Pain Response After Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Versus Conventional Radiation Therapy in Patients With Bone Metastases-A Phase 2 Randomized Controlled Trial Within a Prospective Cohort

External Beam Radiation Therapy for Palliation of Symptomatic Bone Metastases: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for palliative external beam radiation therapy (RT) in symptomatic bone metastases.

METHODS

The ASTRO convened a task force to address 5 key questions regarding palliative RT in symptomatic bone metastases. Based on a systematic review by the Agency for Health Research and Quality, recommendations using predefined consensus-building methodology were established; evidence quality and recommendation strength were also assessed.

RESULTS

For palliative RT for symptomatic bone metastases, RT is recommended for managing pain from bone metastases and spine metastases with or without spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Regarding other modalities with RT, for patients with spine metastases causing spinal cord or cauda equina compression, surgery and postoperative RT are conditionally recommended over RT alone. Furthermore, dexamethasone is recommended for spine metastases with spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Patients with nonspine bone metastases requiring surgery are recommended postoperative RT. Symptomatic bone metastases treated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy in 1 fraction (800 cGy/1 fx), 2000 cGy/5 fx, 2400 cGy/6 fx, or 3000 cGy/10 fx. Spinal cord or cauda equina compression in patients who are ineligible for surgery and receiving conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1 fx, 1600 cGy/2 fx, 2000 cGy/5 fx, or 3000 cGy/10 fx. Symptomatic bone metastases in selected patients with good performance status without surgery or neurologic symptoms/signs are conditionally recommended stereotactic body RT over conventional palliative RT. Spine bone metastases reirradiated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1 fx, 2000 cGy/5 fx, 2400 cGy/6 fx, or 2000 cGy/8 fx; nonspine bone metastases reirradiated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1 fx, 2000 cGy/5 fx, or 2400 cGy/6 fx. Determination of an optimal RT approach/regimen requires whole person assessment, including prognosis, previous RT dose if applicable, risks to normal tissues, quality of life, cost implications, and patient goals and values. Relatedly, for patient-centered optimization of treatment-related toxicities and quality of life, shared decision making is recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on published data, the ASTRO task force's recommendations inform best clinical practices on palliative RT for symptomatic bone metastases.

Meta-Analysis of Stereotactic Body Radiation ThERapy in Nonspine BONE Metastases (MASTER-BONES)

PURPOSE

The efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for patients with nonspine bone metastases remains in question. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate SBRT treatment outcomes in nonspine bone metastases.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Eligible studies were retrieved from MEDLINE, Embase, Scielo, the Cochrane Library, and annual meeting proceedings through July 6, 2023. We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guideline recommendations. Quantitative synthesis was performed using a random-effects model. Meta-regression was performed to determine correlation between clinical and treatment factors with the local failure (LF) and fracture rate. P values ≤.05 were deemed statistically significant.

RESULTS

Seven retrospective studies, with a total of 807 patients (1048 lesions) treated with SBRT were included, with median follow-up ranging from 7.6 to 26.5 months. The most common SBRT sites were pelvis (39.2%), ribs (25.8%), femur (16.7%), and humerus/shoulder region (8.7%). At 1 year, the LF and fracture rate were 7% (95% CI, 5.5%-8.5%; I2 = 0; n = 75/1048) and 5.3% (95% CI, 3%-7.5%; I2 = 0; n = 65/1010). The 2-year cumulative LF incidence was 12.1% (95% CI, 10%-15.5%). The overall survival and progression-free survival at 1 year were 82% (95% CI, 75%-88%; I2 = 82%; n = 746/867) and 33.5% (95% CI, 26%-41%; I2 = 0%; n = 51/152), with a median of 20.2 months (95% CI, 10.9-49.1 months) and 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.3-10.3 months) for overall survival and progression-free survival, respectively. Meta-regression analysis revealed a significant relationship between planning target volume and fracture rate (P < .05). Ribs (2.5%) followed by the femur (1.9%; 95% CI, 0%-6.1%) were the most common fracture sites. The occurrence of pain flare, fatigue, and dermatitis were 7%, 5.4%, and 0.65%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Stereotactic body radiation proves both safety and efficacy for non-spine bone metastases, and although serious complications (grade 3) are rare, one case of grade 5 complication was reported. Careful consideration of target volume is crucial due to its link with a higher fracture risk.

Hyoid metastasis an unusual location from lung cancer

Bone metastases from lung cancer account for 8.5%, with those located in the hyoid bone being extremely rare. In this editorial, we made a review about Hsu et al case report highlighted the importance of palliative radiotherapy, even with an unusual but effective scheme in pain control in a patient with non-small cell lung cancer in stage IV.

Characteristics, consent patterns, and challenges of randomized trials using the Trials within Cohorts (TwiCs) design - A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Trials within Cohorts (TwiCs) is a pragmatic design approach that may overcome frequent challenges of traditional randomized trials such as slow recruitment, burdensome consent procedures, or limited external validity. This scoping review aims to identify all randomized controlled trials using the TwiCs design and to summarize their design characteristics, ways to obtain informed consent, output, reported challenges and mitigation strategies.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane, trial registries and citation tracking up to December 2022. TwiCs were defined as randomized trials embedded in a cohort with postrandomization consent for the intervention group and no specific postrandomization consent for the usual care control group. Information from identified TwiCs was extracted in duplicate from protocols, publications, and registry entries. We analyzed the information descriptively and qualitatively to highlight methodological challenges and solutions related to nonuptake of interventions and informed consent procedure.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 46 TwiCs conducted between 2005 and 2022 in 14 different countries by a handful of research groups. The most common medical fields were oncology (11/46; 24%), infectious diseases (8/46; 17%), and mental health (7/46; 15%). A typical TwiCs was investigator-initiated (46/46; 100%), publicly funded (36/46; 78%), and recruited outpatients (27/46; 59%). Excluding eight pilot trials, only 16/38 (42%) TwiCs adjusted their calculated sample size for nonuptake of the intervention, anticipating a median nonuptake of 25% (interquartile range 10%-32%) in the experimental arm. Seventeen TwiCs (45%) planned analyses to adjust effect estimates for nonuptake. Regarding informed consent, we observed three patterns: 1) three separate consents for cohort participation, randomization, and intervention (17/46; 37%); 2) combined consent for cohort participation and randomization and a separate intervention consent (10/46; 22%); and 3) consent only for cohort participation and intervention (randomization consent not mentioned; 19/46; 41%).

CONCLUSION

Existing TwiCs are globally scattered across a few research groups covering a wide range of medical fields and interventions. Despite the potential advantages, the number of TwiCs remains small. The variability in consent procedures and the possibility of substantial nonuptake of the intervention warrants further research to guide the planning, implementation, and analysis of TwiCs.

Comparative Analysis of Stereotactic Radiation Therapy and Conventional Radiation Therapy in Cancer Pain Control: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

AIMS

Approximately 55% of patients diagnosed with primary or metastatic cancer endure pain directly attributable to the disease. Consequently, it becomes imperative to address pain management through a comparative analysis of stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) and conventional radiation therapy (CRT), especially in light of the less efficacious improvement achieved solely through pharmacological interventions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic exploration was undertaken on PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Elsevier's ScienceDirect databases to identify studies that compare Stereotactic Radiotherapy to Conventional radiation therapy for pain management in individuals with metastatic bone cancer. The analyses were executed utilizing the random-effects model.

RESULTS

A cohort of 1152 participants with metastatic bone cancer was analyzed, demonstrating significantly higher complete pain relief in the Stereotactic Radiotherapy group during both early and late follow-up (RR: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.17, 2.23, p-value: 0.004; I2: 0%). Stereotactic Radiotherapy also showed a non-significant increase in the incidence of partial pain relief (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.85, 1.34, p-value: 0.56; I2: 18%). Furthermore, Stereotactic Radiotherapy was associated with a significantly reduced risk of stationary pain throughout follow-up (RR: 0.61; 95%CI: 0.48, 0.76, p-value: <0.0001; I2: 0. The incidence of progressive pain was non-significantly reduced with Stereotactic Radiotherapy during both early and late follow-up (RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.50, 1.17, p-value: 0.22; I2: 0%). Secondary outcomes exhibited a non-significant trend favoring Stereotactic Radiotherapy for dysphagia, esophagitis, pain, and radiodermatitis, while a non-significant increase was observed for nausea, fatigue, and vertebral compression fracture.

CONCLUSION

In summary, stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) has improved in achieving complete pain relief while exhibiting a decreased probability of delivering stationary pain compared to conventional radiation therapy (CRT). Nevertheless, it is crucial in future research to address a noteworthy limitation, specifically, the risk of vertebral compression fracture.

An Update on the Management of Bone Metastases

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Increasing life expectancy among patients with advanced cancer has placed a greater emphasis on optimizing pain control and quality of life. Concurrently, significant advancements in radiotherapy for bone metastases have permitted for dose escalation strategies such as stereotactic radiotherapy. This review aims to provide updated information on the management of bone metastases in light of these developments.

RECENT FINDINGS

We reviewed recent studies regarding the role and details of external beam radiotherapy for bone metastases, with emphasis on differences by treatment site as well as intention (palliative versus ablative for oligometastases). Conventional palliative radiotherapy remains a mainstay of management. While stereotactic radiotherapy may augment durability of pain relief and even survival time, there are significant questions remaining regarding optimal dosing and patient selection. Radiotherapy for bone metastases continues to evolve, particularly with increasing use of stereotactic radiotherapy. Future studies are needed to clarify optimal dose, fractionation, modality, and patient selection criteria among different radiotherapy approaches.

A Prospective Study Assessing the Efficacy and Toxicity of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Oligometastatic Bone Metastases

Purpose

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a promising treatment for oligometastatic disease in bone because of its delivery of high dose to target tissue and minimal dose to surrounding tissue. The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy and toxicity of this treatment in patients with previously unirradiated oligometastatic bony disease.

Methods and Materials

In this prospective phase II trial, patients with oligometastatic bone disease, defined as ≤3 active sites of disease, were treated with SBRT at Brigham and Women's Hospital/Dana Farber Cancer Center and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center between December 2016 and May 2019. SBRT dose and fractionation regimen were not protocol mandated. Local progression-free survival, progression-free survival, prostatic specific antigen progression, and overall survival were reported. Treatment-related toxicity was also reported.

Results

A total of 98 patients and 126 lesions arising from various tumor histologies were included in this study. The median age of patients enrolled was 72.8 years (80.6% male, 19.4% female). Median follow-up was 26.7 months. The most common histology was prostate cancer (68.4%, 67/98). The most common dose prescriptions were 27/30 Gy in 3 fractions (27.0%, 34/126), 30 Gy in 5 fractions (16.7%, 21/126), or 30/35 Gy in 5 fractions (16.7%, 21/126). Multiple doses per treatment regimen reflect dose painting employing the lower dose to the clinical target volume and higher dose to the gross tumor volume. Four patients (4.1%, 4/98) experienced local progression at 1 site for each patient (3.2%, 4/126). Among the entire cohort, 2-year local progression-free survival (including death without local progression) was 84.8%, 2-year progression-free survival (including deaths as well as local, distant, and prostatic specific antigen progression) was 47.5%, and 2-year overall survival was 87.3%. Twenty-six patients (26.5%, 26/98) developed treatment-related toxicities.

Conclusions

Our study supports existing literature in showing that SBRT is effective and tolerable in patients with oligometastatic bone disease. Larger phase III trials are necessary and reasonable to determine long-term efficacy and toxicities.

FLASH radiotherapy for the treatment of symptomatic bone metastases in the thorax (FAST-02): protocol for a prospective study of a novel radiotherapy approach

BACKGROUND

FLASH therapy is a treatment technique in which radiation is delivered at ultra-high dose rates (≥ 40 Gy/s). The first-in-human FAST-01 clinical trial demonstrated the clinical feasibility of proton FLASH in the treatment of extremity bone metastases. The objectives of this investigation are to assess the toxicities of treatment and pain relief in study participants with painful thoracic bone metastases treated with FLASH radiotherapy, as well as workflow metrics in a clinical setting.

METHODS

This single-arm clinical trial is being conducted under an FDA investigational device exemption (IDE) approved for 10 patients with 1-3 painful bone metastases in the thorax, excluding bone metastases in the spine. Treatment will be 8 Gy in a single fraction administered at ≥ 40 Gy/s on a FLASH-enabled proton therapy system delivering a single transmission proton beam. Primary study endpoints are efficacy (pain relief) and safety. Patient questionnaires evaluating pain flare at the treatment site will be completed for 10 consecutive days post-RT. Pain response and adverse events (AEs) will be evaluated on the day of treatment and on day 7, day 15, months 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12, and every 6 months thereafter. The outcomes for clinical workflow feasibility are the occurrence of any device issues as well as time on the treatment table.

DISCUSSION

This prospective clinical trial will provide clinical data for evaluating the efficacy and safety of proton FLASH for palliation of bony metastases in the thorax. Positive findings will support the further exploration of FLASH radiation for other clinical indications including patient populations treated with curative intent.

REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05524064.

Randomised trials conducted using cohorts: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Cohort studies generate and collect longitudinal data for a variety of research purposes. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) increasingly use cohort studies as data infrastructures to help identify and recruit trial participants and assess outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the extent, range and nature of research using cohorts for RCTs and describe the varied definitions and conceptual boundaries for RCTs using cohorts.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

Searches were undertaken in January 2021 in MEDLINE (Ovid) and EBM Reviews-Cochrane Methodology Registry (Final issue, third Quarter 2012).

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Reports published between January 2007 and December 2021 of (a) cohorts used or planned to be used, to conduct RCTs, or (b) RCTs which use cohorts to recruit participants and/or collect trial outcomes, or (c) methodological studies discussing the use of cohorts for RCTs.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were extracted on the condition being studied, age group, setting, country/continent, intervention(s) and comparators planned or received, unit of randomisation, timing of randomisation, approach to informed consent, study design and terminology.

RESULTS

A total of 175 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. We identified 61 protocols, 9 descriptions of stand-alone cohorts intended to be used for future RCTs, 39 RCTs using cohorts and 34 methodological papers.The use and scope of this approach is growing. The thematics of study are far-ranging, including population health, oncology, mental and behavioural disorders, and musculoskeletal conditions.Authors reported that this approach can lead to more efficient recruitment, more representative samples, and lessen disappointment bias and crossovers.

CONCLUSION

This review outlines the development of cohorts to conduct RCTs including the range of use and innovative changes and adaptations. Inconsistencies in the use of terminology and concepts are highlighted. Guidance now needs to be developed to support the design and reporting of RCTs conducted using cohorts.

Practice and principles of stereotactic body radiation therapy for spine and non-spine bone metastases

Radiotherapy is the dominant treatment modality for painful spine and non-spine bone metastases (NSBM). Historically, this was achieved with conventional low dose external beam radiotherapy, however, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is increasingly applied for these indications. Meta-analyses and randomized clinical trials have demonstrated improved pain response and more durable tumor control with SBRT for spine metastases. However, in the setting of NSBM, there is limited evidence supporting global adoption and large scale randomized clinical trials are in need. SBRT is technically demanding requiring careful consideration of organ at risk tolerance, and strict adherence to technical requirements including immobilization, simulation, contouring and image-guidance procedures. Additional considerations include follow up practices after SBRT, with appropriate imaging playing a critical role in response assessment. Finally, there is renewed research into promising new technologies that may further refine the use of SBRT in both spinal and NSBM in the years to come.

A study on short-term efficacy and safety of Iodine-125 brachytherapy coupled with preoperative arterial chemoembolization for hypervascular spinal metastasis

PURPOSE

Hypervascular spinal metastatic malignancies can cause severe pain and intraoperative bleeding and selection of appropriate treatment can be challenging. This study aimed to observe the short-term efficacy and safety of Iodine-125 brachytherapy (125I BT) combined with preoperative transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) for hypervascular spinal metastasis.

METHODS

This study included a total of 33 patients (39 lesions) with hypervascular spinal metastasis. All of them carried out a regimen of TACE followed by 125I BT under CT guidance. A brachytherapy planning system has been utilized for the purpose of designing treatment plans and optimizing dose distribution. Pain relief was evaluated using a numeric rating scale (NRS) and intraoperative bleeding was recorded. Follow-up was conducted for 6 months to observe the local control rate and clinical complications.

RESULTS

All patients tolerated combined treatment well and intraoperative blood loss of every patient was not more than 10 ml. The 2- and 6- month local disease control rates were 92.3% and 83.8%. The NRS scores for thirty-three tumor patients before surgery and after one week, two, and six months of surgery were recorded as 7.33 ± 1.80, 7.39 ± 1.89, 3.15 ± 2.35, and 4.16 ± 2.15, respectively. The NRS score 2 months after treatment was found considerably lower in comparison to the NRS score before operation (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

According to our findings, 125I BT as well as preoperative TACE leads to perioperative hemostasis, pain alleviation, and reduced tumor burden, indicating that this combined treatment could be effective and promising for hypervascular spinal metastases.

Quality of Decision Making in Radiation Oncology

High-quality decision making in radiation oncology requires the careful consideration of multiple factors. In addition to the evidence-based indications for curative or palliative radiotherapy, this article explores how, in routine clinical practice, we also need to account for many other factors when making high-quality decisions. Foremost are patient-related factors, including preference, and the complex interplay between age, frailty and comorbidities, especially with an ageing cancer population. Whilst clinical practice guidelines inform our decisions, we need to account for their applicability in different patient groups and different resource settings. With particular reference to curative-intent radiotherapy, we explore decisions regarding dose fractionation schedules, use of newer radiotherapy technologies and multimodality treatment considerations that contribute to personalised patient-centred care.

Stereotactic Body and Conventional Radiotherapy for Painful Bone Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) are commonly used treatment options for relieving metastatic bone pain. The effectiveness of SBRT compared with cEBRT in pain relief has been a subject of debate, and conflicting results have been reported.

Objective

To compare the effectiveness associated with SBRT vs cEBRT for relieving metastatic bone pain.

Data Sources

A structured search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases on June 5, 2023. Additionally, results were added from a new randomized clinical trial (RCT) and additional unpublished data from an already published RCT.

Study Selection

Comparative studies reporting pain response after SBRT vs cEBRT in patients with painful bone metastases.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Two independent reviewers extracted data from eligible studies. Data were extracted for the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations. The study is reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Overall and complete pain response at 1, 3, and 6 months after radiotherapy, according to the study's definition. Relative risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs were calculated for each study. A random-effects model using a restricted maximum likelihood estimator was applied for meta-analysis.

Results

There were 18 studies with 1685 patients included in the systematic review and 8 RCTs with 1090 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In 7 RCTs, overall pain response was defined according to the International Consensus on Palliative Radiotherapy Endpoints in clinical trials (ICPRE). The complete pain response was reported in 6 RCTs, all defined according to the ICPRE. The ITT meta-analyses showed that the overall pain response rates did not differ between cEBRT and SBRT at 1 (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.99-1.30), 3 (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.96-1.47), or 6 (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.96-1.54) months. However, SBRT was associated with a higher complete pain response at 1 (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.02-2.01), 3 (RR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.16-2.78), and 6 (RR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.24-4.91) months after radiotherapy. The PP meta-analyses showed comparable results.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, patients with painful bone metastases experienced similar overall pain response after SBRT compared with cEBRT. More patients had complete pain alleviation after SBRT, suggesting that selected subgroups will benefit from SBRT.

ESTRO clinical practice guideline: Stereotactic body radiotherapy for spine metastases

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Recent progress in diagnostics and treatment of metastatic cancer patients have improved survival substantially. These developments also affect local therapies, with treatment aims shifting from short-term palliation to long-term symptom or disease control. There is consequently a need to better define the value of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for the treatment of spinal metastases.

METHODS

This ESTRO clinical practice guideline is based on a systematic literature review conducted according to PRISMA standards, which formed the basis for answering four key questions about the indication and practice of SBRT for spine metastases.

RESULTS

The analysis of the key questions based on current evidence yielded 22 recommendations and 5 statements with varying levels of endorsement, all achieving a consensus among experts of at least 75%. In the majority, the level of evidence supporting the recommendations and statements was moderate or expert opinion, only, indicating that spine SBRT is still an evolving field of clinical research. Recommendations were established concerning the selection of appropriate patients with painful spine metastases and oligometastatic disease. Recommendations about the practice of spinal SBRT covered technical planning aspects including dose and fractionation, patient positioning, immobilization and image-guided SBRT delivery. Finally, recommendations were developed regarding quality assurance protocols, including description of potential SBRT-related toxicity and risk mitigation strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

This ESTRO clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations and statements regarding the selection of patients with spinal metastases for SBRT and its safe implementation and practice. Enrollment of patients into well-designed prospective clinical trials addressing clinically relevant questions is considered important.

A Systematic Review of the Statistical Methods Adopted for Analyzing Follow-Up Data in Cohort Multiple Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The cohort multiple randomized controlled trial (cmRCT) can tackle some of the weaknesses of an RCT which has triggered the interest of researchers considerably over time. Several challenges persist regarding the methods of analyzing such valued data. The paucity of international recommendations concerning the statistical methods for analyzing trial data has led to a variety of strategies further complicating the result comparison. Our aim was to review the different cmRCT analysis methods since cmRCT was first proposed in 2010.

METHODOLOGY

A search for full-length studies presenting statistical analysis of the data collected adopting a cmRCT design was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, JSTOR, Scopus, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

RESULTS

Out of 186 studies screened, we selected 22 for the full-text screening and 11 were found eligible for data extraction. All 11 studies were conducted in high-income countries, reflecting the design being underutilized in other settings. All of the studies were found to have used intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis with four of them utilizing instrumental variables (IV) analysis or a complier average causal effect (CACE). Randomization was noted often to be interchangeably used for random selection. Sample size calculation was not clearly specified in the majority of the studies.

CONCLUSION

Clarity regarding the distinction between an RCT and a cmRCT is warranted. The fundamental difference in design, which leads to certain biases that need to be taken care of by adopting IV or CACE analysis, has to be understood before taking up a cmRCT.

Efficacy and safety of SBRT for spine metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysis for preparation of an ESTRO practice guideline

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Advances in characterizing cancer biology and the growing availability of novel targeted agents and immune therapeutics have significantly changed the prognosis of many patients with metastatic disease. Palliative radiotherapy needs to adapt to these developments. In this study, we summarize the available evidence for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in the treatment of spinal metastases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using PRISMA methodology, including publications from January 2005 to September 2021, with the exception of the randomized phase III trial RTOG-0631 which was added in April 2023. Re-irradiation was excluded. For meta-analysis, a random-effects model was used to pool the data. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I2-test, assuming substantial and considerable as I2 > 50 % and I2 > 75 %, respectively. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 69 studies assessing the outcomes of 7236 metastases in 5736 patients were analyzed. SBRT for spine metastases showed high efficacy, with a pooled overall pain response rate of 83 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 68 %-94 %), pooled complete pain response of 36 % (95 % CI: 20 %-53 %), and 1-year local control rate of 94 % (95 % CI: 86 %-99 %), although with high levels of heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 93 %, I2 = 86 %, and 86 %, respectively). Furthermore, SBRT was safe, with a pooled vertebral fracture rate of 9 % (95 % CI: 4 %-16 %), pooled radiation induced myelopathy rate of 0 % (95 % CI 0-2 %), and pooled pain flare rate of 6 % (95 % CI: 3 %-17 %), although with mixed levels of heterogeneity among the studies (I2 = 92 %, I2 = 0 %, and 95 %, respectively). Only 1.7 % of vertebral fractures required surgical stabilization.

CONCLUSION

Spine SBRT is characterized by a favorable efficacy and safety profile, providing durable results for pain control and disease control, which is particularly relevant for oligometastatic patients.

Quality of life issues in patients with bone metastases: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Bones are frequent sites of metastatic disease, observed in 30-75% of advanced cancer patients. Quality of life (QoL) is an important endpoint in studies evaluating the treatments of bone metastases (BM), and many patient-reported outcome tools are available. The primary objective of this systematic review was to compile a list of QoL issues relevant to BM and its interventions. The secondary objective was to identify common tools used to assess QoL in patients with BM, and the QoL issues they fail to address.

METHODS

A search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases between 1946 and 27 January 2023 with the keywords "bone metastases", "quality of life", and "patient reported outcomes". Specific QoL issues in original research studies and the QoL tools used were extracted.

RESULTS

The review identified the QoL issues most prevalent to BM in the literature. Physical and functional issues observed in patients included pain, interference with ambulation and daily activities, and fatigue. Psychological symptoms, such as helplessness, depression, and anxiety were also common. These issues interfered with patients' relationships and social activities. Items not mentioned in existing QoL tools were related to newer treatments of BM, such as pain flare, flu-like symptoms, and jaw pain due to osteonecrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review highlights that QoL issues for patients with BM have expanded over time due to advances in BM-directed treatments. If they are relevant, additional treatment-related QoL issues identified need to be validated prospectively by patients and added to current assessment tools.

SBRT of Spinal Metastases Using a Simultaneous Integrated Boost Concept in Oligometastatic Cancer Patients Is Safe and Effective

(1) Purpose: To assess the safety and effectivity of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) on spinal metastases utilizing a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) concept in oligometastatic cancer patients. (2) Methods: 62 consecutive patients with 71 spinal metastases received SIB-SBRT between 01/2013 and 09/2022 at our institution. We retrospectively analyzed toxicity, local tumor control (LC), and progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) following SIB-SBRT and assessed possible influencing factors (Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test and Cox proportional-hazards model). (3) Results: SIB-SBRT was delivered in five fractions, mostly with 25/40 Gy (n = 43; 60.56%) and 25/35 Gy (n = 19, 26.76%). Estimated rates of freedom from VCF were 96.1/90.4% at one/two years. VCF development was significantly associated with osteoporosis (p < 0.001). No ≥ grade III acute and one grade III late toxicity (VCF) were observed. Estimated LC rates at one/two years were 98.6/96.4%, and histology was significantly associated with local treatment failure (p = 0.039). Median PFS/OS was 10 months (95% CI 6.01-13.99)/not reached. Development of metastases ≥ one year after initial diagnosis and Karnofsky Performance Score ≥ 90% were predictors for superior PFS (p = 0.038) and OS (p = 0.012), respectively. (4) Conclusion: Spinal SIB-SBRT yields low toxicity and excellent LC. It may be utilized in selected oligometastatic patients to improve prognosis. To the best of our knowledge, we provide the first clinical data on the toxicity and effectivity of SIB-SBRT in spinal metastases in a larger patient cohort.

Short-term pain control after palliative radiotherapy for uncomplicated bone metastases: a prospective cohort study

This study aimed at evaluating the efficacy of different radiotherapy (RT) fractionation regimens in managing uncomplicated painful bone metastases (BM) and identifying predictive factors for pain control. Patients with 1 to 4 symptomatic BM from any primary solid tumors and a life expectancy exceeding 3 months were included in the study and received palliative RT, with SBRT restricted in the context of oligometastatic disease or in patients with good prognosis. Pain analysis using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) tool was conducted at baseline, 1 and 3 months after RT. Analgesic intake was recorded as morphine-equivalent doses (OME). Pain response was assessed using the International Consensus on Palliative Radiotherapy Endpoint (ICPRE). Multivariate logistic regression analyzed patient-related, tumor-related, and treatment-related factors predicting BM pain control at 3 months post-RT. From Feb 2022 to Feb 2023, 44 patients with 65 symptomatic BM were investigated. Breast (32%) and lung (24%) tumors were the most common primary tumors. Treatment plans included 3DCRT (60%) and VMAT (40%), with a median biological effective dose for tumors (BED) of 29 Gy [14-108]. All patients completed the 3-month follow-up. Pain response rates were 62% at 1 month and 60% at 3 months. Responders had better PS ECOG scores (67%; P = 0.008) and received active systemic therapies (67%: P = 0.036). Non-responders had lower pretreatment BPI (mean: 13.7 vs. 58.2; P = 0.032), with significantly higher values after 1 month (mean: 9.1 vs. 5.3, P = 0.033). Baseline BPI (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.032-1.327; P = 0.014) and BPI at 1 month (OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.698-0.976; P = 0.025) were independent predictors of pain response at 3 months. Our findings show that palliative RT ensured short-term pain control in patients with BM, regardless of tumor type and dose-fractionation regimen. A larger sample size and a longer follow-up could potentially identify which patients are likely to benefit most from RT, and which fractionation might be indicated for achieving a durable pain relief. A multidisciplinary approach is paramount to provide a better care to BM patients.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for spinal metastases: 12 years of a single center experience

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical outcomes of patients with spine metastases treated with SBRT at our institution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with spine metastases treated with SBRT (1 fraction/18 Gy or 5 fractions/7 Gy) during the last 12 years have been analyzed. All patients were simulated supine in a vacuum cushion or with a shoulder mask. CT scans and MRI image registration were performed. Contouring was based on International Spine-Radiosurgery-Consortium-Consensus-Guidelines. Highly conformal-techniques (IMRT/VMAT) were used for treatment planning. Intra and interfraction (CBCT or X-Ray-ExacTrac) verification were mandatory.

RESULTS

From February 2010 to January 2022, 129 patients with spinal metastases were treated with SBRT [1 fraction/18 Gy (75%) or 5 fractions/7 Gy] (25%). For patients with painful metastases (74/129:57%), 100% experienced an improvement in pain after SBRT. With a median follow-up of 14.2 months (average 22.9; range 0.5-140) 6 patients (4.6%) experienced local relapse. Local progression-free survival was different, considering metastases's location (p < 0.04). The 1, 2 and 3 years overall survival (OS) were 91.2%, 85.1% and 83.2%, respectively. Overall survival was significantly better for patients with spine metastases of breast and prostate cancers compared to other tumors (p < 0.05) and significantly worse when visceral metastases were present (p < 0.05), when patients were metastatic de novo (p < 0.05), and in those patients receiving single fraction SBRT (p: 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

According to our experience, SBRT for patients with spinal metastases was effective in terms of local control and useful to reach pain relief. Regarding the intent of the treatment, an adequate selection of patients is essential to propose this ablative approach.

Advances and Challenges in Trials of Local Therapy for Patients With Oligometastatic or Oligoprogressive Disease

The paradigm of oligometastatic disease (OMD), characterized by a limited number of metastases potentially amenable to local therapies, presents unique opportunities and challenges in clinical trial design and implementation. Although local ablative therapies, such as stereotactic body radiation therapy, have shown promise in improving outcomes for patients with OMD, there is a lack of large-scale randomized phase III trials supporting their widespread use. This paper outlines the key challenges in trial design and implementation in the oligometastatic setting, including appropriate patient selection, the definition of the oligometastatic state, trial design considerations, endpoint selection, and logistical considerations related to enrollment and follow-up. We suggest potential strategies to address these challenges, emphasizing the importance of a comprehensive, patient-centric approach, and the integration of multidisciplinary teams in trial design and implementation. The aim is to encourage the design of well-structured clinical trials, ultimately refining best practices and enhancing patient outcomes in the management of OMD.

Analysis of the characteristics and the degree of pragmatism exhibited by pragmatic-labelled trials of antineoplastic treatments

BACKGROUND

Pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) are designed to reflect how an investigational treatment would be applied in clinical practice. As such, unlike their explanatory counterparts, they measure therapeutic effectiveness and are capable of generating high-quality real-world evidence. However, the conduct of PCTs remains extremely rare. The scarcity of such studies has contributed to the emergence of the efficacy-effectiveness gap and has led to calls for launching more of them, including in the field of oncology. This analysis aimed to identify self-labelled pragmatic trials of antineoplastic interventions and to evaluate whether their use of this label was justified.

METHODS

We searched PubMed® and Embase® for publications corresponding with studies that investigated antitumor therapies and that were tagged as pragmatic in their titles, abstracts and/or index terms. Subsequently, we consulted all available source documents for the included trials and extracted relevant information from them. The data collected were then used to appraise the degree of pragmatism displayed by the PCTs with the help of the validated PRECIS-2 tool.

RESULTS

The literature search returned 803 unique records, of which 46 were retained upon conclusion of the screening process. This ultimately resulted in the identification of 42 distinct trials that carried the 'pragmatic' label. These studies examined eight different categories of neoplasms and were mostly randomized, open-label, multicentric, single-country trials sponsored by non-commercial parties. On a scale of one (very explanatory) to five (very pragmatic), the median PCT had a PRECIS-2 score per domain of 3.13 (interquartile range: 2.57-3.53). The most and least pragmatic studies in the sample had a score of 4.44 and 1.57, respectively. Only a minority of trials were described in sufficient detail to allow them to be graded across all domains of the PRECIS-2 instrument. Many of the studies examined also had features that arguably precluded them from being pragmatic altogether, such as being monocentric or placebo-controlled in nature.

CONCLUSION

PCTs of antineoplastic treatments are generally no more pragmatic than they are explanatory.

The Trial within Cohorts (TwiCs) study design in oncology: experience and methodological reflections

A Trial within Cohorts (TwiCs) study design is a trial design that uses the infrastructure of an observational cohort study to initiate a randomized trial. Upon cohort enrollment, the participants provide consent for being randomized in future studies without being informed. Once a new treatment is available, eligible cohort participants are randomly assigned to the treatment or standard of care. Patients randomized to the treatment arm are offered the new treatment, which they can choose to refuse. Patients who refuse will receive standard of care instead. Patients randomized to the standard of care arm receive no information about the trial and continue receiving standard of care as part of the cohort study. Standard cohort measures are used for outcome comparisons. The TwiCs study design aims to overcome some issues encountered in standard Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs). An example of an issue in standard RCTs is the slow patient accrual. A TwiCs study aims to improve this by selecting patients using a cohort and only offering the intervention to patients in the intervention arm. In oncology, the TwiCs study design has gained increasing interest during the last decade. Despite its potential advantages over RCTs, the TwiCs study design has several methodological challenges that need careful consideration when planning a TwiCs study. In this article, we focus on these challenges and reflect on them using experiences from TwiCs studies initiated in oncology. Important methodological challenges that are discussed are the timing of randomization, the issue of non-compliance (refusal) after randomization in the intervention arm, and the definition of the intention-to-treat effect in a TwiCs study and how this effect is related to its counterpart in standard RCTs.

Stereotactic Body radiotherapy and pedicLE screw fixatioN During one hospital visit for patients with symptomatic unstable spinal metastases: a randomized trial (BLEND RCT) using the Trials within Cohorts (TwiCs) design

BACKGROUND

Spinal metastases can lead to unremitting pain and neurological deficits, which substantially impair daily functioning and quality of life. Patients with unstable spinal metastases receive surgical stabilization followed by palliative radiotherapy as soon as wound healing allows. The time between surgery and radiotherapy delays improvement of mobility, radiotherapy-induced pain relief, local tumor control, and restart of systemic oncological therapy. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) enables delivery of preoperative high-dose radiotherapy while dose-sparing the surgical field, allowing stabilizing surgery within only hours. Patients may experience earlier recovery of mobility, regression of pain, and return to systemic oncological therapy. The BLEND RCT evaluates the effectiveness of SBRT followed by surgery within 24 h for the treatment of symptomatic, unstable spinal metastases.

METHODS

This phase III randomized controlled trial is embedded within the PRospective Evaluation of interventional StudiEs on boNe meTastases (PRESENT) cohort. Patients with symptomatic, unstable spinal metastases requiring stabilizing surgery and radiotherapy will be randomized (1:1). The intervention group (n = 50) will be offered same-day SBRT and surgery, which they can accept or refuse. According to the Trial within Cohorts (TwiCs) design, the control group (n = 50) will not be informed and receive standard treatment (surgery followed by conventional radiotherapy after 1-2 weeks when wound healing allows). Baseline characteristics and outcome measures will be captured within PRESENT. The primary outcome is physical functioning (EORTC-QLQ-C15-PAL) 4 weeks after start of treatment. Secondary endpoints include pain response, time until return to systemic oncological therapy, quality of life, local tumor control, and adverse events up to 3 months post-treatment.

DISCUSSION

The BLEND RCT evaluates the effect of same-day SBRT and stabilizing surgery for the treatment of symptomatic, unstable spinal metastases compared with standard of care. We expect better functional outcomes, faster pain relief, and continuation of systemic oncological therapy. The TwiCs design enables efficient recruitment within an ongoing cohort, as well as prevention of disappointment bias and drop-out as control patients will not be informed about the trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05575323. Registered on October 11, 2022.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Spinal Metastases: Benefits and Limitations

Progress in biological cancer characterization, targeted systemic therapies and multimodality treatment strategies have shifted the goals of radiotherapy for spinal metastases from short-term palliation to long-term symptom control and prevention of compilations. This article gives an overview of the spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) methodology and clinical results of SBRT in cancer patients with painful vertebral metastases, metastatic spinal cord compression, oligometastatic disease and in a reirradiation situation. Outcomes after dose-intensified SBRT are compared with results of conventional radiotherapy and patient selection criteria will be discussed. Though rates of severe toxicity after spinal SBRT are low, strategies to minimize the risk of vertebral compression fracture, radiation induced myelopathy, plexopathy and myositis are summarized, to optimize the use of SBRT in multidisciplinary management of vertebral metastases.

Multidisciplinary Approach to Spinal Metastases and Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression—A New Integrative Flowchart for Patient Management

Metastatic spine disease (MSD) and metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) are major causes of permanent neurological damage and long-term disability for cancer patients. The development of MSD is pathophysiologically framed by a cooperative interaction between general mechanisms of bone growth and specific mechanisms of spinal metastases (SM) expansion. SM most commonly affects the thoracic spine, even though multiple segments may be affected concomitantly. The great majority of SM are extradural, while intradural-extramedullary and intramedullary metastases are less frequently seen. The management of patients with SM is particularly complex and challenging, with multiple factors—such as the spinal stability status, primary tumor radio and chemosensitivity, cancer biological burden, patient performance status and comorbidities, and patient’s oncological prognosis—influencing the clinical decision-making process. Different frameworks were developed in order to systematize and support this process. A multidisciplinary, personalized approach, enriched by the expertise of each involved specialty, is crucial. We reviewed the most recent evidence and proposed an updated algorithmic approach to patients with MSD according to the clinical scenario of each patient. A flowchart-based approach offers an evidence-based management of MSD, providing a valuable clinical decision tool in a context of high uncertainty and quick-acting need.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Versus Conventional Radiation Therapy in Pain Relief for Bone Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the difference in pain relief between stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and conventional radiation therapy (cRT) for patients with bone metastases.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Clinical trials and observational studies comparing SBRT versus cRT for bone metastases were retrieved. The main endpoint was pain relief after radiation therapy; the secondary endpoints were pain score change, local progression-free survival, reirradiation rate, and toxic events. When there was a significant heterogeneity, the random-effects model was applied. Otherwise, the fixed-effects model was used. Analyses of all included studies were performed first, followed by analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only.

RESULTS

Six RCTs, 1 prospective cohort study, and 3 retrospective observational studies were enrolled. Between 2004 and 2019, 448 patients received SBRT, and 445 patients received cRT. All prospective studies defined the lesions as oligometastatic. Pooled results based on all included studies indicated that SBRT was generally associated with a higher overall relief rate (P < .001 at 3 months; P = .015 at 6 months) and complete relief rate (P = .029 at 1 month; P < .001 at 6 months). Pooled results based on RCTs indicated that at 3 and 6 months, SBRT was associated with a higher overall relief rate (P < .001 and P = .017, respectively) and complete relief rate (P < .001 and P < .00, respectively). Subgroup analyses indicated that in more cases, the analgesic advantage of SBRT was more obvious when spinal lesions were irradiated, when the difference in the mean biological effective dose (BED) was less, or when intensity modulated radiation therapy was used to deliver SBRT.

CONCLUSIONS

Excessive elevation of BED introduces the risk of diminishing the analgesic effect of SBRT. SBRT delivered using intensity modulated radiation therapy is preferred for pain relief in spinal oligometastases. More RCTs are required to determine the most appropriate BED or dose regimen for SBRT.

Prognostic Score in Radiotherapy Practice for Palliative Treatments (PROPHET) Study for Bone Metastases: An Investigation Into the Clinical Effect on Treatment Prescription

Purpose

Bone metastases frequently occur during malignant disease. Palliative radiation therapy (PRT) is a crucial part of palliative care because it can relieve pain and improve patients' quality of life. Often, a clinician's survival estimation is too optimistic. Prognostic scores (PSs) can help clinicians tailor PRT indications to avoid over- or undertreatment. Although the PS is supposed to aid radiation oncologists (ROs) in palliative-care scenarios, it is unclear what type of support, and to what extent, could impact daily clinical practice.

Methods and Materials

A national-based investigation of the prescriptive decisions on simulated clinical cases was performed in Italy. Nine clinical cases from real-world clinical practice were selected for this study. Each case description contained complete information regarding the parameters defining the prognosis class according to the PS (in particular, the Mizumoto Prognostic Score, a validated PS available in literature and already applied in some clinical trials). Each case description contained complete information regarding the parameters defining the prognosis class according to the PS. ROs were interviewed through questionnaires, each comprising the same 3 questions per clinical case, asking (1) the prescription after detailing the clinical case features but not the PS prognostic class definition; (2) whether the RO wanted to change the prescription once the PS prognostic class definition was revealed; and (3) in case of a change of the prescription, a new prescriptive option. Three RO categories were defined: dedicated to PRT (RO-d), nondedicated to PRT (RO-nd), and resident in training (IT). Interviewed ROs were distributed among different regions of the country.

Results

Conversion rates, agreements, and prescription trends were investigated. The PS determined a statistically significant 11.12% of prescription conversion among ROs. The conversion was higher for the residents and significantly higher for worse prognostic scenario subgroups, respectively. The PS improved prescriptive agreement among ROs (particularly for worse-prognostic-scenario subgroups). Moreover, PS significantly increased standard prescriptive approaches (particularly for worse-clinical-case presentations).

Conclusions

To the best of our knowledge, the PROPHET study is the first to directly evaluate the potential clinical consequences of the regular application of any PS. According to the Prophet study, a prognostic score should be integrated into the clinical practice of palliative radiation therapy for bone metastasis and training programs in radiation oncology.

Efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: Evidence from randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Pain relief is one of the main objectives of radiotherapy for cancer patients with bone metastases. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) enables precise delivery of a higher dosage to the target area. Several trials have reported comparisons between SBRT and conventional radiotherapy (cRT) in patients with painful bone metastasis. However, the results of those investigations were inconsistent, and no systematic review or meta-analysis has been done till now.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Clinicaltrials.gov up to May 1, 2022 for relevant studies. Patients with painful bone metastasis who received SBRT or cRT were included. The primary outcome was the patients' pain response rate at three months. The secondary outcomes included the rate of pain responders at one month and six months, oral morphine equivalent dose (OMED) use, and any adverse events. STATA software 12.0 was used for the statistical analysis.

RESULTS

We collected 533 patients' data from 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), there was a significant difference of pain response rate at 3 months between two groups (RR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.12-1.77, I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.003). However, no significant difference was found in pain response rate at 1 month (RR = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.91-1.54, I2 = 31.5%, P = 0.201) and 6 months (RR = 1.25, 95% CI: 0.93-1.69, I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.140). OMED consumption was not significantly different in patients treated with SBRT compared with control group (WMD = -1.11, 95% CI: -17.51-15.28, I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.894). For safety outcome, no statistical difference was found between SBRT and cRT (RR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.46-1.14, I2=20.1%, P = 0.162).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that for painful bone metastases, patients with SBRT experienced better pain relief 3 months after radiation than patients with cRT, and SBRT did not increase the incidence of adverse events.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-6-0099/, identifier INPLASY202260099.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a promising approach in treating painful bone metastases. However, the superiority of SBRT over conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) remains controversial. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was conducted to compare SBRT and cEBRT for the treatment of bone metastases.

METHODS

A search was conducted using PubMed on January 22, 2022, with the following inclusion criteria: (i) randomised controlled trials comparing SBRT with cEBRT for bone metastases and (ii) endpoint including pain response. Effect sizes across studies were pooled using random-effects models in a meta-analysis of risk ratios.

RESULTS

A total of 1246 articles were screened, with 7 articles comprising 964 patients (522 and 442 patients in the SBRT and cEBRT arms, respectively) meeting the inclusion criteria. The overall pain response (OR) rates of bone metastases at 3 months were 45% and 36% in the SBRT and cEBRT arms, respectively. The present analyses showed no significant difference between the two groups. In four studies included for the calculation of OR rates of spinal metastases at three months, the OR rates were 40% and 35% in the SBRT and cEBRT arms, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups. The incidence of severe adverse effects and health-related quality of life outcomes were comparable between the two arms.

CONCLUSIONS

The superiority of SBRT over cEBRT for pain palliation in bone metastases was not confirmed in this meta-analysis. Although SBRT is a standard of care for bone metastases, patients receiving SBRT should be selected appropriately.

Palliative Efficacy of High-Dose Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Versus Conventional Radiotherapy for Painful Non-Spine Bone Metastases: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

(1) Background: The superiority of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) over conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) in terms of pain palliation for bone metastases remains controversial. (2) Methods: This propensity score-matched study compared the overall pain response (OR) 3 months after radiotherapy among patients with painful (≥2 points on a 0-to-10 scale) non-spine bone metastases. Patients with lesions that were treated with SBRT or cEBRT and whose pain scores were evaluated 3 months after radiotherapy were included in this study. Pain response was evaluated according to the International Consensus Criteria. (3) Results: A total of 234 lesions (SBRT, n = 129; cEBRT, n = 105) were identified in our institutional database. To reduce the confounding effects, 162 patients were selected using a propensity score-matched analysis (n = 81 for each treatment). The OR rate at 3 months after SBRT was significantly higher than that after cEBRT (76.5% vs. 56.8%; p = 0.012). A noteworthy finding of our study is that the same trend was observed even after 6 months (75.9% vs. 50.0%; p = 0.011). The 1-year local failure rates after SBRT and cEBRT were 10.2% and 33.3% (p < 0.001), respectively. (4) Conclusions: Our findings suggest that SBRT is superior to cEBRT for pain palliation in patients with non-spine bone metastases.

Effect of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Combined with Thermoplastic Fixation on Set-Up Errors in Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy

Objective

To investigate the effect of stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) combined with thermoplastic fixation on set-up error in breast cancer (BC) patients undergoing radiotherapy.

Methods

Ninety BC patients undergoing radiotherapy who were treated in our hospital (May 2019-May 2020) were selected as the research objects and equally divided into the experimental group and control group according to the order of hospitalization, with 45 patients in each group. The control group received conventional radiotherapy combined with breast bracket, and the experimental group received SBRT combined with thermoplastic fixation. The incidences of adverse reactions, 1-year survival rates, and set-up errors were compared between the two groups.

Results

Compared with the control group, the experimental group had much lower total incidence of adverse reactions and remarkably higher 1-year survival rate. The translational errors (X direction, Y direction, and Z direction), translational errors after rotation (X direction, Y direction, and Z direction), and rotation errors (X direction, Y direction, and Z direction) in the experimental group were obviously lower compared with those in the control group.

Conclusion

Implementing SBRT combined with thermoplastic fixation in BC patients undergoing radiotherapy can effectively improve set-up efficiency and treatment accuracy and reduce set-up errors. Compared with the breast bracket, the combination of SBRT and thermoplastic fixation has higher application value, and further studies are conducive to providing patients with a better solution plan.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy versus Conventional External Beam Radiation Therapy for Painful Bone Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and conventional external beam radiation therapy (cEBRT) in patients with previously unirradiated painful bone metastases (BM).

METHODS

We searched biomedical databases for eligible randomized trials (RCTs). The outcomes of interest were pain response, local progression, overall survival (OS) and adverse events. We used established tools to assess the quality of the individual trials and certainty of the pooled evidence. We performed meta-analyses using random effects models.

RESULTS

Six RCTs were identified. SBRT improved complete pain response rates at 3 months (OR, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.88-6.07; high certainty), reduced local progression rates (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.06-0.62; high certainty) and increase pain flare rates. There were no differences for other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with previously unirradiated painful BM, SBRT significantly improved complete pain response rates at 3 months, delayed local progression and increase pain flare rates.

A randomized controlled trial for evaluating pain response in patients with spinal metastases following local versus whole vertebral radiotherapy: study protocol for phase II clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with bone metastasis often experience severe pain that is difficult to control and seriously affects quality of life. Radiotherapy is an effective way to relieve pain in these patients. Currently, there is no standard recommended range of radiotherapy targets for vertebral metastasis. The effect of radiotherapy on pain relief varies among patients, and some patients with metastases have serious side effects.

METHODS

This study aims to verify whether reducing the radiotherapy range for vertebral metastases can achieve the same effect as whole vertebral radiotherapy while minimizing side effects. Sixty-six patients with pain caused by vertebral metastasis were randomly divided into two groups. The study group is receiving partial vertebrae body radiotherapy at the regions of abnormal signal, suspected invasion, and adjacent subclinical focus of vertebral metastasis, and the control group is receiving the same dose of radiotherapy on whole vertebrae body where metastasis occurred. After radiotherapy, along-term follow-up of patients will determine pain relief and side effects.

DISCUSSION

The expected results of this study are that local irradiation of vertebral metastases can achieve a palliative effect of pain control not less than total vertebral irradiation with fewer side effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (No: ChiCTR1900023401 ).

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.

Evaluation of Patient-Reported Outcome Differences by Radiotherapy Techniques for Bone Metastases in A Population-Based Healthcare System

We assessed whether advanced RT techniques were associated with differences in patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Patients with bone metastases who completed the brief pain inventory (BPI) before and after RT were identified, and RT technique was categorized as simple (e.g., parallel opposed pair) or advanced (e.g., 3D-conformal RT (3DCRT), intensity-modulated RT (IMRT), or stereotactic ablative RT (SABR)). Pain response and patient-reported interference on quality of life secondary to pain was compared. A total of 1712 patients completed the BPI. From 2017−2021, the rate of advanced RT technique increased significantly (p < 0.001; 2.4%, 2.4%, 9.7%, 5.5%, 9.3%), with most advanced techniques consisting of IMRT, and only 7% of advanced techniques were SABR. Comparing simple vs. advanced technique, neither the complete pain response (12.3% vs. 11.4%; p = 0.99) nor the partial pain response (50.0% vs. 51.8%; p = 0.42) was significantly different. There was no significant patient-reported difference in pain interfering with general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relationships, sleep, or enjoyment of life. Given that there is increasing utilization of advanced RT techniques, there is further need for randomized trials to assess their benefits given the increased cost and inconvenience to patients.

Response assessment after stereotactic body radiation therapy for spine and non-spine bone metastases: results from a single institutional study

Background

The use of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for tumor and pain control in patients with bone metastases is increasing. We report response assessment after bone SBRT using radiological changes through time and clinical examination of patients.

Methods

We analyzed retrospectively oligo-metastatic/progressive patients with bony lesions treated with SBRT between 12/2008 and 10/2018, without in-field re-irradiation, in our institution. Radiological data were obtained from imaging modalities used for SBRT planning and follow-up purposes in picture archiving and communication system and assessed by two independent radiologists blind to the time of treatment. Several radiological changes were described. Radiographic response assessment was classified according to University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center criteria. Pain response and the neurological deficit were captured before and at least 6 months after SBRT.

Results

A total of 35 of the 74 reviewed patients were eligible, presenting 43 bone metastases, with 51.2% (n = 22) located in the vertebral column. Median age at the time of SBRT was 66 years (range 38–84) and 77.1% (n = 27) were male. Histology was mainly prostate (51.4%, n = 18) and breast cancer (14.3%, n = 5). Median total radiation dose delivered was 24 Gy (range 24–42), in three fractions (range 2–7), prescribed to 70–90% isodose-line. After a median follow-up of 1.8 years (range < 1–8.2) for survivors, complete or partial response, stable, and progressive disease occurred in 0%, 11.4% (n = 4), 68.6% (n = 24), and 20.0% (n = 7) of the patients, respectively. Twenty patients (57.1%) died during the follow-up time, all from disease progression, yet 70% (n = 14) from this population with local stable disease after SBRT. From patients who were symptomatic and available for follow-up, almost half (44.4%) reported pain reduction after SBRT.

Conclusions

Eighty percent of the patients showed local control after SBRT for bone metastases. Pain response was favorable. For more accurate response assessment, comparing current imaging modalities with advanced imaging techniques such as functional MRI and PET/CT, in a prospective and standardized way is warranted.

Trial registration Retrospectively registered.

Patterns of the use of advanced radiation therapy techniques for the management of bone metastases and the associated factors in Victoria

INTRODUCTION

To describe the pattern of the use of advanced radiation therapy (RT) techniques, including intensity-modulated RT (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and stereotactic body RT (SBRT) for the management of bone metastases (BM), and the associated factors in Victoria.

METHODS

We used a population-based cohort of patients from the state-wide Victorian Radiotherapy Minimum Data Set (VRMDS) who received RT for BM between 2012 and 2017. The primary outcome was proportion of RT courses using advanced RT techniques. The Cochran-Armitage test for trend was used to evaluate temporal trend in advanced RT use. Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with advanced RT use.

RESULTS

A total of 18,158 courses of RT were delivered to 10,956 patients-16,626 (91.6%) courses were 3D conformal RT, 857 (4.7%) IMRT/VMAT and 675 (3.7%) SBRT. There was a sharp increase in IMRT/VMAT use from <1% in 2012-2015, to 10.1% in 2016 and 16.3% in 2017 (P-trend < 0.001). Increase in SBRT use was more gradual, from 1.2% in 2012 to 4.8% in 2016 and 5.5% in 2017 for SBRT (P-trend<0.001). In multivariate analyses, year of RT was the strongest predictor of IMRT/VMAT use (OR = 41; 95%CI = 25-67; P < 0.001, comparing 2012-2013 and 2016-2017). Primary tumour type (prostate cancer) was the strongest predictor of SBRT use (OR = 6.07; 95% CI = 4.19-8.80; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Overall, there was increasing trend in the use of advanced RT techniques for BM in Victoria, with a distinct pattern for IMRT/VMAT compared with SBRT - SBRT uptake was more gradual while IMRT/VMAT uptake was abrupt, occurring contemporaneously with Medicare Benefit Scheme funding changes in 2016.

Quality of Life After Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Versus Conventional Radiation Therapy in Patients With Bone Metastases

PURPOSE

Painful bone metastases hamper quality of life (QoL). The aim of this prespecified secondary analysis of the PRESENT trial was to compare change in global QoL, physical functioning, emotional functioning, functional interference, and psychosocial aspects after conventional radiation therapy (cRT) versus stereotactic body RT (SBRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 110 patients were enrolled in the phase 2 randomized controlled VERTICAL trial (NCT02364115) following the "trials within cohorts" design and randomized 1:1 to cRT or SBRT. Patient-reported global QoL, physical functioning, emotional functioning, functional interference, and psychosocial aspects were assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire (QLQ) Core 15 Palliative Care and QLQ Bone Metastases 22 modules. Changes in QoL domains over time were compared between patients treated with cRT and SBRT using intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) linear mixed model analysis adjusting for baseline scores. Proportions of patients in the cRT versus SBRT arm reporting a clinically relevant change in QoL within 3 months were compared using a χ² test.

RESULTS

QoL scores had improved over time and were comparable between groups for all domains in both the ITT and PP analyses, except for functional interference and psychological aspects in the ITT. Functional interference scores had improved more after 12 weeks in the cRT arm than in the SBRT arm (25.5 vs 14.1 points, respectively; effect size [ES] = 0.49, P = .04). Psychosocial aspects scores had improved more after 8 weeks in the cRT arm than in the SBRT arm (12.2 vs 7.3; ES = 0.56, P = .04). No clinically relevant differences between groups at 12 weeks in terms of global QoL, physical functioning, emotional functioning, functional interference, and psychosocial aspects were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Palliative RT improves QoL. Both SBRT and cRT have a comparable effect on patient-reported QoL outcomes in patients with painful bone metastases. Functional interference and psychological aspects scores improved more in patients treated with cRT versus patients offered SBRT.

[Stereotactic body radiation therapy for spine bone oligometastatic disease]

Stereotactic radiotherapy is an ever more common technique, regardless of the location treated. However, spinal stereotactic radiotherapy requires a particular technicality in order to ensure its proper realization. There is now a large literature defining the type of imaging to be used, the dose to be delivered and the delineation of target volumes. This technique can achieve a significant local control and an interesting analgesic efficiency. However, its place in relation to conventional radiotherapy remains limited because it requires MRI imaging and a significantly longer patient management during the treatment fraction. In this context, it is currently mainly restricted to oligometastatic patients or for re-irradiations.

International Multi-institutional Patterns of Contouring Practice and Clinical Target Volume Recommendations for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Non-Spine Bone Metastases

PURPOSE

Despite the increasing use of stereotactic body radiation therapy for non-spine bone metastases (NSBM), there is no established standard for target delineation. The objective of this study was to provide consensus recommendations on clinical target volume (CTV) delineation based on international expert contours.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Eleven cases of NSBM were contoured by 9 international radiation oncologists. For each case, the gross tumor volume was provided on the simulation computed tomography scans with accompanying magnetic resonance imaging. Participants contoured the CTV and completed a clinical survey. Agreement between CTV contours were analyzed with simultaneous truth and performance level estimation using the kappa coefficient and the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and summarized to establish contouring recommendations. A direction-dependent analysis was applied to the consensus contours to quantify margins.

RESULTS

All CTV contours were completed. Six participants used a single-dose level, whereas 3 used a 2-dose level simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique. For the SIB cases, the largest volume receiving a stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) dose was used for contour analysis. There was substantial agreement between contours across cases with a mean kappa of 0.72 (mean sensitivity 0.85, mean specificity 0.97). The mean DSC value was 0.77 (range, 0.67-0.87). Consensus CTV contouring recommendations were (1) an intraosseous CTV margin of 5 to 10 mm should be strongly considered within contiguous bone; (2) an extraosseous margin of 5 to 10 mm should be strongly considered where there is soft tissue disease or cortical bone disruption; (3) CTVs should be manually cropped to respect anatomic barriers to spread (eg, peritoneal cavity, pleura, uninvolved joint space and cortical bone).

CONCLUSIONS

CTV contouring recommendations for NSBM-SBRT were established based on analysis of international expert consensus contours with a high level of agreement. These principles may provide guidance to treating physicians and inform future study until prospective clinical data can provide further refinement.

Effects of exercise in breast cancer patients: implications of the trials within cohorts (TwiCs) design in the UMBRELLA Fit trial

Purpose

The Trials within Cohorts (TwiCs) design aims to overcome problems faced in conventional RCTs. We evaluated the TwiCs design when estimating the effect of exercise on quality of life (QoL) and fatigue in inactive breast cancer survivors.

Methods

UMBRELLA Fit was conducted within the prospective UMBRELLA breast cancer cohort. Patients provided consent for future randomization at cohort entry. We randomized inactive patients 12–18 months after cohort enrollment. The intervention group (n = 130) was offered a 12-week supervised exercise intervention. The control group (n = 130) was not informed and received usual care. Six-month exercise effects on QoL and fatigue as measured in the cohort were analyzed with intention-to-treat (ITT), instrumental variable (IV), and propensity scores (PS) analyses.

Results

Fifty-two percent (n = 68) of inactive patients accepted the intervention. Physical activity increased in patients in the intervention group, but not in the control group. We found no benefit of exercise for dimensions of QoL (ITT difference global QoL: 0.8, 95% CI = − 2.2; 3.8) and fatigue, except for a small beneficial effect on physical fatigue (ITT difference: − 1.1, 95% CI = − 1.8; − 0.3; IV: − 1.9, 95% CI = − 3.3; − 0.5, PS: − 1.2, 95% CI = − 2.3; − 0.2).

Conclusion

TwiCs gave insight into exercise intervention acceptance: about half of inactive breast cancer survivors accepted the offer and increased physical activity levels. The offer resulted in no improvement on QoL, and a small beneficial effect on physical fatigue.

Trial registration

Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5482/NL.52062.041.15), date of registration: December 07, 2015.