were used to determine rates of incomplete RT. Electronic medical records of a subset of 367 patients randomly selected from the 2040 patients were then analyzed to examine for association of non-completion of RT with patient, disease, and therapy-related factors. Results: Overall, 10% of patients did not complete pRT. The rate of single fractions prescribed as a proportion of all RT fractions increased from 18% (pre-2017: pre-study era) to 29% (2017-2020: study era) (p < 0.0001). After conducting multivariate analysis on the overall group, multiple lifetime malignancies (OR:0.64) or increasing the number of pRT fractions (OR:0.08-0.17) were associated with non-completion. Being selected for stereotactic RT (OR:3.75) or survival > 30 days post-RT prescription (OR:2.20-5.02) were associated with greater rates of RT completion. The ROs' estimates of life expectancy at the time of RT prescription were not predictive of RT completion. In the multivariate analysis of the 367-patient subset, the presence of hepatic metastases (OR 2.59), survival 30-59 days (OR 6.61) and survival 90+ days (OR 8.18) post-RT prescription were associated with pRT completion. Only increasing pRT fractionation (OR:0.05-0.2) was associated with non-completion. Conclusion: One in ten patients prescribed pRT did not complete their treatment course. Decreasing pRT fractionation and improving prognostication in patients near the end of life may decrease rates of incomplete RT courses.

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.

Improving providers' survival estimates and selection of prognosis- and guidelines-appropriate treatment for patients with symptomatic bone metastases: Development of the Bone Metastases Ensemble Trees for Survival Decision Support Platform

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

In the management of symptomatic bone metastases, current practice guidelines do not provide clear methodology for selecting palliative radiotherapy (RT) regimens based on specific patient and disease features. Decision support aids may offer an effective means for translating the complex data needed to render individualised treatment decisions, yet no such tools are available for use in this setting. Thus, we describe the development of the Bone Metastases Ensemble Trees for Survival-Decision Support Platform (BMETS-DSP), which aims to optimise selection of evidence-based, individualised palliative RT regimens.

METHOD

The Ottawa Decision Support Framework was used as the theoretical basis for development of BMETS-DSP. First, we utilised stakeholder input and review of the literature to assess determinants underlying the provider decision. Based on this assessment and iterative stakeholder feedback, we developed the web-based, provider-facing BMETS-DSP. Consistent with the underlying theoretical framework, our design also included assessment of decision quality using the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) certification checklist.

RESULTS

Stakeholder input and review of 54 evidence-based publications identified the following determinants of the provider decision: estimated prognosis, characteristics of the target symptomatic lesion and the primary cancer type, consideration of alternative interventions, access to patient-specific recommendations, and patient preferences. Based on these determinants, we developed the BMETS-DSP that (1) collects patient-specific data, (2) displays an individualised predicted survival curve, and (3) provides case-specific, evidence-based recommendations regarding RT, open surgery, systemic therapy, and hospice referral to aid in the decision-making process. The finalised tool met IPDAS quality requirements. Preliminary results of a pilot assessment suggest impact of clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

We describe the successful development of a provider-facing decision support platform to aid in the provision of palliative RT in better alignment with patient and disease features. Impact of the BMETS-DSP on decision outcomes will be further assessed in a randomised, controlled study.

Multidisciplinary Approach to Patients With Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression: A Diagnostic Therapeutic Algorithm to Improve the Neurological Outcome

Introduction

The morbidity associated with metastatic spinal disease is significant because of spinal cord and/or nerve root compression. The purpose of this paper is to define a diagnostic-therapeutic path for patients with vertebral metastases and from this path to build an algorithm to reduce the devastating consequences of spinal cord compression.

Materials and Methods

The algorithm is born from the experience of a primary care center. A spine surgeon, an emergency room (ER) physician, a neuroradiologist, a radiation oncologist, and an oncologist form the multidisciplinary team. The ER physician or the oncologist intercept the patient with symptoms and signs of a metastatic spinal cord compression. Once the suspicion is confirmed, the following steps of the flow-chart must be triggered. The spine surgeon takes charge of the patient and, on the base of the anamnestic data and neurological examination, defines the appropriate timing for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in collaboration with the neuroradiologist. From the MRI outcome, the spine surgeon and the radiation oncologist consult each other to define further therapeutic alternatives. If indicated, surgical treatment should precede radiation therapy. The oncologist gets involved after surgery for systemic therapy.

Results

In 2021, the Spine and Spinal Cord Surgery department evaluated 257 patients with vertebral metastasis. Fifty-three patients presented with actual or incipient spinal cord compression. Among these, 27 were admitted due to rapid progression of symptoms, neurological deficits and/or spine instability signs. The level was thoracic in 21 cases, lumbar in 4 cases, cervical in 1 case, sacral in 1 case. Fifteen were operated on, 10 of these programmed and 5 in emergency.

Discussion

Patients with a history of malignancy can present to the ER or to the oncology department with symptoms that must be correctly framed in the context of a metastatic involvement. Even when there is no previous cancer history, the patient's pain characteristics and clinical signs must be interpreted to yield the correct diagnosis of vertebral metastasis with incipient or current spinal cord compression. The awareness of the alert symptoms and the application of an integrated paradigm consent to frame the patients with spinal cord compression, obtaining the benefits of a homogeneous step-by-step diagnostic and therapeutic path. Early surgical or radiation therapy treatment gives the best hope for preventing the worsening, or even improving, the deficits.

Conclusions

Metastatic spinal cord compression can cause neurological deficits compromising quality of life. Treatment strategies should be planned comprehensively. A multidisciplinary approach and the application of the proposed algorithm is of paramount importance to optimize the outcomes of these patients.

A pilot study of stereotactic boost for malignant epidural spinal cord compression: clinical significance and initial dosimetric evaluation

Purpose

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) is a devastating complication of advanced malignancy, which can result in neurologic complications and significant deterioration in overall function and quality of life. Most patients are not candidates for optimal surgical decompression and as a result, receive urgent 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) to prevent or attempt to reverse neurologic progression. Multiple trials indicate that response and ambulatory rates after 3DCRT are inferior to surgery. The advent of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has created a method with which a “radiosurgical decompression” boost may facilitate improve outcomes for MESCC patients.

Methods

We are conducting a pilot study to investigate SBRT boost after urgent 3D CRT for patients with MESCC. The aim of the study is to establish feasibility of this two-phase treatment regimen, and secondarily to characterize post-treatment ambulation status, motor response, pain control, quality of life and survival.

Discussion

We describe the study protocol and present a case report of one patient. A quality assurance review was conducted after the first seven patients, and resultant dose-constraints were revised to improve safety and feasibility of planning through more conservative organ at risk constraints. There have been no severe adverse events (grade 3–5) to date. We have illustrated clinical and dosimetric data of an example case, where a patient regained full strength and ambulatory capacity.

Conclusions

Our study aims to determine if SBRT is a feasible option in addition to standard 3DCRT for MESCC patients, with the goal to consider future randomized trials if successful. Having a robust quality assurance process in this study ensures translatability going forward if future trials with multicenter and increased patient representation are to be considered.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov; registration no. NCT03529708; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03529708; First posted May 18, 2018.

Malignant spinal cord compression (MSCC) presentation before and during Covid-19

Introduction:

Malignant spinal cord compression (MSCC) is a serious condition requiring urgent palliative radiotherapy to alleviate symptoms and avoid permanent paralysis. This audit compares the number of patients treated for MSCC before and during Covid-19, their treatment regimes and 30-day mortality rates to assess if the pandemic affected the treatment and the number of patients referred for palliative radiotherapy.

Methods:

A retrospective audit was performed (July–December 2019) and 101 patients were treated for MSCC, an average of 17 patients per month. A further audit was undertaken during Covid-19 (March–May 2020) and 36 patients were treated for MSCC, an average of 12 patients per month in this shorter cohort.

Results:

The results have demonstrated fewer patients presenting during the pandemic and this may be due to patients not wishing to utilise the National Health Service (NHS) during this time. It also highlighted the need to reduce the treatment duration to minimise hospital attendance and lessen the potential for exposure to Covid-19.

Conclusion:

Educating patients at risk of MSCC is essential and all cancer patients should be counselled on symptoms and what to do if they occur. Ensuring clinicians know the warning signs and the referral pathway for MSCC is also key to ensure early presentation and early referral for treatment.

Malignant spinal cord compression

Malignant spinal cord compression (MSCC) is a potentially devastating consequence of cancer. Early recognition of the signs and symptoms of MSCC can allow diagnosis prior to the development of irreversible complications. Information provision to patients and doctors regarding the risk of MSCC and a streamlined pathway for further investigation are both key to improving the outcome for patients developing this condition. Described in this paper is the development of such a pathway at Aberdeen Royal Infirmary.

Non-inferiority randomised phase 3 trial comparing two radiation schedules (single vs. five fractions) in malignant spinal cord compression

Background

The optimal EBRT schedule for MSCC is undetermined. Our aim was to determine whether a single fraction (SF) was non-inferior to five daily fractions (5Fx), for functional motor outcome.

Methods

Patients not proceeding with surgical decompression in this multicentre non-inferiority, Phase 3 trial were randomised to 10 Gy/SF or 20 Gy/5Fx. A change in mobility from baseline to 5 weeks for each patient, was evaluated by a Modified Tomita score: 1 = ‘Walk unaided’, 2 = ‘With walking aid’ and 3 = ‘Bed-bound’. The margin used to establish non-inferiority was a detrimental change of −0.4 in the mean difference between arms.

Results

One-hundred and twelve eligible patients were enrolled. Seventy-three patients aged 30–87 were evaluated for the primary analysis. The 95% CI for the difference in the mean change in mobility scores between arms was −0.12 to 0.6. Since −0.4 is not included in the interval, there is evidence that 10 Gy/SF is non-inferior to 20 Gy/5Fx. One grade 3 AE was reported in the 5Fx arm. Twelve (26%) patients in the 5Fx arm had a Grade 2–3 AE compared with six (11%) patients in the SF arm (p = 0.093).

Conclusion

For mobility preservation, one 10-Gy fraction is non-inferior to 20 Gy in five fractions, in patients with MSCC not proceeding with surgical decompression.

Clinical Trial Registration

Cancer Trials Ireland ICORG 05-03; NCT00968643; EU-20952.

Association of spinal instability due to metastatic disease with increased mortality and a proposed clinical pathway for treatment

OBJECTIVE

Multidisciplinary treatment including medical oncology, radiation oncology, and surgical consultation is necessary to provide comprehensive therapy for patients with spinal metastases. The goal of this study was to review the use of radiation therapy and/or surgical intervention and their impact on patient outcomes.

METHODS

In this retrospective series, the authors identified at their institution those patients with spinal metastases who had received radiation therapy alone or had undergone surgery with or without radiation therapy within a 6-year period. Data on patient age, chemotherapy, surgical procedure, radiation therapy, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), primary tumor pathology, Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS), and survival after treatment were collected from the patient electronic medical records. N - 1 chi-square testing was used for comparisons of proportions. The Student t-test was used for comparisons of means. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. A survival analysis was completed using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty patients with spinal metastases were identified, 109 of whom had undergone surgery with or without radiation therapy. Among the 104 patients for whom the surgical details were reviewed, 34 (33%) had a history of preoperative radiation to the surgical site but ultimately required surgical intervention. In this surgical group, a significantly increased frequency of death within 30 days was noted for the SINS unstable patients (23.5%) as compared to that for the SINS stable patients (2.3%; p < 0.001). The SINS was a significant predictor of time to death among surgical patients (HR 1.11, p = 0.037). Preoperative KPS was not independently associated with decreased survival (p > 0.5) on univariate analysis. One hundred twenty-six patients met the criteria for inclusion in the radiation-only analysis. Ninety-eight of these patients (78%) met the criteria for potential instability (PI) at the time of treatment, according to the SINS system. Five patients (5%) with PI in the radiation therapy group had a documented neurosurgical or orthopedic surgery consultation prior to radiation therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

At the authors' institution, patients with gross mechanical instability per the SINS system had an increased rate of 30-day postoperative mortality, which remained significant when controlling for other factors. Surgical consultation for metastatic spine patients receiving radiation oncology consultation with PI is low. The authors describe an institutional pathway to encourage multidisciplinary treatment from the initial encounter in the emergency department to expedite surgical evaluation and collaboration.

Radiotherapy for metastatic spinal cord compression with increased radiation doses (RAMSES-01): a prospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Patients with metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) and favorable survival prognoses can benefit from radiation doses greater than 30Gy in 10 fractions in terms of improved local progression-free survival (LPFS) and overall survival (OS).

METHODS/DESIGN

This prospective study mainly investigates LPFS after precision radiotherapy (volumetric modulated arc therapy or stereotactic body radiotherapy) with 18 × 2.33Gy in 3.5 weeks. LPFS is defined as freedom from progression of motor deficits during radiotherapy and an in-field recurrence of MSCC following radiotherapy. The maximum relative dose allowed to the spinal cord is 101.5% of the prescribed dose, resulting in an equivalent dose in 2Gy-fractions (EQD2) for radiation myelopathy is 45.5Gy, which is below the tolerance dose of 50Gy according to the Quantitative Analyses of Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic (QUANTEC). The EQD2 of this regimen for tumor cell kill is 43.1Gy, which is 33% higher than for 30Gy in 10 fractions (EQD2 = 32.5Gy). Primary endpoint is LPFS at 12 months after radiotherapy. Secondary endpoints include the effect of 18 × 2.33Gy on motor function, ambulatory status, sensory function, sphincter dysfunction, LPFS at other follow-up times, overall survival, pain relief, relief of distress and toxicity. Follow-up visits for all endpoints will be performed directly and at 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after radiotherapy. A total of 65 patients are required for the prospective part of the study. These patients will be compared to a historical control group of at least 235 patients receiving conventional radiotherapy with 10x3Gy in 2 weeks.

DISCUSSION

If precision radiotherapy with 18 × 2.33Gy results in significantly better LPFS than 10x3Gy of conventional radiotherapy, this regimen should be strongly considered for patients with MSCC and favorable survival prognoses.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04043156. Registered 30-07-2019.

Patterns of practice in palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases in UK centres

Background

There is abundant evidence of the comparative efficacy of single-fraction (SF) radiotherapy and multi-fraction (MF) radiotherapy when treating patients with bone metastases. Despite this, previous surveys have shown SF schedules to be underutilised.

Aim

To determine current patterns of practice in patients with bone metastasis and to investigate the factors that influence practice.

Method

An electronic audit was performed amongst 46 physicians, within 7 hospital trusts in the UK. The audit comprised of four hypothetical cases in which consultants and registrars chose which dose and fractionation they would recommend and their reasons for this recommendation.

Results

SF radiotherapy was the most common radiotherapy schedule in hypothetical cases 1, 3 and 4. SF radiotherapy was recommended by 65% of respondents in case 1, 47% in case 2, 89% in case 3 and 46% in case 4. For case 2, 50% proposed MF radiotherapy. For case 4, 22% of respondents recommended Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SABR). The following deciding factors were cited as influencing choice of an SF schedule: prognosis, published evidence, performance status and spinal cord compression.

Conclusion

The most common radiotherapy schedule selected was SF. However, there were inter-institution differences regarding the use of SF radiotherapy. Furthermore, the survey had shown that a third of respondents recommended an MF regime, despite evidence supporting the efficacy of an SF schedule.

(ICORG 05-03): prospective randomized non-inferiority phase III trial comparing two radiation schedules in malignant spinal cord compression (not proceeding with surgical decompression); the quality of life analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal primary external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) radiation schedule for malignant epidural spinal cord compression (MSCC) remains to be determined. The ICORG 05-03 trial assessed if a 10 Gy single fraction radiation schedule was not inferior to one with 20 Gray (Gy) in five daily fractions, in terms of functional motor outcome, for the treatment of MSCC in patients not proceeding with surgical decompression. This article reports on two of the secondary endpoints, Quality of life (QoL), assessed according to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) version 3.0 (EORTC Data Center, Brussels, Belgium) and pain control assessed using a visual analog scale.

METHODS

A randomized, parallel group, multicenter phase III trial was conducted by Cancer Trials Ireland (formerly All-Ireland Cooperative Oncology Research Group, ICORG), across five hospital sites in Ireland and Northern Ireland. Patients were randomized to 10 Gy single fraction of EBRT or 20 Gy in five fractions in a 1:1 ratio. Patients with baseline and 5-week follow up QoL data are included in this analysis.

FINDINGS

From 2006 to 2014, 112 eligible patients were enrolled for whom 57 were evaluated for this secondary analysis. After adjusting for pre-intervention scores, there was no statistically significant difference in post-treatment Summary scores (excl. FI and QL), or pain scores between the two RT schedules at 5 weeks and 3 months following EBRT. There was a statistically significant relationship between the pretreatment and post-treatment Summary scores (p =  .002) but not between the pre-treatment and post-treatment pain scores.

INTERPRETATION

Primary radiotherapy for the treatment of MSCC significantly improves QoL in patients not proceeding with surgical decompression. After adjusting for pre-intervention scores, there was no statistically significant difference between a 10 Gy single fraction radiation schedule and one with 20 Gy in five daily fractions on post-treatment QoL Summary scores. For most patients, an effective treatment with low burden would be desirable. A single fraction schedule should be considered for this group of patients.

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

BACKGROUND

This study provides separate comparisons of 1 × 8 Gy to 5 × 4 Gy for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) in patients with poor, intermediate and favorable survival prognoses.

METHODS

Patients receiving 1 × 8 Gy were matched to patients receiving 5 × 4 Gy for age, gender, performance status, tumor type, involved vertebrae, other bone metastases, visceral metastases, interval between tumor diagnosis and MESCC, ambulatory status and time developing motor deficits. From a study including patients with poor (N = 156) or intermediate (N = 86) survival prognoses, subgroup analyses were performed. Furthermore, 232 new patients with favorable prognoses matched the same way were included.

RESULTS

In poor prognoses patients, 6-month survival rates were 10% after 1 × 8 Gy and 6% after 5 × 4 Gy (p = 0.38); in-field reRT rates in few patients alive at 6 months were 15 and 2% (p = 0.16). In intermediate prognoses patients, 6-month survival rates were 49% after 1 × 8 Gy and 58% after 5 × 4 Gy (p = 0.30). ReRT rates at 6 months were 23 and 13% (p = 0.25). In favorable prognoses patients, 6-month survival rates were 89% after 1 × 8 Gy and 91% after 5 × 4 Gy. ReRT rates at 6 months were 14 and 3% (p = 0.007). In no subgroup, RT regimen had a significant impact on motor function.

CONCLUSIONS

Since in patients with poor prognoses, outcomes after 1 × 8 Gy and 5 × 4 Gy were not significantly different, 1 × 8 Gy may be an option. In patients with intermediate prognoses, a trend was found in favor of 5 × 4 Gy. In patients with favorable prognoses, need for in-field reRT was greater after 1 × 8 Gy.