1
|
Alcorn S, Cortés ÁA, Bradfield L, Brennan M, Dennis K, Diaz DA, Doung YC, Elmore S, Hertan L, Johnstone C, Jones J, Larrier N, Lo SS, Nguyen QN, Tseng YD, Yerramilli D, Zaky S, Balboni T. External Beam Radiation Therapy for Palliation of Symptomatic Bone Metastases: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol 2024; 14:377-397. [PMID: 38788923 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2024.04.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2024] [Revised: 04/24/2024] [Accepted: 04/25/2024] [Indexed: 05/26/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Alcorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
| | - Ángel Artal Cortés
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet, Zaragoza, Spain
| | - Lisa Bradfield
- American Society for Radiation Oncology, Arlington, Virginia
| | | | - Kristopher Dennis
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Dayssy A Diaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Yee-Cheen Doung
- Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon
| | - Shekinah Elmore
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Lauren Hertan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Candice Johnstone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
| | - Joshua Jones
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rochester Regional Health, Rochester, New York
| | - Nicole Larrier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Simon S Lo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Quynh-Nhu Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas - MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Yolanda D Tseng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Divya Yerramilli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Sandra Zaky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| | - Tracy Balboni
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Grosinger AJ, Alcorn SR. An Update on the Management of Bone Metastases. Curr Oncol Rep 2024; 26:400-408. [PMID: 38539021 PMCID: PMC11021281 DOI: 10.1007/s11912-024-01515-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/04/2024] [Indexed: 04/17/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander J Grosinger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Mail Code 494, 420 Delaware St. SE, Minneapolis, MN, 55455-0110, USA
| | - Sara R Alcorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Mail Code 494, 420 Delaware St. SE, Minneapolis, MN, 55455-0110, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gojsevic M, Shariati S, Chan AW, Bonomo P, Zhang E, Kennedy SKF, Rajeswaran T, Rades D, Vassiliou V, Soliman H, Lee SF, Wong HCY, Rembielak A, Oldenburger E, Akkila S, Azevedo L, Chow E. Quality of life in patients with malignant spinal cord compression: a systematic review. Support Care Cancer 2023; 31:736. [PMID: 38055061 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-08186-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2023] [Accepted: 11/13/2023] [Indexed: 12/07/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Malignant spinal cord compression (MSCC) is an oncological emergency that may result in a devastating combination of malignancy and disability. Existing quality of life (QoL) questionnaires commonly used in MSCC literature (EORTC QLQ-C30, BM-22, Brief Pain Inventory, and Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes) may not capture all the commonly reported symptoms and lack specificity to MSCC. The primary objective of this systematic review is to determine unmet patient needs and underreported QoL issues and compile a comprehensive list of QoL issues. The secondary objective of this review is to compile all existing QoL tools and questionnaires and determine whether any QoL issues are not addressed in the existing tools currently used in the literature. METHODS A literature search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases between 1946 and February 6, 2023, to compile all QoL issues and existing questionnaires used to assess QoL in patients with MSCC. All study designs were included given that they discussed QoL issues specific to patients with MSCC. RESULTS The results of this systematic review identified the most frequently discussed QoL issues in the literature studying MSCC. This included direct symptoms of MSCC such as back pain, paralysis, limb weakness/numbness, and urinary/bowel incontinence. Indirect symptoms coming from radiotherapy treatment such as dysphagia, painful swallowing, mouth pain, dry mouth, diarrhea, fatigue, and nausea/vomiting were also noted. Other symptoms resulting from corticosteroid treatment included difficulty sleeping, blurring of vision, weight gain, and mood disturbance. Patients also experienced psychosocial issues such as anxiety, depression, emotional distress, low self-esteem, concerns about dependence on others, concerns about getting home, and fear about their prognosis and future. CONCLUSION This review highlights the QoL issues specific to patients with MSCC and QoL tools capturing these issues. Relevance of QoL issues identified in this systematic review must be prospectively validated by patients and healthcare professionals with experience in treating MSCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Milena Gojsevic
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Saba Shariati
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Adrian Wai Chan
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Tuen Mun Hospital, Hospital Authority, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Pierluigi Bonomo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Elwyn Zhang
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Samantha K F Kennedy
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Thenugaa Rajeswaran
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Dirk Rades
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Vassilios Vassiliou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Bank of Cyprus Oncology Centre, Nicosia, Cyprus
| | - Hany Soliman
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Shing-Fung Lee
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Tuen Mun Hospital, Hospital Authority, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Henry C Y Wong
- Department of Oncology, Princess Margaret Hospital, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Agata Rembielak
- The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Eva Oldenburger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Louvain, Belgium
| | - Shereen Akkila
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | - Edward Chow
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Nielsen AM, Storm KS, Laursen MRT, Gram VR, Rechner LA, Ottosson W, Suppli MH, Sibolt P, Behrens CF, Vogelius IR, Persson GF. Interim analysis of patient-reported outcome compliance and dosimetry in a phase 3 randomized clinical trial of oesophagus-sparing spinal radiotherapy. Acta Oncol 2023; 62:1496-1501. [PMID: 37647380 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2023.2251083] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2023] [Accepted: 08/14/2023] [Indexed: 09/01/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The randomized clinical trial ESO-SPARE investigates if oesophagus-sparing radiotherapy (RT) can reduce dysphagia in patients with metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC). Patient-reported outcome (PRO) is the only follow-up measure. Due to the fragile patient population, low respondent compliance was anticipated. We performed a planned interim analysis of dosimetry and respondent compliance, to ensure that the protocol requirements were met. METHODS Patients >18 years referred for cervical/thoracic MSCC radiotherapy in 1-10 fractions were included from two centres. Patients were randomized (1:1) to standard RT or oesophagus-sparing RT, where predefined oesophageal dose constraints were prioritized over target coverage. Patients completed a trial diary with daily reports of dysphagia for 5 weeks (PRO-CTC-AE) and weekly quality of life reports for 9 weeks (QLQ-C30, EQ-5D-5L). According to power calculation, 124 patients are needed for primary endpoint analysis. The sample size was inflated to 200 patients to account for the fragile patient population. The co-primary endpoints, peak patient-reported dysphagia, and preserved ability to walk (EQ-5D-5L), are analysed at 5 and 9 weeks, respectively. The interim analysis was conducted 90 days after the inclusion of patient no 100. Respondent compliance was assessed at 5 and 9 weeks. In all RT plans, oesophagus and target doses were evaluated regarding adherence to protocol constraints. RESULTS From May 2021 to November 2022, 100 patients were included. Fifty-two were randomized to oesophagus-sparing RT. In 23% of these plans, oesophagus constraints were violated. Overall, the dose to both target and oesophagus was significantly lower in the oesophagus-sparing plans. Only 51% and 41% of the patients were evaluable for co-primary endpoint analysis at five and nine weeks, respectively. Mortality and hospitalization rates were significantly larger in patients who completed <4 days PRO questionnaires. CONCLUSION Compliance was lower than anticipated and interventions to maintain study power are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Mann Nielsen
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Katrine Smedegaard Storm
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Michael R T Laursen
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Vanja Remberg Gram
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Laura Ann Rechner
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Wiviann Ottosson
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Morten Hiul Suppli
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Patrik Sibolt
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Claus F Behrens
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Health Technology, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark
| | - Ivan R Vogelius
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Gitte F Persson
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Compagnone D, Cecchinato R, Pezzi A, Langella F, Damilano M, Redaelli A, Vanni D, Lamartina C, Berjano P, Boriani S. Diagnostic Approach and Differences between Spinal Infections and Tumors. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13:2737. [PMID: 37685273 PMCID: PMC10487270 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13172737] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2023] [Revised: 08/08/2023] [Accepted: 08/19/2023] [Indexed: 09/10/2023] Open
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN A systematic review of the literature about differential diagnosis between spine infection and bone tumors of the spine. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The differential diagnosis between spine infection and bone tumors of the spine can be misled by the prevalence of one of the conditions over the other in different areas of the world. A review of the existing literature on suggestive or even pathognomonic imaging aspects of both can be very useful for correctly orientating the diagnosis and deciding the most appropriate area for biopsy. The purpose of our study is to identify which imaging technique is the most reliable to suggest the diagnosis between spine infection and spine bone tumor. METHODS A primary search on Medline through PubMed distribution was made. We identified five main groups: tuberculous, atypical spinal tuberculosis, pyogenic spondylitis, and neoplastic (primitive and metastatic). For each group, we evaluated the commonest localization, characteristics at CT, CT perfusion, MRI, MRI with Gadolinium, MRI diffusion (DWI) and, in the end, the main features for each group. RESULTS A total of 602 studies were identified through the database search and a screening by titles and abstracts was performed. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 34 articles were excluded and a total of 22 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. For each article, the role of CT-scan, CT-perfusion, MRI, MRI with Gadolinium and MRI diffusion (DWI) in distinguishing the most reliable features to suggest the diagnosis of spine infection versus bone tumor/metastasis was collected. CONCLUSION Definitive differential diagnosis between infection and tumor requires biopsy and culture. The sensitivity and specificity of percutaneous biopsy are 72% and 94%, respectively. Imaging studies can be added to address the diagnosis, but a multidisciplinary discussion with radiologists and nuclear medicine specialists is mandatory.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Andrea Pezzi
- IRCCS Ospedale Galeazzi—Sant’Ambrogio, 20157 Milan, Italy
- Residency Program in Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University of Milan, 20141 Milan, Italy
| | | | - Marco Damilano
- IRCCS Ospedale Galeazzi—Sant’Ambrogio, 20157 Milan, Italy
| | | | - Daniele Vanni
- IRCCS Ospedale Galeazzi—Sant’Ambrogio, 20157 Milan, Italy
| | | | - Pedro Berjano
- IRCCS Ospedale Galeazzi—Sant’Ambrogio, 20157 Milan, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Multidisciplinary Approach to Spinal Metastases and Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression—A New Integrative Flowchart for Patient Management. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15061796. [PMID: 36980681 PMCID: PMC10046378 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15061796] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2023] [Revised: 03/04/2023] [Accepted: 03/14/2023] [Indexed: 03/18/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
7
|
ESTRO ACROP guidelines for external beam radiotherapy of patients with complicated bone metastases. Radiother Oncol 2022; 173:240-253. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.06.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2022] [Revised: 05/31/2022] [Accepted: 06/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
|
8
|
Quality of life in a randomized trial comparing two neoadjuvant regimens for locally advanced rectal cancer-INCAGI004. Support Care Cancer 2022; 30:6557-6572. [PMID: 35486228 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-07059-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2021] [Accepted: 04/11/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (neoCRT) followed by surgery is the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), but the emergence of different drug regimens may result in different response rates. Good clinical response translates into greater sphincter preservation, but quality of life (QOL) may be impaired after treatment due to chemoradiotherapy and surgical side effects. OBJECTIVE To prospectively evaluate the impact of clinical response and surgical resection on QOL in a randomized trial comparing two different neoCRT regimens. METHODS Stage II and III rectal cancer patients were randomized to receive neoCRT with either capecitabine (group 1) or 5-Fu and leucovorin (group 2) concomitant to long-course radiotherapy. Clinical downstaging was accessed using MRI 6-8 weeks after treatment. EORTCs QLQ-C30 and CR38 were applied before treatment (T0), after neoCRT (T1), after rectal resection (T2), early after adjuvant chemotherapy (T3), and 1 year after the end of treatment or stoma closure (T4). The Wexner scale was used for fecal incontinence evaluation at T4. A C30SummaryScore (Geisinger and cols.) was calculated to compare QOL results. RESULTS Thirty-two patients were assigned to group 1 and 31 to group 2. Clinical downstaging occurred in 70.0% of group 1 and 53.3% of group 2 (p = 0.288), and sphincter preservation was 83.3% in group 1 and 80.0% in group 2 (p = 0.111). No significant difference in QOL was detected when comparing the two treatment groups after neoCRT using QLQ-C30. However, the CR38 module detected differences in micturition problems (15.3 points), gastrointestinal problems (15.3 points), defecation problems (11.8 points), and sexual satisfaction (13.3 points) favoring the capecitabine group. C30SummaryScore detected significant improvement comparing T0 to T1 and deterioration comparing T1 to T2 (p = 0.025). The mean Wexner scale score was 9.2, and a high score correlated with symptoms of diarrhea and defecation problems at T4. CONCLUSIONS QOL was equivalent between groups after neoCRT except for micturition problems, gastrointestinal problems, defecation problems, and sexual satisfaction favoring the capecitabine arm after. The overall QOL using the C30SummaryScore was improved after neoCRT, but decreased following rectal resection, returning to basal levels at late evaluation. Fecal incontinence was high after sphincter preservation. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03428529.
Collapse
|
9
|
Tibdewal A, Sharma A, Gurram L, Mummudi N, Agarwal J. Outcomes of Palliative Radiotherapy in Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression in Lung Cancer-A Prospective Observational Study from Tata Memorial Hospital. South Asian J Cancer 2021; 10:120-126. [PMID: 34568226 PMCID: PMC8460344 DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1731903] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background
Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) secondary to lung cancer (LC) is a debilitating complication associated with poor prognosis and is commonly treated with radiotherapy (RT). There is no consensus for RT dose fractionation in spinal cord compression.
Methods
Forty consecutive patients of LC with radiological evidence of MESCC treated with palliative RT were evaluated for functional outcomes (pain, ambulation, and sphincter function) at 2-, 4-, and 24-week post RT completion. Pain assessment was done using visual analogue scale (VAS) and response was categorized according to international consensus criteria, ambulation status (AS) using Tomita’s scale, and sphincter function by the presence or absence of a catheter. Overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank test. Impact of potential prognostic factors on survival was also analyzed and
p
-value ≤0.05 was considered significant.
Results
Sixteen, 22, and two patients received 8 Gy single fraction (SF), 20 Gy in five fractions (20/5), and 30 Gy in 10 fractions (30/10), respectively. At 2 weeks, overall response (OR) rates of pain, ambulation, and sphincter control were 73, 81, and 81%, respectively. At 4 and 24 weeks, 93.7, 84.3, 87.5% and 88, 94, 76.5% had OR, respectively. Median OS was 4 months. Six- and 12-months OS was 50 and 37.5%. Nonsignificant difference in OS was seen between SF and 20/5 fractions (median 2.2 vs. 7.1 months,
p
= 0.39). Age ≤50 years was the only significant factor (
p
<0.05) in univariate analysis for OS.
Conclusion
Radiotherapy provided equivalent pain control, ambulation, and sphincter function compared with reported literature in MESCC. Nonsignificant difference in OS exists between SF and multifraction RT regimens.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anil Tibdewal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Alisha Sharma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Lavanya Gurram
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Naveen Mummudi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Jaiprakash Agarwal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Palliative radiotherapy indications during the COVID-19 pandemic and in future complex logistic settings: the NORMALITY model. Radiol Med 2021; 126:1619-1656. [PMID: 34570309 PMCID: PMC8475365 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-021-01414-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2021] [Accepted: 08/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
Abstract
Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged healthcare systems worldwide over the last few months, and it continues to do so. Although some restrictions are being removed, it is not certain when the pandemic is going to be definitively over. Pandemics can be seen as a highly complex logistic scenario. From this perspective, some of the indications provided for palliative radiotherapy (PRT) during the COVID-19 pandemic could be maintained in the future in settings that limit the possibility of patients achieving symptom relief by radiotherapy.
This paper has two aims: (1) to provide a summary of the indications for PRT during the COVID-19 pandemic; since some indications can differ slightly, and to avoid any possible contradictions, an expert panel composed of the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) and the Palliative Care and Supportive Therapies Working Group (AIRO-palliative) voted by consensus on the summary; (2) to introduce a clinical care model for PRT [endorsed by AIRO and by a spontaneous Italian collaborative network for PRT named “La Rete del Sollievo” (“The Net of Relief”)]. The proposed model, denoted “No cOmpRoMise on quality of life by pALliative radiotherapy” (NORMALITY), is based on an AIRO-palliative consensus-based list of clinical indications for PRT and on practical suggestions regarding the management of patients potentially suitable for PRT but dealing with highly complex logistics scenarios (similar to the ongoing logistics limits due to COVID-19).
Material and Methods First, a summary of the available literature guidelines for PRT published during the COVID-19 pandemic was prepared. A systematic literature search based on the PRISMA approach was performed to retrieve the available literature reporting guideline indications fully or partially focused on PRT. Tables reporting each addressed clinical presentation and respective literature indications were prepared and distributed into two main groups: palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies. These summaries were voted in by consensus by selected members of the AIRO and AIRO-palliative panels. Second, based on the summary for palliative indications during the COVID-19 pandemic, a clinical care model to facilitate recruitment and delivery of PRT to patients in complex logistic scenarios was proposed. The summary tables were critically integrated and shuffled according to clinical presentations and then voted on in a second consensus round. Along with the adapted guideline indications, some methods of performing the first triage of patients and facilitating a teleconsultation preliminary to the first in-person visit were developed.
Results After the revision of 161 documents, 13 papers were selected for analysis. From the papers, 19 clinical presentation items were collected; in total, 61 question items were extracted and voted on (i.e., for each presentation, more than one indication was provided from the literature). Two tables summarizing the PRT indications during the COVID-19 pandemic available from the literature (PRT COVID-19 summary tables) were developed: palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies. The consensus of the vote by the AIRO panel for the PRT COVID-19 summary was reached. The PRT COVID-19 summary tables for palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies were adapted for clinical presentations possibly associated with patients in complex clinical scenarios other than the COVID-19 pandemic. The two new indication tables (i.e., “Normality model of PRT indications”) for both palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies were voted on in a second consensus round. The consensus rate was reached and strong. Written forms facilitating two levels of teleconsultation (triage and remote visits) were also developed, both in English and in Italian, to evaluate the patients for possible indications for PRT before scheduling clinical visits. Conclusion We provide a comprehensive summary of the literature guideline indications for PRT during COVID-19 pandemic. We also propose a clinical care model including clinical indications and written forms facilitating two levels of teleconsultation (triage and remote visits) to evaluate the patients for indications of PRT before scheduling clinical visits. The normality model could facilitate the provision of PRT to patients in future complex logistic scenarios.
Collapse
|
11
|
Furlan JC, Wilson JR, Massicotte EM, Sahgal A, Michael FG. Recent advances and new discoveries in the pipeline of the treatment of primary spinal tumors and spinal metastases: A scoping review. Neuro Oncol 2021; 24:1-13. [PMID: 34508647 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noab214] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
The field of spinal oncology has substantially evolved over the past decades. This review synthesizes and appraises what was learned and what will potentially be discovered from the recently completed and ongoing clinical studies related to the treatment of primary and secondary spinal neoplasms. This scoping review included all clinical studies on the treatment of spinal neoplasms registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov website from February/2000 to December/2020. The terms "spinal cord tumor", "spinal metastasis", and "metastatic spinal cord compression" were used. Of the 174 registered clinical studies on primary spinal tumors and spinal metastasis, most of the clinical studies registered in this American registry were interventional studies led by single institutions in North America (n=101), Europe (n=43), Asia (n=24) or other continents (n=6). The registered clinical studies mainly focused on treatment strategies for spinal neoplasms (90.2%) that included investigating stereotactic radiosurgery (n=33), radiotherapy (n=21), chemotherapy (n=20), and surgical technique (n=11). Of the 69 completed studies, the results from 44 studies were published in the literature. In conclusion, this review highlights the key features of the 174 clinical studies on spinal neoplasms that were registered from 2000 to 2020. Clinical trials were heavily skewed towards the metastatic population as opposed to the primary tumours which likely reflects the rarity of the latter condition and associated challenges in undertaking prospective clinical studies in this population. This review serves to emphasize the need for a focused approach to enhancing translational research in spinal neoplasms with a particular emphasis on primary tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julio C Furlan
- Lyndhurst Centre, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,KITE Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Department of Medicine, Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jefferson R Wilson
- Department of Surgery, Division of Neurosurgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Eric M Massicotte
- Department of Surgery, Division of Neurosurgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Ontario, Canada
| | - Fehlings G Michael
- Department of Surgery, Division of Neurosurgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
O'Donovan A, Leech M. Personalised treatment for older adults with cancer: The role of frailty assessment. Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol 2020; 16:30-38. [PMID: 33102819 PMCID: PMC7568178 DOI: 10.1016/j.tipsro.2020.09.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2020] [Revised: 09/04/2020] [Accepted: 09/04/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
It is widely accepted in clinical practice that chronological age is a poor predictor of treatment tolerance and outcomes in older adults with cancer. Intrinsic vulnerability is more a function of underlying frailty, rather than chronological age. Frailty is a state of increased vulnerability to stressors, such as cancer and its treatment, which can lead to adverse health outcomes for patients. Capturing this heterogeneity in reserve capacity is the cornerstone of management in geriatricmedicine, but remains poorly understood or adopted in radiation oncology. A two-step approach, using a shorter screening tool, followed by full assessment for those who need it, is the mostresourceful way of implementing frailty assessment in radiotherapy departments. It is important for radiation oncology professionals to identify frailty and to use this information in multidisciplinary decision making in order to develop a personalised radiotherapy approach for the older person. There are many ways we can effectively use this information, such as considering treatment fractionation schedules that would limit the burden of travel for those with social frailty, or reviewing the range of modalities at our disposal, which might limit toxicity in the older person at high risk of deterioration during treatment. Frailty assessment is not carried out in many radiotherapy departments presently, but there are many international models to use as exemplars as to how it may be implemented in clinical practice. There are many opportunities for further research and role development in this field at the current time.
Collapse
|
13
|
Loblaw A, George K, Misra V. Surgical and Radiotherapeutic Management of Malignant Extradural Spinal Cord Compression. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2020; 32:745-752. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2020.07.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2020] [Revised: 07/28/2020] [Accepted: 07/31/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
|
14
|
Yerramilli D, Xu AJ, Gillespie EF, Shepherd AF, Beal K, Gomez D, Yamada J, Tsai CJ, Yang TJ. Palliative Radiation Therapy for Oncologic Emergencies in the Setting of COVID-19: Approaches to Balancing Risks and Benefits. Adv Radiat Oncol 2020; 5:589-594. [PMID: 32363243 PMCID: PMC7194647 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2020.04.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2020] [Revised: 03/31/2020] [Accepted: 04/01/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Palliation of metastatic disease compromises a significant portion of radiation treatments in the United States. These patients present a unique challenge in resource-limited settings, as expeditious treatment is often required to prevent serious morbidity. In order to reduce the risk of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 and maximize the benefit to patients, we present evidence-based recommendations for radiation in patients with oncologic emergencies. Radiation oncologists with expertise in the treatment of metastatic disease at a high-volume comprehensive cancer center reviewed the available evidence and recommended best practices for the treatment of common oncologic emergencies, with attention to balancing the risk of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 and the potential morbidity of delaying treatment. Many prospective trials and national guidelines support the use of abbreviated courses of radiotherapy for patients with oncologic emergencies. As such, in the setting of the current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the use of hypofractionated radiation therapy for patients requiring palliation for oncologic emergencies achieves desirable functional outcomes without compromising care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Erin F. Gillespie
- PROMISE (Precision Radiation for Oligometastatic and Metastatic Disease) Program, Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Annemarie F. Shepherd
- PROMISE (Precision Radiation for Oligometastatic and Metastatic Disease) Program, Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Kathryn Beal
- PROMISE (Precision Radiation for Oligometastatic and Metastatic Disease) Program, Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Daniel Gomez
- PROMISE (Precision Radiation for Oligometastatic and Metastatic Disease) Program, Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Josh Yamada
- PROMISE (Precision Radiation for Oligometastatic and Metastatic Disease) Program, Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Non-inferiority randomised phase 3 trial comparing two radiation schedules (single vs. five fractions) in malignant spinal cord compression. Br J Cancer 2020; 122:1315-1323. [PMID: 32157242 PMCID: PMC7188681 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-020-0768-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2019] [Revised: 11/12/2019] [Accepted: 11/13/2019] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The optimal EBRT schedule for MSCC is undetermined. Our aim was to determine whether a single fraction (SF) was non-inferior to five daily fractions (5Fx), for functional motor outcome. Methods Patients not proceeding with surgical decompression in this multicentre non-inferiority, Phase 3 trial were randomised to 10 Gy/SF or 20 Gy/5Fx. A change in mobility from baseline to 5 weeks for each patient, was evaluated by a Modified Tomita score: 1 = ‘Walk unaided’, 2 = ‘With walking aid’ and 3 = ‘Bed-bound’. The margin used to establish non-inferiority was a detrimental change of −0.4 in the mean difference between arms. Results One-hundred and twelve eligible patients were enrolled. Seventy-three patients aged 30–87 were evaluated for the primary analysis. The 95% CI for the difference in the mean change in mobility scores between arms was −0.12 to 0.6. Since −0.4 is not included in the interval, there is evidence that 10 Gy/SF is non-inferior to 20 Gy/5Fx. One grade 3 AE was reported in the 5Fx arm. Twelve (26%) patients in the 5Fx arm had a Grade 2–3 AE compared with six (11%) patients in the SF arm (p = 0.093). Conclusion For mobility preservation, one 10-Gy fraction is non-inferior to 20 Gy in five fractions, in patients with MSCC not proceeding with surgical decompression. Clinical Trial Registration Cancer Trials Ireland ICORG 05-03; NCT00968643; EU-20952.
Collapse
|
16
|
Hoskin PJ, Hopkins K, Misra V, Holt T, McMenemin R, Dubois D, McKinna F, Foran B, Madhavan K, MacGregor C, Bates A, O’Rourke N, Lester JF, Sevitt T, Roos D, Dixit S, Brown G, Arnott S, Thomas SS, Forsyth S, Beare S, Reczko K, Hackshaw A, Lopes A. Effect of Single-Fraction vs Multifraction Radiotherapy on Ambulatory Status Among Patients With Spinal Canal Compression From Metastatic Cancer: The SCORAD Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2019; 322:2084-2094. [PMID: 31794625 PMCID: PMC6902166 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.17913] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Malignant spinal canal compression, a major complication of metastatic cancer, is managed with radiotherapy to maintain mobility and relieve pain, although there is no standard radiotherapy regimen. OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether single-fraction radiotherapy is noninferior to 5 fractions of radiotherapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Multicenter noninferiority randomized clinical trial conducted in 42 UK and 5 Australian radiotherapy centers. Eligible patients (n = 686) had metastatic cancer with spinal cord or cauda equina compression, life expectancy greater than 8 weeks, and no previous radiotherapy to the same area. Patients were recruited between February 2008 and April 2016, with final follow-up in September 2017. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive external beam single-fraction 8-Gy radiotherapy (n = 345) or 20 Gy of radiotherapy in 5 fractions over 5 consecutive days (n = 341). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end point was ambulatory status at week 8, based on a 4-point scale and classified as grade 1 (ambulatory without the use of aids and grade 5 of 5 muscle power) or grade 2 (ambulatory using aids or grade 4 of 5 muscle power). The noninferiority margin for the difference in ambulatory status was -11%. Secondary end points included ambulatory status at weeks 1, 4, and 12 and overall survival. RESULTS Among 686 randomized patients (median [interquartile range] age, 70 [64-77] years; 503 (73%) men; 44% had prostate cancer, 19% had lung cancer, and 12% had breast cancer), 342 (49.8%) were analyzed for the primary end point (255 patients died before the 8-week assessment). Ambulatory status grade 1 or 2 at week 8 was achieved by 115 of 166 (69.3%) patients in the single-fraction group vs 128 of 176 (72.7%) in the multifraction group (difference, -3.5% [1-sided 95% CI, -11.5% to ∞]; P value for noninferiority = .06). The difference in ambulatory status grade 1 or 2 in the single-fraction vs multifraction group was -0.4% (63.9% vs 64.3%; [1-sided 95% CI, -6.9 to ∞]; P value for noninferiority = .004) at week 1, -0.7% (66.8% vs 67.6%; [1-sided 95% CI, -8.1 to ∞]; P value for noninferiority = .01) at week 4, and 4.1% (71.8% vs 67.7%; [1-sided 95% CI, -4.6 to ∞]; P value for noninferiority = .002) at week 12. Overall survival rates at 12 weeks were 50% in the single-fraction group vs 55% in the multifraction group (stratified hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.74-1.41]). Of the 11 other secondary end points that were analyzed, the between-group differences were not statistically significant or did not meet noninferiority criterion. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients with malignant metastatic solid tumors and spinal canal compression, a single radiotherapy dose, compared with a multifraction dose delivered over 5 days, did not meet the criterion for noninferiority for the primary outcome (ambulatory at 8 weeks). However, the extent to which the lower bound of the CI overlapped with the noninferiority margin should be considered when interpreting the clinical importance of this finding. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN Identifiers: ISRCTN97555949 and ISRCTN97108008.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter J. Hoskin
- Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, United Kingdom
- University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Kirsten Hopkins
- Bristol Centre for Haematology and Oncology Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Vivek Misra
- The Christie Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Tanya Holt
- Princess Alexandra Hospital, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | | | - Danny Dubois
- Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, United Kingdom
| | - Fiona McKinna
- Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | - Andrew Bates
- Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | - Noelle O’Rourke
- The Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, United Kingdom
| | | | - Tim Sevitt
- Kent Oncology Centre, Maidstone, United Kingdom
| | - Daniel Roos
- Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia
- University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Sandy Beare
- CRUK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, London, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Andre Lopes
- CRUK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Rades D, Hansen O, Jensen LH, Dziggel L, Staackmann C, Doemer C, Cacicedo J, Conde-Moreno AJ, Segedin B, Ciervide-Jurio R, Rubio-Rodriguez C, Perez-Romasanta LA, Alvarez-Gracia A, Dennis K, Ferrer-Albiach C, Navarro-Martin A, Lopez-Campos F, Jankarashvili N, Janssen S, Olbrich D, Holländer NH. Radiotherapy for metastatic spinal cord compression with increased radiation doses (RAMSES-01): a prospective multicenter study. BMC Cancer 2019; 19:1163. [PMID: 31783816 PMCID: PMC6884857 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-6390-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2019] [Accepted: 11/21/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) and favorable survival prognoses can benefit from radiation doses greater than 30Gy in 10 fractions in terms of improved local progression-free survival (LPFS) and overall survival (OS). METHODS/DESIGN This prospective study mainly investigates LPFS after precision radiotherapy (volumetric modulated arc therapy or stereotactic body radiotherapy) with 18 × 2.33Gy in 3.5 weeks. LPFS is defined as freedom from progression of motor deficits during radiotherapy and an in-field recurrence of MSCC following radiotherapy. The maximum relative dose allowed to the spinal cord is 101.5% of the prescribed dose, resulting in an equivalent dose in 2Gy-fractions (EQD2) for radiation myelopathy is 45.5Gy, which is below the tolerance dose of 50Gy according to the Quantitative Analyses of Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic (QUANTEC). The EQD2 of this regimen for tumor cell kill is 43.1Gy, which is 33% higher than for 30Gy in 10 fractions (EQD2 = 32.5Gy). Primary endpoint is LPFS at 12 months after radiotherapy. Secondary endpoints include the effect of 18 × 2.33Gy on motor function, ambulatory status, sensory function, sphincter dysfunction, LPFS at other follow-up times, overall survival, pain relief, relief of distress and toxicity. Follow-up visits for all endpoints will be performed directly and at 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after radiotherapy. A total of 65 patients are required for the prospective part of the study. These patients will be compared to a historical control group of at least 235 patients receiving conventional radiotherapy with 10x3Gy in 2 weeks. DISCUSSION If precision radiotherapy with 18 × 2.33Gy results in significantly better LPFS than 10x3Gy of conventional radiotherapy, this regimen should be strongly considered for patients with MSCC and favorable survival prognoses. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04043156. Registered 30-07-2019.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dirk Rades
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562 Lübeck, Germany
| | - Olfred Hansen
- Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | | | - Liesa Dziggel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562 Lübeck, Germany
| | - Christian Staackmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562 Lübeck, Germany
| | - Claudia Doemer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562 Lübeck, Germany
| | - Jon Cacicedo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cruces University Hospital, Barakaldo, Vizcaya Spain
| | - Antonio J. Conde-Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University and Polytechnic Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Barbara Segedin
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | | | | | | | - Ana Alvarez-Gracia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, ICO - University Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain
| | - Kristopher Dennis
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital & University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Carlos Ferrer-Albiach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Consorcio Hospital Provincial de Castellón, Castellón, Spain
| | - Arturo Navarro-Martin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | | | - Stefan Janssen
- Medical Practice for Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Hannover, Germany
| | | | - Niels Henrik Holländer
- Department of Oncology and Palliative Units, Zealand University Hospital, Naestved, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Rades D, Šegedin B, Conde-Moreno AJ, Ferrer-Albiach C, Metz M, Polat B, Badakhshi H, Schreiber A, Nitsche M, Cacicedo J, Schild SE. Patient-Reported Outcomes–Secondary Analysis of the SCORE-2 Trial Comparing 4 Gy × 5 to 3 Gy × 10 for Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2019; 105:760-764. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2019] [Revised: 07/22/2019] [Accepted: 08/05/2019] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
|
19
|
Abstract
This article reviews the most common oncologic emergencies encountered by the radiation oncologist, including malignant spinal cord compression, intramedullary spinal cord metastasis, superior vena cava syndrome, hemoptysis, and airway compromise caused by tumor. Important trials evaluating different treatments for these emergencies are reviewed. The role of corticosteroids, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy in these patients is discussed and patient-specific treatment guidelines are suggested.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mannat Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 22 South Greene Street, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA
| | - Pranshu Mohindra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 22 South Greene Street, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA
| | - Mark Mishra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 22 South Greene Street, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA
| | - William Regine
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 22 South Greene Street, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA
| | - Young Kwok
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 22 South Greene Street, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Nieder C. [Patients with metastatic spinal cord compression profit from rapid multidisciplinary diagnostics and treatment]. Strahlenther Onkol 2019; 195:367-368. [PMID: 30767032 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-019-01437-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
|
21
|
Donovan EK, Sienna J, Mitera G, Kumar-Tyagi N, Parpia S, Swaminath A. Single versus multifraction radiotherapy for spinal cord compression: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiother Oncol 2019; 134:55-66. [PMID: 31005225 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.01.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2018] [Revised: 01/14/2019] [Accepted: 01/15/2019] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND While multifraction radiotherapy (RT) regimens (MFRT) have been considered the standard of care in patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) with limited prognosis, recent randomized evidence has demonstrated that single fraction RT (SFRT) may be equivalent in terms of functional and overall outcomes. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine the effects of SFRT compared to short course MFRT in patients with MESCC. METHODS A search of OVID, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to February 2018 was conducted. Randomized and prospective non-randomized trials comparing SFRT and short course MFRT for MESCC were included. Data were analyzed using a random effects model, and relative risks (RR) or hazard ratios (HR) were reported with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria. RESULTS Overall 1717 articles were reviewed. Three randomized trials were eligible for inclusion (n = 712 patients). The pooled treatment effect for SFRT versus MFRT with respect to motor response was RR = 0.96 (95% CI = 0.86-1.07, I2 = 19%), HR = 1.00 (95% CI = 0.88-1.13, I2 = 0%) for OS, and RR = 0.97, (95% CI = 0.85-1.11, I2 = 61%) for bladder function. There was insufficient data to perform a meta-analysis on quality of life, toxicity or pain response, however available information suggests pain response appears similar between SFRT and MFRT. Overall quality of evidence was deemed moderate due to risk of bias. There was no evidence of an observed difference with respect to motor response, bladder dysfunction and OS between SFRT and MFRT for MESCC in patients with a limited prognosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elysia K Donovan
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, Canada.
| | - Julianna Sienna
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, Canada
| | - Gunita Mitera
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Nidhi Kumar-Tyagi
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, Canada
| | - Sameer Parpia
- Department of Statistics and Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| | - Anand Swaminath
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Rades D, Conde-Moreno AJ, Cacicedo J, Veninga T, Segedin B, Stanic K, Schild SE. A scoring system to predict local progression-free survival in patients irradiated with 20 Gy in 5 fractions for malignant spinal cord compression. Radiat Oncol 2018; 13:257. [PMID: 30594231 PMCID: PMC6311053 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-018-1203-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2018] [Accepted: 12/16/2018] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Local progression-free survival (LPFS = stable or improved motor function/resolution of paraplegia during RT without in-field recurrence following RT) is important when treating metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC). An instrument to estimate LPFS was created to identify patients appropriately treated with short-course RT instead of longer-course RT plus/minus decompressive surgery. Methods In 686 patients treated with 20 Gy in 5 fractions alone, ten characteristics were retrospectively analyzed for LPFS including age, interval between tumor diagnosis and RT of MSCC, visceral metastases, other bone metastases, primary tumor type, gender, time developing motor deficits, pre-RT gait function, number of vertebrae affected by MSCC, and performance score. Characteristics significantly (p < 0.05) associated with LPFS on multivariate analyses were incorporated in the scoring system. Six-month LPFS rates for significant characteristics were divided by 10, and corresponding points were added. Results On multivariate analyses, visceral metastases (p < 0.001), tumor type (p = 0.009), time developing motor deficits (p < 0.001) and performance score (p = 0.009) were associated with LPFS and used for the scoring system. Scores for patients ranged between 24 and 35 points. Three groups were designed: 24–28 (A), 29–31 (B) and 32–35 (C) points. Six-month LPFS rates were 46, 69 and 92%, 12-month LPFS rates 46, 63 and 83%. Median survival times were 2 months (61% died within 2 months), 4 months and ≥ 11 months (median not reached). Conclusions Most group A patients appeared sub-optimally treated with 20 Gy in 5 fractions. Patients with survival prognoses ≤2 months may be considered for best supportive care or single-fraction RT, those with prognoses ≥3 months for longer-course RT plus/minus upfront decompressive surgery. Many group B and most group C patients achieved long-time LPFS and appeared sufficiently treated with 20 Gy in 5 fractions. However, based on previous data, long-term survivors may benefit from longer-course RT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dirk Rades
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562, Lübeck, Germany.
| | - Antonio J Conde-Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital and Polytechnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Jon Cacicedo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cruces University Hospital, Barakaldo, Vizcaya, Spain
| | - Theo Veninga
- Department of Radiotherapy, Dr. Bernard Verbeeten Institute, Tilburg, Netherlands
| | - Barbara Segedin
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Karmen Stanic
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Steven E Schild
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, AZ, USA
| |
Collapse
|