Combined hepatic artery 5-fluorouracil and irradiation of liver metastases. A randomized study

Electrocoagulation for liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Primary liver tumours and liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma are two of the most common malignant tumours to affect the liver. The liver is second only to the lymph nodes as the most common site for metastatic disease. More than half of the people with metastatic liver disease will die from metastatic complications. Electrocoagulation by diathermy is a method used to destroy tumour tissue, using a high-frequency electric current generating high temperatures, applied locally with an electrode (needle, blade, or ball). The objective of this method is to destroy the tumour completely, if possible, in a single session. With the time, electrocoagulation by diathermy has been replaced by other techniques, but the evidence is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of electrocoagulation by diathermy, administered alone or with another intervention, versus no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments in people with liver metastases.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP, and FDA to October 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered all randomised trials that assessed beneficial and harmful effects of electrocoagulation by diathermy, administered alone or with another intervention, versus comparators, in people with liver metastases, regardless of the location of the primary tumour.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias of the included trial using predefined risk of bias domains, and presented the review results incorporating the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one randomised clinical trial with 306 participants (175 males; 131 females) who had undergone resection of the sigmoid colon, and who had five or more visible and palpable hepatic metastases. The diagnosis was confirmed by histological assessment (biopsy) and by carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level. The trial was conducted in Iraq. The age of participants ranged between 38 and 79 years. The participants were randomised to four different study groups. The liver metastases were biopsied and treated (only once) in three of the groups: 75 received electrocoagulation by diathermy alone, 76 received electrocoagulation plus allopurinol, 78 received electrocoagulation plus dimethyl sulphoxide. In the fourth intervention group, 77 participants functioning as controls received a vehicle solution of allopurinol 5 mL 4 x a day by mouth; the metastases were left untouched. The status of the liver and lungs was followed by ultrasound investigations, without the use of a contrast agent. Participants were followed for five years. The analyses are based on per-protocol data only analysing 223 participants. We judged the trial to be at high risk of bias. After excluding 'nonevaluable patients', the groups seemed comparable for baseline characteristics. Mortality due to disease spread at five-year follow-up was 98% in the electrocoagulation group (57/58 evaluable people); 87% in the electrocoagulation plus allopurinol group (46/53 evaluable people); 86% in the electrocoagulation plus dimethyl sulphoxide group (49/57 evaluable people); and 100% in the control group (55/55 evaluable people). We observed no difference in mortality between the electrocoagulation alone group versus the control group (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.03; 113 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We observed lower mortality in the electrocoagulation combined with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide group versus the control group (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95; 165 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain regarding post-operative deaths between the electrocoagulation alone group versus the control group (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.12; 152 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and between the electrocoagulation combined with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide groups versus the control group (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09 to 10.86; 231 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial authors did not report data on number of participants with other adverse events and complications, recurrence of liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, tumour response measures, and health-related quality of life. Data on failure to clear liver metastases were not provided for the control group. There was no information on funding or conflict of interest. We identified no ongoing trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence on the beneficial and harmful effects of electrocoagulation alone or in combination with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide in people with liver metastases is insufficient, as it is based on one randomised clinical trial at low to very low certainty. It is very uncertain if there is a difference in all-cause mortality and post-operative mortality between electrocoagulation alone versus control. It is also uncertain if electrocoagulation in combination with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide may result in a slight reduction of all-cause mortality in comparison with a vehicle solution of allopurinol (control). It is very uncertain if there is a difference in post-operative mortality between the electrocoagulation combined with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide group versus control. Data on other adverse events and complications, failure to clear liver metastases or recurrence of liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, tumour response measures, and health-related quality of life were most lacking or insufficiently reported for analysis. Electrocoagulation by diathermy is no longer used in the described way, and this may explain the lack of further trials.

Transarterial (chemo)embolisation versus no intervention or placebo for liver metastases

BACKGROUND

The liver is affected by two of the most common groups of malignant tumours: primary liver tumours and liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma or other extrahepatic primary cancers. Liver metastases are significantly more common than primary liver cancer, and long-term survival rate after radical surgical treatment is approximately 50%. However, R0 resection (resection for cure) is not feasible in the majority of people; therefore, other treatments have to be considered. One possible option is based on the concept that the blood supply to hepatic tumours originates predominantly from the hepatic artery. Transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) of the hepatic artery can be achieved by administering a chemotherapeutic drug followed by vascular occlusive agents, and can lead to selective necrosis of the liver tumour while it may leave normal parenchyma virtually unaffected. This can also be performed without chemotherapy, which is called bland transarterial embolisation (TAE).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of TAE or TACE compared with no intervention or placebo in people with liver metastases.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and four more databases (December 2019). We also searched two trials registers and the US Food and Drug Administration database (September 2019).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing beneficial and harmful effects of TAE or TACE compared with no intervention or placebo for liver metastases.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We extracted information on participant characteristics, interventions, study outcomes, study design, and trial methods. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE. We resolved disagreements by discussion.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one randomised clinical trial with 61 participants (43 male and 18 female) with colorectal cancer with liver metastases: 22 received transarterial embolisation (TAE; hepatic artery embolisation), 19 received transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE; 5-fluorouracil hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy with degradable microspheres), and 20 received 'no active therapeutic intervention' as a control. Most tumours were synchronous, unresectable metastases involving up to 75% of the liver. Participants were followed for a minimum of seven months. The trial was at high risk of bias. Very-low-certainty evidence found inconclusive results for mortality at 44 months between the TAE and TACE versus no intervention groups (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 1.06; 61 participants). Local recurrence was reported in 10 participants without any details about the group allocation. Very-low-certainty evidence found little or no difference in mortality between the TAE and no intervention groups (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.10; 42 participants). Median survival was 7 months from trial entry (range 2 to 44 months) in the TAE group and 7.9 months (range 1 to 26 months) in the control group, and 8.7 months after diagnosis (range 2 to 49 months) in the TAE group and 9.6 months (range 1 to 27 months) in the control group. The trial authors reported the differences were not statistically significant. There were no reported side effects in the control group. In the TAE group, 18 participants experienced short-term symptoms of 'post-embolisation syndrome', which were relieved with symptomatic treatment; one participant also had a local puncture site haematoma. Very-low-certainty evidence found little or no difference in mortality between the TACE and no intervention groups (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.07; 39 participants). Median survival in the TACE group was 10.7 months (range 3 to 38 months) from trial entry, and 13.0 months (range 3 to 38 months) after diagnosis. The trial authors reported that differences between groups were not statistically significant. All participants experienced short-term nausea, with or without vomiting, immediately after treatment; one participant developed a wound infection, and one developed deep vein thrombosis. The trial did not measure failure to clear liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, tumour response measures, or health-related quality of life. Cancer Research Campaign, a non-profit organisation, provided a grant for the trial; Pharmacia Ltd. delivered the Port-a-Cath arterial delivery systems and degradable starch microspheres. We identified one ongoing trial comparing TACE plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in people with unresectable colorectal liver metastases who failed with first-line chemotherapy (NCT03783559).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on one, small randomised trial at high risk of bias, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of TAE or TACE versus no active therapeutic intervention on mortality for people with liver metastases as the true effect may be substantially different. The trial did not measure failure to clear liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, tumour response measures, or health-related quality of life. Short-term, minor adverse events were recorded in the intervention groups only. Large trials, following current standards of conduct and reporting, are required to explore the benefits and harms of TAE or TACE compared with no intervention or placebo in people with resectable and unresectable liver metastasis.

Percutaneous ethanol injection for liver metastases

BACKGROUND

The liver is affected by two of the most common groups of malignant tumours: primary liver tumours and liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma or other extrahepatic primary cancers. Liver metastases are significantly more common than primary liver cancer, and the reported long-term survival rate after radical surgical treatment is approximately 50%. However, R0 resection (resection for cure) is not feasible in the majority of patients; therefore, other treatments have to be considered. One of these is percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI), which causes dehydration and necrosis of tumour cells, accompanied by small-vessel thrombosis, leading to tumour ischaemia and destruction of the tumour.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI) compared with no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments in people with liver metastases.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 10 September 2019: the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE Ovid; Embase Ovid; Science Citation Index Expanded; Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science; Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS); and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). We also searched clinical trials registers such as ClinicalTrials.gov, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (17 September 2019).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing beneficial and harmful effects of percutaneous ethanol injection and its comparators (no intervention, other ablation methods, systemic treatments) for liver metastases.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard methodological procedures as outlined by Cochrane. We extracted information on participant characteristics, interventions, study outcomes, study design, and trial methods. Two review authors performed data extraction and assessed risk of bias independently. We assessed the certainty of evidence by using GRADE. We resolved disagreements by discussion.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified only one randomised clinical trial comparing percutaneous intratumour ethanol injection (PEI) in addition to transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation (TACE) versus TACE alone. The trial was conducted in China and included 48 trial participants with liver metastases: 25 received PEI plus TACE, and 23 received TACE alone. The trial included 37 male and 11 female participants. Mean participant age was 49.3 years. Sites of primary tumours included colon (27 cases), stomach (12 cases), pancreas (3 cases), lung (3 cases), breast (2 cases), and ovary (1 case). Seven participants had a single tumour, 15 had two tumours, and 26 had three or more tumours in the liver. The bulk diameter of the tumour on average was 3.9 cm, ranging from 1.2 cm to 7.6 cm. Participants were followed for 10 months to 43 months. The trial reported survival data after one, two, and three years. In the PEI + TACE group, 92%, 80%, and 64% of participants survived after one year, two years, and three years; in the TACE alone group, these percentages were 78.3%, 65.2%, and 47.8%, respectively. Upon conversion of these data to mortality rates, the calculated risk ratio (RR) for mortality at last follow-up when PEI plus TACE was compared with TACE alone was 0.69 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 1.33; very low-certainty evidence) after three years of follow-up. Local recurrence was 16% in the PEI plus TACE group and 39.1% in the TACE group, resulting in an RR of 0.41 (95% CI 0.15 to 1.15; very low-certainty evidence). Forty-five out of a total of 68 tumours (66.2%) shrunk by at least 25% in the PEI plus TACE group versus 31 out of a total of 64 tumours (48.4%) in the TACE group. Trial authors reported some adverse events but provided very few details. We did not find data on time to mortality, failure to clear liver metastases, recurrence of liver metastases, health-related quality of life, or time to progression of liver metastases. The single included trial did not provide information on funding nor on conflict of interest.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence for the effectiveness of PEI plus TACE versus TACE in people with liver metastases is of very low certainty and is based on one small randomised clinical trial at high risk of bias. Currently, it cannot be determined whether adding PEI to TACE makes a difference in comparison to using TACE alone. Evidence for benefits or harms of PEI compared with no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments is lacking.

Cryotherapy for liver metastases

BACKGROUND

The liver is affected by two of the most common groups of malignant tumours: primary liver tumours and liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Liver metastases are significantly more common than primary liver cancer and long-term survival rates reported for patients after radical surgical treatment is approximately 50%. However, R0 resection (resection for cure) is not feasible in the majority of patients. Cryotherapy is performed with the use of an image-guided cryoprobe which delivers liquid nitrogen or argon gas to the tumour tissue. The subsequent process of freezing is associated with formation of ice crystals, which directly damage exposed tissue, including cancer cells.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of cryotherapy compared with no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments in people with liver metastases.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, and six other databases up to June 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing beneficial and harmful effects of cryotherapy and its comparators for liver metastases, irrespective of the location of the primary tumour.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We extracted information on participant characteristics, interventions, study outcomes, and data on the outcomes important for our review, as well as information on the design and methodology of the trials. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias in each study. One review author performed data extraction and a second review author checked entries.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no randomised clinical trials comparing cryotherapy versus no intervention or versus systemic treatments; however, we identified one randomised clinical trial comparing cryotherapy with conventional surgery. The trial was conducted in Ukraine. The trial included 123 participants with solitary, or multiple unilobar or bilobar liver metastases; 63 participants received cryotherapy and 60 received conventional surgery. There were 36 women and 87 men. The primary sites for the metastases were colon and rectum (66.6%), stomach (7.3%), breast (6.5%), skin (4.9%), ovaries (4.1%), uterus (3.3%), kidney (3.3%), intestines (1.6%), pancreas (1.6%), and unknown (0.8%). The trial was not reported sufficiently enough to assess the risk of bias of the randomisation process, allocation concealment, or presence of blinding. It was also not possible to assess incomplete outcome data and selective outcome reporting bias. The certainty of evidence was low because of risk of bias and imprecision.The participants were followed for up to 10 years (minimum five months). The trial reported that the mortality at 10 years was 81% (51/63) in the cryotherapy group and 92% (55/60) in the conventional surgery group. The calculated by us relative risk (RR) with 95% Confidence Interval (CI) was: RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.02. We judged the evidence as low-certainty evidence. Regarding adverse events and complications, separately and in total, our calculation showed no evidence of a difference in recurrence of the malignancy in the liver: 86% (54/63) of the participants in the cryotherapy group and 95% (57/60) of the participants in the conventional surgery group developed a new malignancy (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.01; low-certainty evidence). The frequency of reported complications was similar between the cryotherapy group and the conventional surgery group, except for postoperative pain. Both insignificant and pronounced pain were reported to be more common in the cryotherapy group while intense pain was reported to be more common in the conventional surgery group. However, the authors did not report whether there was any evidence of a difference. There were no intervention-related mortality or bile leakages.We identified no evidence for health-related quality of life, cancer mortality, or time to progression of liver metastases. The study reported tumour response in terms of the carcinoembryonic antigen level in 69% of participants, and reported results in the form of a graph for 30% of participants. The carcinoembryonic antigen level was lower in the cryotherapy group, and decreased to normal values faster in comparison with the control group (P < 0.05).

FUNDING

the trial did not provide information on funding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for the effectiveness of cryotherapy versus conventional surgery in people with liver metastases is of low certainty. We are uncertain about our estimate and cannot determine whether cryotherapy compared with conventional surgery is beneficial or harmful. We found no evidence for the benefits or harms of cryotherapy compared with no intervention, or versus systemic treatments.

Radiotherapy of Liver Malignancies. From Whole Liver Irradiation to Stereotactic Hypofractionated Radiotherapy

Aims and background

Until recently radiotherapy of hepatic malignancies has played a limited role due to the well-known limited radiotolerance of the liver. The aim of this paper is to review the available data on the risk of radiation-induced liver disease (RILD) and to define the modern role of radiotherapy in the management of patients with metastatic or primary liver malignancies.

Methods

The advent of three-dimensional conformal treatment planning with dose-volume histogram analysis has made the study of partial liver irradiation possible. Limited portions of the liver may withstand high doses of radiation with minimal risk of RILD. Patients with solitary unresectable liver tumors may be treated with high-dose radiotherapy with curative intent. Recently, the feasibility of stereotactically guided treatment techniques with a single fraction or few treatment sessions has been explored in numerous institutions.

Results

The radiation tolerance of the whole liver found by several investigations is in the order of approximately 30 Gy, which seriously restricts its clinical application. The role of whole liver irradiation therefore appears of limited benefit in the palliation of patients with multiple liver metastases. The use of three-dimensional conformal techniques has made partial liver irradiation possible to doses in the 70–80 Gy range with conventional fractionation. At least two published series have reported improved local control and survival rates with dose escalation with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in patients with unresectable liver metastases. Similar outcomes have been recently reported with single dose (or hypofractionated) stereotactic radiotherapy both in metastatic and primary hepatic malignancies with minimal morbidity. Accurate target delineation and treatment reproducibility are the key to the success of this novel treatment approach, and specific treatment planning techniques and patient setup procedures must be developed to implement it.

Conclusions

Stereotactic high-dose radiotherapy is technically feasible for the treatment of inoperable liver malignancies, with the potential of high local control and low morbidity. Definitive evidence on the clinical advantages of this technique over other more established treatments can only be gathered from well-designed clinical studies.

Resurrection of whole liver radiotherapy-A case report

INTRODUCTION

This is a case report of a patient of lymphoma with liver metastasis who had persistent pain and jaundice despite multiple lines of chemotherapy. She underwent palliative liver irradiation. This is an uncommon modality due to fear of radiation induced hepatitis. We reviewed literature available on the use of liver irradiation for palliation and concluded that it can be safely used with good results. A 33-year-old female with Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma (NHL) presented with obstructive jaundice. She underwent stenting followed by chemotherapy. She was lost to follow up to later present with a progressively increasing right hypochondrial mass, pain and icterus. Ultrasound abdomen revealed massive hepatomegaly with hypodense lesions in both liver lobes and centring the porta with dilatation of biliary radicals. Despite multiple lines of chemotherapy and use of opioids, there was no symptomatic relief in pain, size of mass or any decrease in biochemical parameters. Then she was offered palliative radiation in the form of partial liver irradiation to a dose of 21Gy/7 fractions. She had >50% pain relief after 2 fractions and was off opioids by last fraction. Liver span reduced from 6cm to 1cm below costal margin in mid clavicular line. Radiologically 60% reduction in size of liver lesions was observed. Also, a decreasing trend in biochemical parameters was observed. Use of whole or partial liver irradiation is rare in clinical practice due to fear of radiation induced hepatitis by conventional techniques. Newer techniques of delivering radiation can highly improvise accuracy and permit further dose escalation.

Radiotherapy for liver metastases: a review of evidence

Over the past decade, there has been an increasing use of radiotherapy (RT) for the treatment of liver metastases. Most often, ablative doses are delivered to focal liver metastases with the goal of local control and ultimately improving survival. In contrast, low-dose whole-liver RT may be used for the palliation of symptomatic diffuse metastases. This review examines the available clinical data for both approaches. The review found that RT is effective both for local ablation of focal liver metastases and for palliation of patients with symptomatic liver metastases. However, there is a lack of a high level of evidence from randomized clinical trials.

Global approach to hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: indication and outcome of intra-arterial chemotherapy and other hepatic-directed treatments

Liver metastases of colorectal cancer is present in more than 20% of new diagnosed patients and in 40-60% of relapsed patients. It is a life-threatening prognostic aspect. Hepatic resection, when possible, is the best therapeutic modality, although the overall survival rate is still low (30%). Angiography and intraoperative ultrasonography are useful for resection. The number of hepatic metastases and the surgical margin are probably the most significant prognostic factors. Colorectal cancer may spread predominantly to the liver making regional treatment strategies viable options. Subtotal hepatic resections and segmentectomies are potentially curable procedures for single or small numbers of hepatic metastases without other sites of disease. However, there have been no prospective randomized trials comparing patients with unresected liver metastases and resected metastases. Regional chemotherapy with floxuridine seems usefull combined with hepatic resection or as palliative therapy. Gastric ulcer and biliary sclerosis are the main related toxicities. Patients with localized, unresectable hepatic metastases or concomitant bad medical condition may be candidates for radiation, percutaneous ethanol injection, cryosurgery, percutaneous radiofrequency, hypoxic flow-stop perfusions with bioreductive alkylating agents, hepatic arterial ligation, embolization and chemoembolization. These new hepatic-directed modalities of treatment are being investigated and may offer new approaches to providing palliation and prolonging survival. This review will report the possibilities of intra-arterial chemotherapy and other novel hepatic-directed approaches to the treatment of liver metastases from colorectal cancer.

Current treatment for colorectal cancer metastatic to the liver

Surgery is currently the only available treatment option which offers the potential for cure for patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Of those who undergo a potentially curative operation for their primary tumour but subsequently recur, almost 80% will develop evidence of metastatic disease within the liver. Greater experience and improvements in technique in liver surgery, with an increasingly aggressive surgical approach to metastatic colorectal cancer to the liver, has resulted in prolonged disease-free survival with 5-year rates varying from 21% to 48%. In order to increase these numbers further and to treat patients not eligible for surgical therapy, new treatment modalities and strategies have been developed. This review presents an update of the current treatment for colorectal disease metastatic to the liver.

Radiotherapy for palliation of symptoms in incurable cancer

Approximately one half of prescribed radiotherapy is given for palliation of symptoms due to incurable cancer. Distressing symptoms including pain, bleeding, and obstruction can often be relieved with minimal toxic effects. Painful osseous metastasis is common in oncologic practice. Ninety percent of patients with symptomatic bone metastases obtain some pain relief with a lowdose, brief course of palliative radiotherapy. One half of the responding patients may experience complete pain relief. A single dose of 800 cGy in the setting of painful bone metastasis may provide pain control comparable to more protracted treatment at a higher dose of radiation. Patients with lytic disease in weight-bearing bones, particularly in the presence of cortical destruction, should be considered for prophylactic surgical stabilization of their condition. Routinely a brief, fractionated course of radiotherapy is given postoperatively. Pain due to multiple bone metastases uncontrolled by analgesics can be managed with single doses of halfbody irradiation. Doses of 600 cGy delivered to the upper half-body (above the umbilicus) and 800 cGy to the lower half-body (from the umbilicus to the middle of the femur) will provide some pain relief in 73% of patients. Half-body techniques have been investigated as prophylactic treatment, as a complement to local-field irradiation, and as fractionated rather than singledose therapy. Although intravenous administration of strontium 89 has been associated with myelosuppression, this treatment has been shown (a) to relieve pain due to bone metastasis and (b) to delay development of new painful sites. Recent data from phase III trials demonstrated that bisphosphonates have a role in reducing skeletal morbidity due to bone metastasis. Bone pain was reduced, and the incidence of pathologic fracture and the need for future radiotherapy was decreased. Radiotherapy relieves clinical symptoms in 70% to 90% of patients with brain metastases. Brief treatment schedules (e.g., 2000 cGy in five fractions over 1 week) are as effective as more prolonged therapy. Patients with solitary brain metastasis and no extracranial disease or controlled extracranial disease should be considered for surgical resection, because phase III data indicate enhanced survival with such an approach. Whole-brain radiotherapy is routinely administered postoperatively. A phase III study is examining the impact of accelerated fractionated doses of radiotherapy (two treatments per day) on survival of patients with brain metastases. Stereotaxic radiosurgical treatment is becoming increasingly available and permits delivery of radiation to metastatic intracranial tumor with minimal exposure of normal surrounding brain This treatment is most commonly used at the time of a solitary recurrence of disease in patients who previously received whole-brain radiotherapy. A role for this modality in newly diagnosed brain metastases remains to be defined. Chest symptoms are common in patients with locally advanced lung cancer and are effectively palliated with one 1000 cGy or two 850 cGy one fraction doses of radiation to the thoracic inlet and mediastinum. Chest pain and hemoptysis are more effectively palliated than cough and dyspnea. In patients with stage III cancer there is no compelling evidence that radiotherapy confers a survival advantage, and it may be reasonable to administer thoracic radiotherapy only when the patient has significant symptoms and the goal is to achieve control of these symptoms. Approximately 75% of the cases of superior vena cava syndrome are due to lung cancer, and small-cell lung cancer is the most common histologic type. A histologic diagnosis should be obtained before treatment is started, because detection of lymphoma or small-cell carcinoma would necessitate systemic therapy. Eighty percent of the patients with vena cava syndrome due to malignant disease achieve symptom relief with a brief, fractionated, palliative course of rad