Short-course regimen of palliative radiotherapy in complicated bone metastases: a phase i–ii study (SHARON Project)

Classification of Patients With Painful Tumors to Predict Response to Palliative Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

This study aimed to identify factors affecting pain response to develop a patient classification system for palliative radiation therapy (RT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Our prospective observational study (UMIN000044984) provided data on patients who received palliative RT for painful tumors. The eligibility criteria were having a numerical rating scale (NRS) score of 2 or more before treatment and receiving palliative RT between August 2021 and September 2022. Post-RT follow-up was scheduled prospectively at 2, 4, 12, 24, 36, and 52 weeks. Pain response was assessed using the International Consensus Pain Response Endpoints criteria, with the primary outcome being the response rate within 12 weeks. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors affecting pain response and develop the classification system. Each class evaluated the differences in response rate, time to response, and progression.

RESULTS

Of the 488 registered lesions, 366 from 261 patients met the criteria. Most patients had bone metastases (75%), of whom 72% were using opioids and 22% underwent reirradiation. Conventional RT (eg, 8-Gy single fraction, 20 Gy in 5 fractions) was administered to 93% of patients. Over a median of 6.8 months of follow-up, the average NRS decreased from 6.1 to 3.4 at 12 weeks for 273 evaluable lesions, with a 60% response rate. Opioid use and reirradiation negatively affected the response rate in multivariate analysis (P < .01). Lesions were categorized into class 1 (no opioid use and no reirradiation; 89 lesions), class 2 (neither class 1 nor 3; 211 lesions), and class 3 (opioid use and reirradiation; 66 lesions), with respective response rates of 75%, 61%, and 36% (P < .001). Time to response was similar across the classes (P = .91), but the progression rates at 24 weeks differed (11%, 27%, and 63%, respectively; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid use and reirradiation are factors leading to significant variations in pain response rates and time to progression.

Radiation Therapy for Painful Bone Metastases: Fractionation, Recalcification, and Symptom Control

Bone is a common site for metastases, which may cause pain and other skeletal-related events (SRE) in patients with advanced cancer. Since the 1980s, prospective clinical trials have demonstrated the high efficacy of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for pain relief from focal, symptomatic lesions. In uncomplicated bone metastases, which include those without pathologic fracture, evidence of cord compression, or prior surgical intervention, improvement or complete pain relief with radiotherapy is as high as 60%, with no difference in efficacy when radiotherapy is delivered in a single or multiple fractions. The ability to treat with a single fraction makes EBRT an attractive therapy even for patients with poor performance status and/or life expectancy. Even in patients with complicated bone metastases (eg cord compression), several randomized trials have demonstrated similar rates of pain relief in addition to improved functional outcomes such as ambulation. In this review, we summarize the role of EBRT for alleviating painful bone metastases and explore its role for other endpoints including functional outcomes, recalcification, and prevention of SREs.

The tumor core boost study: A feasibility study of radical dose escalation to the central part of large tumors with an integrated boost in the palliative treatment setting

PURPOSE

For patients with large tumors palliative radiotherapy often is the only local treatment option. To prevent toxicity the administered doses are low. Dose escalation to the tumor could be an option to better smyptom control and prolong local control rates. In this prospective study we used a very pragmatic approach with a simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) to an almost geometrically defined tumor core to achieve this. The primary endpoint was to demonstrate feasibility.

METHOD

Patients with solid tumors > 4 cm in diameter of different histologies were eligible in this single arm, prospective, multi-institutional clinical feasibility trial with two treatment concepts: 5 × 5 Gy with an integrated boost to the tumor core of 5 × 10 Gy or 10 × 3 Gy with a boost of 10 × 6 Gy. The objective of dose escalation in this study was to deliver a minimum dose of 150% of the prescribed dose to the gross tumor volume (GTV) tumor core and to reach a maximum of at least 200% in the tumor core.

RESULTS

In all, 21 patients at three study sites were recruited between January 2019 and November 2020 and were almost evenly spread (9 to 12) between the two concepts. The treated planning target volumes (PTV) averaged 389.42 cm³ (range 49.4-1179.6 cm³). The corresponding core volumes were 72.85 cm³ on average (range 4.21-338.3 cm³). Dose escalation to the tumor core with mean doses of 167.7-207.7% related to the nonboost prescribed isodose led to PTV mean doses of 120.5-163.3%. Treatment delivery and short-term follow-up was successful in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Palliative radiotherapy with SIB to the tumor core seems to be a feasible and well-tolerated treatment concept for large tumors. The applied high doses of up to 50 Gy in 5 fractions (or 60 Gy in 10 fractions) did not cause unexpected side effects in the 42 day follow-up period. Further research is needed for more information on efficacy and long-term toxicity.

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.

Short course palliative radiotherapy in advanced solid tumors: a pooled analysis (the SHARON project)

Previous trials showed the tolerability and efficacy of a palliative radiotherapy (RT) regimen (SHARON) based on the 4 fractions delivered in 2 days in different oncological settings. In order to identify possible predictors of symptomatic response, the purpose of this study is to perform a pooled analysis of previous trials. We analyzed the impact on symptomatic response of the following parameters: tumor site, histological type, performance status (ECOG), dominant symptom, and RT dose using the Chi-square test and Fisher's exact test. One-hundred-eighty patients were analyzed. Median RT dose was 20 Gy (range: 14-20 Gy). The overall response rate was 88.8% (95% CI 83.3-92.7%) while pre- and post-treatment mean VAS was 5.3 (± 7.7) and 2.2 (± 2.2), respectively (p < 0.001). The overall response rate of pain, dyspnea, bleeding, dysphagia, and other symptoms was 86.2%, 90.9%, 100%, 87.5%, and 100%, respectively. Comparing the symptomatic effect based on the analyzed parameters no significant differences were recorded. However, patients with locally advanced disease showed a higher rate of symptomatic responses than metastatic ones (97.3% vs 83.0%; p = 0.021). Finally, the complete pain response rate was more than double in patients with mild to moderate (VAS: 4-7) compared to those with severe (VAS > 7) pain (36.0% vs 14.3%; p = 0.028). This pooled analysis showed high efficacy of the SHARON regimen in the relief of several cancer-related symptoms. The markedly and significantly higher complete pain response rate, in patients with mild-moderate pain, suggests early referral to palliative RT for patients with cancer-related pain.

Palliative radiotherapy of bone metastases in octogenarians: How do the oldest olds respond? Results from a tertiary cancer center with 288 treated patients

BACKGROUND

Accompanied by the demographic change, the number of octogenarian cancer patients with bone metastases will increase in the future. Palliative radiotherapy constitutes an effective analgesic treatment; however, as pain perception and bone metabolism change with increasing age, the analgesic efficacy of radiotherapy may be altered in elderly patients. We therefore investigated the treatment outcomes of palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases in octogenarians.

METHODS

Patients between 80 and 89 years undergoing radiotherapy for bone metastases between 2009 and 2019 at a tertiary cancer center were analyzed for patterns-of-care, pain response and overall survival (OS). Logistic regression analyses were carried out to examine parameters associated with pain response, and Cox analyses were conducted to reveal prognostic parameters for OS.

RESULTS

A total of 288 patients with 516 irradiated lesions were included in the analysis. The majority (n = 249, 86%) completed all courses of radiotherapy. Radiotherapy led to pain reduction in 176 patients (61%) at the end of treatment. Complete pain relief at the first follow-up was achieved in 84 patients (29%). Bisphosphonate administration was significantly associated with higher rates of pain response at the first follow-up (p < 0.05). Median OS amounted to 9 months, and 1-year, 2-year and 3-year OS were 43%, 28% and 17%. In the multivariate analysis, ECOG (p < 0.001), Mizumoto score (p < 0.01) and Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) (p < 0.001) were independent prognosticators for OS.

CONCLUSION

Palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases constitutes a feasible and effective analgesic treatment in octogenarian patients. ECOG, Mizumoto score and SINS are prognosic variables for survival and may aid treatment decisions regarding radiotherapy fractionation in this patient group. Single-fraction radiotherapy with 8 Gy should be applied for patients with uncomplicated bone metastases and poor prognosis. Prospective trials focusing on quality of life of these very old cancer patients with bone metastases are warranted to reveal the optimal radiotherapeutic management for this vulnerable population.

Use and Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Trials of Palliative Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

Approximately 50% of all patients with cancer have an indication for radiotherapy, and approximately 50% of radiotherapy is delivered with palliative intent, with the aim of alleviating symptoms. Symptoms are best assessed by patient-reported outcomes (PROs), yet their reliable interpretation requires adequate reporting in publications.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the use and reporting of PROs in clinical trials of palliative radiotherapy.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

This preregistered systematic review searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trials for clinical trials of palliative radiotherapy published from 1990 to 2020. Key eligibility criteria were palliative setting, palliative radiotherapy as treatment modality, and clinical trial design (per National Institutes of Health definition). Two authors independently assessed eligibility. Trial characteristics were extracted and standard of PRO reporting was assessed in adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) PRO extension. The association of the year of publication with the use of PROs was assessed by logistic regression. Factors associated with higher CONSORT-PRO adherence were analyzed by multiple regression. This study is reported following the PRISMA guidelines.

FINDINGS

Among 7377 records screened, 225 published clinical trials representing 24 281 patients were eligible. Of these, 45 trials (20%) used a PRO as a primary end point and 71 trials (31%) used a PRO as a secondary end point. The most prevalent PRO measures were the Numeric Rating Scale/Visual Analogue Scale (38 trials), European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (32 trials), and trial-specific unvalidated measures (25 trials). A more recent year of publication was significantly associated with a higher chance of PROs as a secondary end point (odds ratio [OR], 1.04 [95% CI, 1.00-1.07]; P = .03) but not as primary end point. Adherence to CONSORT-PRO was poor or moderate for most items. Mean (SD) adherence to the extension adherence score was 46.2% (19.6%) for trials with PROs as primary end point and 31.8% (19.8%) for trials with PROs as a secondary end point. PROs as a primary end point (regression coefficient, 9.755 [95% CI, 2.270-17.240]; P = .01), brachytherapy as radiotherapy modality (regression coefficient, 16.795 [95% CI, 5.840-27.751]; P = .003), and larger sample size (regression coefficient, 0.028 [95% CI, 0.006-0.049]; P = .01) were significantly associated with better PRO reporting per extension adherence score.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this systematic review of palliative radiotherapy trials, the use and reporting of PROs had room for improvement for future trials, preferably with PROs as a primary end point.

A SHort course Accelerated RadiatiON therapy (SHARON) dose-escalation trial in older adults head and neck non-melanoma skin cancer

OBJECTIVES

To assess feasibility and safety of a SHort-course Accelerated RadiatiON therapy (SHARON) regimen, in the treatment of non-melanoma skin cancers (NMSC) in older patients.

METHODS

Old patients (age ≥ 80 years) with histological confirmed non-melanoma skin cancers were enrolled. The primary endpoint was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Radiotherapy regimen was based on the delivery of four radiotherapy fractions (5 Gy per fraction) with a twice daily fractionation in two consecutive days. Three different level of dose were administered: 20 Gy (one cycle), 40 Gy (two cycles) and 60 Gy (three cycles).

RESULTS

Thirty patients (median age: 91 years; range: 80-96) were included in this analysis. Among fourteen patients who completed the one cycle, only one (7%) experimented acute G4 skin toxicity. Twelve patients reported an improvement or resolution of baseline symptoms (overall palliative response rate: 85.8%). Nine and seven patients underwent to two and three RT cycles, respectively: of these, no G3 toxicities were recorded. The overall response rate was 100% when three cycles were delivered. The overall six-month symptom-free survival was 78.7% and 77.8% in patients treated with one course and more courses, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-course accelerated radiotherapy in older patients with non-melanoma skin cancers is well tolerated. High doses seem to be more effective in terms of response rate.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This approach could represent an option for older adults with NMSC, being both palliative (one course) or potentially curative (more courses) in the aim, accordingly to the patient's condition.

The Palliative Care in the Metastatic Spinal Tumors. A Systematic Review on the Radiotherapy and Surgical Perspective

Spine represents the most common site for metastatic disease involvement. Due to the close relationship between the spinal cord and critical structures, therapeutical management of metastatic spinal cord disease remains challenging. Spinal localization can lead to neurological sequelae, which can significantly affect the quality of life in patients with a limited life expectancy. The authors conducted a systematic literature review according to PRISMA guidelines in order to determine the impact of the most updated palliative care on spinal metastases. The initial literature search retrieved 2526 articles, manually screened based on detailed exclusion criteria. Finally, 65 studies met the inclusion criteria and were finally included in the systematic review. In the wide scenario of palliative care, nowadays, recent medical or surgical treatments represent valuable options for ameliorating pain and improving patients QoL in such this condition.

Palliative radiotherapy indications during the COVID-19 pandemic and in future complex logistic settings: the NORMALITY model

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged healthcare systems worldwide over the last few months, and it continues to do so. Although some restrictions are being removed, it is not certain when the pandemic is going to be definitively over. Pandemics can be seen as a highly complex logistic scenario. From this perspective, some of the indications provided for palliative radiotherapy (PRT) during the COVID-19 pandemic could be maintained in the future in settings that limit the possibility of patients achieving symptom relief by radiotherapy.

This paper has two aims: (1) to provide a summary of the indications for PRT during the COVID-19 pandemic; since some indications can differ slightly, and to avoid any possible contradictions, an expert panel composed of the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) and the Palliative Care and Supportive Therapies Working Group (AIRO-palliative) voted by consensus on the summary; (2) to introduce a clinical care model for PRT [endorsed by AIRO and by a spontaneous Italian collaborative network for PRT named “La Rete del Sollievo” (“The Net of Relief”)]. The proposed model, denoted “No cOmpRoMise on quality of life by pALliative radiotherapy” (NORMALITY), is based on an AIRO-palliative consensus-based list of clinical indications for PRT and on practical suggestions regarding the management of patients potentially suitable for PRT but dealing with highly complex logistics scenarios (similar to the ongoing logistics limits due to COVID-19).

Material and Methods

First, a summary of the available literature guidelines for PRT published during the COVID-19 pandemic was prepared. A systematic literature search based on the PRISMA approach was performed to retrieve the available literature reporting guideline indications fully or partially focused on PRT. Tables reporting each addressed clinical presentation and respective literature indications were prepared and distributed into two main groups: palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies. These summaries were voted in by consensus by selected members of the AIRO and AIRO-palliative panels. Second, based on the summary for palliative indications during the COVID-19 pandemic, a clinical care model to facilitate recruitment and delivery of PRT to patients in complex logistic scenarios was proposed. The summary tables were critically integrated and shuffled according to clinical presentations and then voted on in a second consensus round. Along with the adapted guideline indications, some methods of performing the first triage of patients and facilitating a teleconsultation preliminary to the first in-person visit were developed.

Results

After the revision of 161 documents, 13 papers were selected for analysis. From the papers, 19 clinical presentation items were collected; in total, 61 question items were extracted and voted on (i.e., for each presentation, more than one indication was provided from the literature). Two tables summarizing the PRT indications during the COVID-19 pandemic available from the literature (PRT COVID-19 summary tables) were developed: palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies. The consensus of the vote by the AIRO panel for the PRT COVID-19 summary was reached. The PRT COVID-19 summary tables for palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies were adapted for clinical presentations possibly associated with patients in complex clinical scenarios other than the COVID-19 pandemic. The two new indication tables (i.e., “Normality model of PRT indications”) for both palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies were voted on in a second consensus round. The consensus rate was reached and strong. Written forms facilitating two levels of teleconsultation (triage and remote visits) were also developed, both in English and in Italian, to evaluate the patients for possible indications for PRT before scheduling clinical visits.

Conclusion

We provide a comprehensive summary of the literature guideline indications for PRT during COVID-19 pandemic. We also propose a clinical care model including clinical indications and written forms facilitating two levels of teleconsultation (triage and remote visits) to evaluate the patients for indications of PRT before scheduling clinical visits. The normality model could facilitate the provision of PRT to patients in future complex logistic scenarios.

Factors affecting symptom presentation in an early-phase clinical trials clinic patient population

Increasing numbers of oncology therapies are being approved based on early-phase single-arm studies. Yet, little is known regarding the use of patient-reported outcomes in single-arm oncology trials testing novel therapies. We examined patient-reported symptom severity and symptom interference with activity- (WAW: work, general activity, walking) and mood-(REM: relations with others, enjoyment of life, mood) related functioning, and their association with factors known to influence symptom severity reporting, in early-phase clinical trials clinic patients. Patients completed the validated MD Anderson Symptom Inventory, containing 13 severity items and six interference items, each rated on a 0-10 scale (higher scores = worse symptom severity/interference). Performance status (ECOG-PS) and age were ascertained. Multiple linear regression was performed. In 248 phase I patients (51% female, 90% ECOG 0-1, and 74% ≤65 years), 67% of patients had ≥seven concurrent symptoms of any severity level, and 51% of patients described ≥three concurrent symptoms as moderate-to-severe (severity rating ≥ 5). Composite symptom severity, WAW and REM were worse in patients with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 vs. 0-1, and worse in patients with ECOG-PS = 1 than in patients with ECOG-PS = 0. Compared with patients over 65y, adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients (18y-39y) and patients aged 40y to 65y had worse composite symptom severity. As expected, being employed full-time/retired was associated with better symptom profiles in phaseI patients. The variation of symptom burden by performance status and age suggest that these factors need to be considered in the design of early-phase trials, particularly if patient-reported symptoms are used as primary/secondary/exploratory endpoints.

Short-Course 2-Dimensional Radiation Therapy in the Palliative Treatment of Esophageal Cancer in a Developing Country: A Phase II Study (Sharon Project)

PURPOSE

Patients with locally advanced and metastatic esophageal cancer are usually affected by cancer-related symptoms, which worsen their performance status and quality of life. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of short-course accelerated radiation therapy for symptomatic palliation in a low resourced setting where only a 2-dimensional radiation therapy (RT) technique was available.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A phase II trial based on Simon's 2-stage design was planned. A total dose of 12 Gy in 4 fractions, twice per day, over 2 days, ≥8 hours apart, using a 2-dimensional conventional RT technique was delivered with a Cobalt 60 unit (Equinox, Best Theratronics, Ottawa, Ontario). Symptoms were graded using the International Atomic Energy Agency scoring system.

RESULTS

A total of 17 patients were treated (male/female = 10/7; median age, 50.0 years; range, 27-78 years; histology: 6 adenocarcinomas and 11 squamous cell carcinomas; tumor site: 4 gastresophageal junction and 13 esophagus). The most frequent baseline symptoms were dysphagia or regurgitation (100%), odynophagia (76%), and chest or back pain (53%). At 1 month after RT, all patients were alive with palliative response rates (complete plus partial) for dysphagia, regurgitation, odynophagia, and chest or back pain of 76%, 82%, 69%, and 56%, respectively. No patients presented acute ≥G3 toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-course accelerated radiation therapy treatment, planned and delivered using a conventional 2-dimensional RT technique, was effective and well tolerated for the symptomatic palliation of locally advanced or metastatic esophageal cancer. This schedule may be useful for RT centers in developing countries to reduce treatment times, costs, and patient waiting times before treatment.