Dexamethasone for the Prevention of a Pain Flare After Palliative Radiation Therapy for Painful Bone Metastases: The Multicenter Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled 3-Armed Randomized Dutch DEXA Study

Impact of Dosing and Duration of Dexamethasone on Serious Corticosteroid-Related Adverse Events

CONTEXT

Corticosteroids are commonly prescribed in oncology, but few studies have examined its adverse events (AEs) compared to placebo control.

OBJECTIVES

Using data from a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial, we evaluated the association between the dose and duration of dexamethasone and serious AEs.

METHODS

This is a pre-planned secondary analysis of the Alleviating Breathlessness in Cancer Patients with Dexamethasone (ABCD) trial in which patients were randomized to dexamethasone 8 mg BID x1 week, then 4 mg BID x1 week or placebo, followed by an optional open-label phase with 4 mg BID x1 week, then 2 mg BID x1 week. The primary outcome was Grade 3+ AEs (CTCAE v4.03). We evaluated the association between AEs and dexamethasone exposure using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 119 cancer patients, 32 received intervention followed by open label (mean exposure 243 mg over 27 days), 47 received intervention with no open label, 20 received placebo followed by open label, and 20 received no dexamethasone. The most common AEs included insomnia (31%), dyspepsia (21%), neuropsychiatric symptoms (18%), and infections (17%). Overall, 38 (32%) had Grade 3+ AEs and 27 (23%) were hospitalized. Patients with the greatest exposure to dexamethasone experienced more Grade 3+ AEs compared to those with no exposure (65% vs. 15%); odds ratio of 15.1 (95% CI 1.4-160.8, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Greater dexamethasone exposure, even at moderate doses, was associated with more serious AEs. Prescribers should cautiously weigh the risks and benefits of dexamethasone use, especially when considering for palliation of symptoms.

Use of Glucocorticoids in Patients With Cancer: Potential Benefits, Harms, and Practical Considerations for Clinical Practice

PURPOSE

Glucocorticoids are commonly used in patients with cancer for symptom relief or as part of their anticancer treatment. Despite their frequent use, indications and dosing regimens are not exclusively evidence-based and can come with a multitude of adverse effects, some of which can be life-threatening. The objective of this review is to update our current state of knowledge on the use of glucocorticoids in adult patients with cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A comprehensive literature review (1949-2022) was conducted using search terms "glucocorticoids," "corticosteroids," and "cancer." Information was organized by main concepts including indications, potential benefits, and prevention and management of common side effects of glucocorticoid therapy, in addition to appropriate dosing and taper regimens.

RESULTS

Glucocorticoids can be highly effective in improving outcomes and quality of life in patients with cancer. Their uses include management of disease manifestations, symptoms, and complications of cancer treatment. The lowest effective dose should be used and treatment duration should be minimized as clinically feasible. Side effects can be minimized by careful monitoring, continued assessment of benefits versus harms, and preventative measures for expected side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides general principles and practical recommendations on the use of glucocorticoids in patients with cancer. Further prospective studies on the outcomes of patients on glucocorticoids may help guide practice.

Dexamethasone Coanalgesic Administration in Steroid Naïve and Steroid Non-Naïve Patients for the Prevention of Pain Flares after Palliative Radiotherapy for Bone Metastases

Objective

Dexamethasone could be an effective prophylactic agent for the prevention of pain flares after palliative radiotherapy (RT) for uncomplicated bone metastases. To date, there are no data on its prophylactic coanalgesic (opioid-sparing) effect after RT in patients with complicated bone metastases compared to uncomplicated ones, which is the aim of our study.

Methods

Twenty-nine American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) III-IV patients, aged ≥18, treated with single-fraction 8 Gy/1 or multi-fraction 20 Gy/5 RT for painful uncomplicated bone metastases (steroid naïve patients, n = 14) or complicated ones (steroid non-naïve patients, n = 15), were examined retrospectively. All patients received parenteral dexamethasone (4 mg or 8 mg daily, 1 hour before RT, followed by the same dose for the next 4 days) along with their background and breakthrough pain opioid intake (morphine equivalents) during their 5-day in-hospital stay. Pain severity (numeric rating scale) and analgesic consumption were recorded at admission, daily during the hospital stay, and for 10 days following treatment. Binary logistic regression was used to determine predictive factors for pain flare occurrence.

Results

A higher ASA score is the only determinant positively influencing opioid consumption (P = 0.018) and pain flare as well (OR = 15.00; 95% CI: 2, 24-100, 48; P = 0.005). Lower dose 4 mg dexamethasone was revealed as a moderate analgesic agent in steroid naïve patients with no side effects, whereas in steroid non-naïve patients the predominantly higher dose 8 mg dexamethasone had minimal impact on pain flares prevention at the expense of more pronounced immunosuppression (P = 0.039).

Conclusions

Irrespective of the supporting evidence of dexamethasone potential for prevention of RT-induced pain flare, our data failed to reveal its efficacy in the real practice world (a case mix of uncomplicated and complicated bone metastases). Further dose-effect bigger studies are needed, identifying optimal doses of dexamethasone intake and its optimal duration in high-risk patients.

Dexamethasone prescribing for cancer pain between palliative care and radiation oncology

PURPOSE

Dexamethasone is a commonly prescribed corticosteroid by both palliative care physicians and radiation oncologists for the treatment of metastatic cancer pain. However, clinical evidence for dexamethasone dose and efficacy is lacking, and prescribing between these different specialties may be influenced by other factors. This study investigates the dexamethasone prescriptions of palliative care physicians and radiation oncologists for cancer pain and their prescription rationales.

METHODS

Palliative care physicians and radiation oncologists in British Columbia, Canada, were surveyed on their preferred dexamethasone prescription in response to 4 case vignettes of patients with metastatic cancer and asked to choose a rationale from a list of options which were then categorized as "habit-based," "results-based," or "evidence-based." Response frequencies between the specialties were compared with odds ratios.

RESULTS

The total daily dose and duration of dexamethasone prescriptions were similar between the specialties. Palliative care physicians were significantly more likely than radiation oncologists to prescribe a single daily dose of dexamethasone rather than a divided dose (OR 3.3 [95% CI 2.0-5.5]). This significant difference persisted when separately analyzing results at different total daily doses. Both specialties were more likely to select habit-based rationales rather than evidence-based rationales, with no significant difference between specialties.

CONCLUSION

These findings show that dexamethasone prescriptions are habit-based and that prescribing habits are different between palliative care physicians and radiation oncologists. Interventions based on these findings could potentially prevent unequal patient care. Further qualitative investigations of physician perceptions are indicated to better understand habit-based corticosteroid prescribing patterns.

ESTRO ACROP guidelines for external beam radiotherapy of patients with uncomplicated bone metastases

After liver and lungs, bone is the third most common metastatic site (Nystrom et al., 1977). Almost all malignancies can metastasize to the skeleton but 80% of bone metastases originate from breast, prostate, lung, kidney and thyroid cancer (Mundy, 2002). Introduction of effective systemic treatment in many cancers has prolonged patients' survival, including those with bone metastases. Bone metastases may significantly reduce quality of life due to related symptoms and possible complications, such as pain and neurologic compromise. The most serious complications of bone metastases are skeletal-related events (SRE), defined as pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, pain, or other symptoms requiring an urgent intervention such as surgery or radiotherapy. In turn, growing access to modern diagnostic tools allows early detection of asymptomatic bone metastases that could be successfully managed with local treatment avoiding development of SRE. The treatment for bone metastases should focus on relieving existing symptoms and preventing new ones. Radiotherapy is the standard of care for patients with symptomatic bone metastases, providing durable pain relief with minimal toxicity and reasonable cost-effectiveness. Historically, the dose was prescribed in one to five fractions and delivered using simple planning techniques. While 3D-conformal radiotherapy is still widely used for treating bone metastases, introduction of highlyconformal radiotherapy techniques such as stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) have opened new therapeutic possibilities that should be considered in selected patients with bone metastases.

Radiotherapy of bone metastases

We present the update of the recommendations of the French society of oncological radiotherapy on bone metastases. This is a common treatment in the management of patients with cancer. It is a relatively simple treatment with proven efficacy in reducing pain or managing spinal cord compression. More complex treatments by stereotaxis can be proposed for oligometastatic patients or in case of reirradiation. In this context, increased vigilance should be given to the risks to the spinal cord.

Prophylactic corticosteroid to prevent pain flare in bone metastases treated by radiotherapy

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic corticosteroids to prevent pain flare (PF) in bone metastases treated with radiotherapy performing a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT).

Materials and methods

RCTs were identified on Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the proceedings of annual meetings through June 2020. We followed the PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. A meta-analysis was performed to assess if corticosteroids reduce the PF, pain progression, and the mean of days with PF compared with the placebo. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Three RCTs with a total of 713 patients treated were included. The corticosteroids reduced the occurrence of early PF 20.5% (51/248) versus 32% (80/250) placebo, OR = 0.55 (95% CI: 0.36-0.82, p = 0.002). The mean days of PF were reduced to 1.6 days (95% CI: 1.3-1.9, p = 0.0001). Prophylactic corticosteroids had more patients with no PF and no pain progression, OR = 1.63 (95% CI: 1.14-2.32, p = 0.007). No significant corticosteroids effect was observed for pain progression (p = ns) and late PF occurrence (p = ns).

Conclusion

Prophylactic corticosteroids reduced the incidence of early PF, the days with PF, resulting in a superior rate of patients with no PF and no pain progression, but with no significant benefit for reducing pain progression or late PF occurrence.

Defining the needs of patients with recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck cancer: An expert opinion

The clinical and biological heterogeneity of head and neck cancer (HNC) is paralleled by a plethora of different symptoms that affect the patient's quality of life. These symptoms include, for instance, pain, fatigue, nutritional issues, airways obstruction, voice alterations and psychological distress. In addition, patients with HNC are prone to a high risk of infection, and may also suffer from acute complications, such as hypercalcemia, spine compression by bone metastasis or bleeding. Prolonging survival is also an inherent expectation for all patients. Addressing the above needs is crucial in all patients with HNC, and especially in those with recurrent and/or metastatic (RM) disease. However, research on how to address patients' needs in RM-HNC remains scarce. This paper defines patients' needs for RM HNC and presents an Expert Opinion on how to address them, proposing also some lines of research.