Radiotherapy for bone metastases: a critical appraisal of outcome measures

Inter- and intra-observer variability associated with the use of the Mirels' scoring system for metastatic bone lesions

Metastatic bone disease is increasing in association with ever-improving medical management of osteophylic malignant conditions. The precise timing of surgical intervention for secondary lesions in long bones can be difficult to determine. This paper aims to evaluate a classic scoring system. All radiographs were examined twice by three orthopaedic oncologists and scored according to the Mirels' scoring system. The Kappa statistic was used for the purpose of statistical analysis. The results show agreement between observers (κ = 0.35-0.61) for overall scores at the two time intervals. Inter-observer agreement was also seen with subset analysis of size (κ = 0.27-0.60), site (κ = 0.77-1.0) and nature of the lesion (κ = 0.55-0.81). Similarly, low levels of intra-observer variability were noted for each of the three surgeons (κ= 0.34, 0.39, and 0.78, respectively). These results indicate a reliable, repeatable assessment of bony metastases. We continue to advocate its use in the management of patients with long bone metastases.

Update in Cancer Pain Syndromes

Cancer pain assessment and management are integral to palliative medicine. This paper reviews recent publications in the period 1999-2004 in the broad categories of epidemiology, pain assessment, nonpharmacologic approaches to cancer pain (radiation therapy, anesthetic blocks, palliative surgery and chemotherapy, complementary and alternative medicine), and in nociceptive pain, neuropathic pain, visceral pain, and bone pain.

Review of patterns of practice and patients’ preferences in the treatment of bone metastases with palliative radiotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Since the 1980s, randomized clinical trials showed that single fraction radiotherapy (RT) provided equal pain relief as multiple fractions of RT in the treatment of bone metastases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using Medline, a literature search was conducted on patterns of practice among radiation oncologists and patients' preferences of dose fractionations for the treatment of bone metastases.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Fifteen studies on international patterns of practice published between 1966 and May 2006 were identified. Surveys of Canadian radiation oncologists indicated approximately 85% preferred multiple fractions, most often as 20 Gray in five fractions (20 Gy/5). Surveys in the United States indicated that 30 Gy/10 was most commonly used, and 90-100% of these oncologists preferred multiple over single fraction RT. Multiple fractions were most commonly used in the United Kingdom, Western Europe, Australia and New Zealand, and India; however, more radiation oncologists in these countries would prescribe a single fraction than in North America. Three studies investigated patients' preferences of dose fractionations. In the Australian study, most patients favored single fraction RT as long as long-term outcomes were not compromised. Durability of pain relief was considered more important than short-term convenience factors. In the Singapore study, 85% of patients would choose extended courses of RT (24 Gy/6) compared to a single 8 Gy. In the Canadian study, most patients (76%) would choose a single 8 Gy over 20 Gy/5 of palliative RT due to greater convenience.

CONCLUSION

Despite strong evidence supporting the use of single fraction RT, current practices and preferences favor multiple fractions for the treatment of bone metastases. This has significant implications for the overall quality of life, RT department workload, costs to healthcare systems, and patient convenience.

Scoring the effect of radiotherapy for painful bone metastases

RATIONALE

The evaluation of the analgesic effects of radiotherapy in painful bone metastases is a matter of controversies due to a lack of appropriate tools to define the outcome. An integration of competences in monitoring the pain response and modifying the opioid treatment according to changes of the clinical condition is mandatory.

PROPOSED METHOD

A meaningful score, used in previous works to monitor the global response to an analgesic intervention in advanced cancer patients, is proposed. A case report, in which opioids are first titrated and then tapered, is described as an example of application of this method.

Palliation of metastatic bone pain: single fraction versus multifraction radiotherapy - a systematic review of the randomised trials

BACKGROUND

Recent randomised studies reported that single fraction radiotherapy was as effective as multifraction radiotherapy in relieving pain due to bone metastasis. However, there are concerns about the higher re-treatment rates and the efficacy of preventing future complications such as pathological fracture and spinal cord compression by single fraction radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVES

To undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis of single fraction radiotherapy versus multifraction radiotherapy for metastatic bone pain relief and prevention of bone complications.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were identified through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cancerlit, reference lists of relevant articles and conference proceedings. Relevant data was extracted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised studies comparing single fraction radiotherapy with multifraction radiotherapy on metastatic bone pain

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The analyses were performed using intention-to-treat principle. The results were pooled using meta-analysis to estimate the effect of treatment on pain response, re-treatment rate, pathological fracture rate and spinal cord compression rate.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven trials that involved 3435 patients were identified. Of 3435 patients, 52 patients were randomised more than once for different painful bone metastasis sites. Altogether, 3487 painful sites were randomised. The trials included patients with painful bone metastases of any primary sites, but were mainly prostate, breast and lung. The overall pain response rates for single fraction radiotherapy and multifraction radiotherapy were 60% (1059/1779) and 59% (1038/1769) respectively, giving an odds ratio of 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89 - 1.19) indicating no difference between the two radiotherapy schedules. There was also no difference in complete pain response rates for single fraction radiotherapy (34% [497/1441]) and multifraction radiotherapy (32% [463/1435]) with an odds ratio of 1.11 (95%CI 0.94-1.30). Patients treated by single fraction radiotherapy had a higher re-treatment rate with 21.5% (267/1240) requiring re-treatment compared to 7.4% (91/1236) of patients in the multifraction radiotherapy arm (odds ratio 3.44 [95%CI 2.67-4.43]). The pathological fracture rate was also higher in single fraction radiotherapy arm patients. Three percent (37/1240) of patients treated by single fraction radiotherapy developed pathological fracture compared to 1.6% (20/1236) for those treated by multifraction radiotherapy (odds ratio 1.82 [95%CI 1.06-3.11]). The spinal cord compression rates were similar for both arms (odds ratio 1.41 [95%CI 0.72-2.75]). Repeated analyses excluding dropout patients gave similar results.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Single fraction radiotherapy was as effective as multifraction radiotherapy in relieving metastatic bone pain. However, the re-treatment rate and pathological fracture rates were higher after single fraction radiotherapy. Studies with quality of life and health economic end points are warranted to find out the optimal treatment option.

Symptom control

Symptom control has become increasingly recognized as an important goal in patient care. In this article, advances in symptom assessment, and various definitions of symptom improvement are reviewed. Theoretical concepts underlying symptom control and clinically significant change are presented, as well as the role of symptom control as an endpoint in clinical trials. Symptom control is then surveyed in two broad categories for selected symptoms. The first area is therapy related symptoms, secondary to chemotherapy, radiation, hormonal therapy, and surgery. Symptoms reviewed include chemotherapy related mucositis, emesis, fatigue; hot flashes; and radiation related dermatitis, xerostomia, and mucositis. The second area is palliative oncologic approaches to disease-related symptoms. Results in palliative chemotherapy, palliative radiation therapy, cancer pain, and lack of appetite are summarized. Areas requiring further research are noted. Findings are presented in both a clinical and research context to help guide the reader with interpreting symptom control studies.

Patient preference for radiotherapy fractionation schedule in the palliation of painful bone metastases

PURPOSE

The radiotherapeutic management of painful bone metastases is controversial, with several institutional and national guidelines advocating use of single-fraction radiotherapy. We aimed to determine patient choice of fractionation schedule after involvement in the decision-making process by use of a decision board.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Advantages and disadvantages of two fractionation schedules (24 Gy in six fractions v 8 Gy in one fraction) used in the randomized Dutch Bone Metastasis Study were discussed with patients using a decision board. Patients were asked to choose a fractionation schedule, to give reasons for their choice, and to indicate level of satisfaction with being involved in decision making.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients were entered. Eighty-five percent (95% confidence interval, 74% to 93%) chose 24 Gy in six fractions over 8 Gy in one fraction (P <.0005). Variables including age, sex, performance status, tumor type, pain score, and paying class were not significantly related to patient choice. Multiple fractionation was chosen for lower re-treatment rates (92%) and fewer fractures (32%). Single-fraction treatment was chosen for cost (11%) and convenience (89%). Eighty-four percent of patients expressed positive opinions about being involved in the decision-making process.

CONCLUSION

Decision board instruments are feasible and acceptable in an Asian population. The vast majority of patients preferred 24 Gy fractionated radiotherapy compared with a single fraction of 8 Gy. These results indicate the need for further research in this important area and serve to remind both clinicians and national or institutional policy makers of the importance of individual patient preference in treatment decision making.

Primary treatment endpoint following palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: need for a consensus definition?

OBJECTIVES

To compare and contrast the definitions of primary treatment endpoints in randomized studies of dose-fractionation schedules for treating bone metastases and to identify basic characteristics of treatment endpoint that may require consensus among investigators.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of various dose-fractionation schedules for painful bone metastases, published between 1980 and 1999, and on-going trials whose protocols were available, were systematically reviewed based on the following features of the primary treatment endpoint: (i) degree of pain relief; (ii) timing of the pain response assessment; (iii) effect of co-interventions on pain relief; (iv) the reduction of analgesic as a treatment response; and (v) quantification of response duration.

RESULTS

Ten published RCTs (each sampled over 100 patients), plus two current trial protocols were reviewed. Five of the 12 studies defined any reduction in pain score as the primary endpoint. Three trials defined response at pre-determined time points, whereas eight studies attributed pain improvement at any time during follow-up to the effect of radiotherapy. No trial incorporated effect of systemic treatments on response. Only two trials incorporated analgesic scores into the primary endpoint criteria, although several trials reported results of combined pain and analgesic relief. Eight trials reported duration of response. Three provided some estimation of duration with respect to survival: two of them employing actuarial time to pain progression, and one calculated the ratio of pain response to median survival duration (percent net relief). Quality of life was measured in four of 12 studies, as secondary endpoint.

CONCLUSION

Although available data suggest similarity in pain relief among various dose-fractionation schedules, accurate and consistent description of the degree of benefit from radiotherapy is lacking. While pain relief is a consistent primary treatment goal among randomized trials, a consensus on several important features of treatment endpoint is needed in order to establish common grounds for future trials in palliative radiotherapy.

Malignant bone pain: pathophysiology and treatments

Metastatic involvement of the bone is one of the most frequent causes of pain in cancer patients and represents one of the first signs of widespread neoplastic disease. The pain may originate directly from the bone, from nerve root compression, or from muscle spasms in the area of the lesions. The mechanism of metastatic bone pain is mainly somatic (nociceptive), even though, in some cases, neuropathic and visceral stimulations may overlap. The conventional symptomatic treatment of metastatic bone pain requires the use of multidisciplinary therapies, such as radiotherapy, in association with systemic treatment (hormonotherapy, chemotherapy, radioisotopes) with the support of analgesic therapy. Recently, studies have indicated the use of bisphosphonates in the treatment of pain and in the prevention of skeletal complications in patients with metastatic bone disease. In some patients, pharmacologic treatment, radiotherapy, and radioisotopes administered alone or in association are not able to manage pain adequately. The role of neuroinvasive techniques in treating metastatic bone pain is debated. The clinical conditions of the patient, his life expectancy, and quality of life must guide the physician in the choice of the best possible therapy.

Palliative radiotherapy of bone metastases: an evaluation of outcome measures

The objective of this study was to identify and evaluate important patient-based outcomes that are specific to the palliative radiotherapy of bone metastases. We first conducted a literature review to identify and evaluate outcomes that are currently in use. To identify outcomes that are important to patients, in-depth patient interviews were conducted. Finally, issues identified through the interviews were quantified through a prospective survey, in which patients completed a questionnaire prior to commencing radiotherapy and again after 6 weeks. In our literature review, we found that there was no standardized definition of either response to radiotherapy or assessment of pain relief. Pain measurement in many studies was undertaken using very simple measures, which could possibly yield inaccurate results. The vast majority of studies did not include quality of life as an endpoint. The patient interviews and survey showed that chronic pain and associated limitation of movement were the disease symptoms causing the most concern. Having a clear, alert mind and being able in self-care were the aspects of daily living given the highest priority. Sustained pain relief and minimizing the risk of future complications were the main priorities relating to radiotherapy treatment. The practical aspects of treatment (travelling distance, remaining at home and brevity of treatment) were of least importance. This study indicates the complexity of evaluating the outcomes of palliative interventions, and confirms the deficiencies of pain relief as the primary end-point. The patient's quality of life is affected by many factors other than pain (such as limited mobility, reduced performance, side effects and impaired role functioning); hence a wider range of end-points is required. Greater sensitivity is required than in currently used end-points. Concurrent diseases as well as concurrent therapies can make it difficult to attribute effects with precision. Unless such factors are considered in research design, the results may prove unreliable.