SPIN-01 RADIATION THERAPY ALONE VERSUS RADIATION THERAPY PLUS RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION/VERTEBRAL AUGMENTATION FOR SPINE METASTASIS: TRIAL IN PROGRESS

BACKGROUND

Spine metastases are a common occurrence in cancer patients and result in pain, neurologic deficits, decline in performance status, disability, inferior quality of life (QOL), and reduction in ability to receive cancer-directed therapies. Conventional external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is associated with modest rates of pain relief, high rates of disease recurrence, low response rates for those with radioresistant histologies, and limited improvement in neurologic deficits. The addition of radiofrequency ablation/percutaneous vertebral augmentation (RFA/PVA) to index sites together with EBRT may improve pain response rates and corresponding quality of life.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a single-center, prospective, randomized, controlled trial in patients with spine metastases from T5-L5, stratified according to tumor type (radioresistant vs. radiosensitive) in which patients in each stratum are randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either RFA/PVA and EBRT or EBRT alone. All patients are treated with EBRT to a dose of 20-30 Gy in 5-10 fractions. The target parameters are measured and recorded at the baseline clinic visit, and daily at home with collection of weekly measurements at 1, 2, and 3 weeks after treatment, and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months following treatment with imaging and QOL assessments.

DISCUSSION

The primary objective of this randomized trial is to determine whether RFA/PVA in addition to EBRT improves pain control compared to palliative EBRT alone for patients with spine metastases, defined as complete or partial pain relief (measured using the Numerical Rating Pain Scale [NRPS]) at 3 months. Secondary objectives include determining whether combined modality treatment improves the rapidity of pain response, duration of pain response, patient reported pain impact, health utility, and overall QOL. The results from this study will be used to allow for comparisons to alternative treatment approaches. This trial was activated 5/2020 and is open to accrual.

Radiation therapy alone versus radiation therapy plus radiofrequency ablation/vertebral augmentation for spine metastasis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Spine metastasis is a common occurrence in cancer patients and results in pain, neurologic deficits, decline in performance status, disability, inferior quality of life (QOL), and reduction in ability to receive cancer-directed therapies. Conventional external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is associated with modest rates of pain relief, high rates of disease recurrence, low response rates for those with radioresistant histologies, and limited improvement in neurologic deficits. The addition of radiofrequency ablation/percutaneous vertebral augmentation (RFA/PVA) to index sites together with EBRT may improve pain response rates and corresponding quality of life.

Methods/design

This is a single-center, prospective, randomized, controlled trial in patients with spine metastasis from T5-L5, stratified according to tumor type (radioresistant vs. radiosensitive) in which patients in each stratum will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either RFA/PVA and EBRT or EBRT alone. All patients will be treated with EBRT to a dose of 20–30 Gy in 5–10 fractions. The target parameters will be measured and recorded at the baseline clinic visit, and daily at home with collection of weekly measurements at 1, 2, and 3 weeks after treatment, and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months following treatment with imaging and QOL assessments.

Discussion

The primary objective of this randomized trial is to determine whether RFA/PVA in addition to EBRT improves pain control compared to palliative EBRT alone for patients with spine metastasis, defined as complete or partial pain relief (measured using the Numerical Rating Pain Scale [NRPS]) at 3 months. Secondary objectives include determining whether combined modality treatment improves the rapidity of pain response, duration of pain response, patient reported pain impact, health utility, and overall QOL.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04375891. Registered on 5 May 2020.

Risk factors for adverse outcome in persons with pneumococcal pneumonia

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors for death and respiratory failure in persons with penicillin-sensitive pneumococcal bacteremia and pneumonia from data available at initial clinical evaluation.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review of persons with pneumococcal bacteremia and pneumonia.

SETTING

Tertiary care medical center (University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento).

PATIENTS

One hundred two consecutive adults admitted to the hospital for treatment of pneumococcal pneumonia with bacteremia.

RESULTS

Of 102 persons, 25 (25%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 17 to 34%) died and 17 (16%; 95% CI, 10 to 25%) survived mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure. In univariate analyses, persons with preexisting lung disease (relative risk [RR], 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.1), initial body temperature < 38 degrees C (RR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.6), or nosocomial infections (RR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.8 to 3.6) or who were > or = 48 years old (RR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.5 to 4.8) were at greater risk for adverse outcomes than persons without these risk factors. Of 25 persons without these risk factors, only one (4%; 95% CI, 0 to 20%) died, and the remaining 24 persons did not require intensive care. Using these risk factors in a multivariate logistic model, death or respiratory failure would have been predicted in 67% of persons and better outcome predicted in 83% of the persons. In multivariate analysis, nosocomial infection was the greatest risk factor (adjusted odds ratio, 17.3; 95% CI, 3.1 to 98).

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors identified at hospital admission can predict the outcome in persons with pneumococcal pneumonia and bacteremia. Identifying these factors may allow earlier use of intensive care or more aggressive treatment. Independent of age, nosocomially acquired infections were the greatest risk factor for death or respiratory failure.