Quality-of-life and toxicity in cancer patients treated with multiple courses of radiation therapy

•

Multiple repeat radiotherapy courses are used more frequently.

•

Prediction of tolerability, quality of life and toxicity remains a challenge.

•

Patients treated with a minimum of five radiotherapies show a stable quality of life.

•

Yet, fatigue and low levels of hemoglobin and lymphocytes are long-term side effects.

Background

Treatment of metastatic cancer patients with multiple repeat courses of radiotherapy has become more frequent due to their improved overall survival. However, very little is known about their long-term outcome. This analysis reports on the quality-of-life, hematologic toxicity, patient-reported experiences and satisfaction, and psychological distress of cancer patients treated with multiple repeat radiotherapy.

Methods

All patients treated with ≥5 courses of radiotherapy between 2011 and 2019 at the Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich (USZ) were screened for this study. A course of radiotherapy was defined as all treatment sessions to one anatomical site under one medical indication. All patients completed two questionnaires: EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire for quality-of-life and a questionnaire evaluating psychological distress and patient-reported experiences. Hematologic toxicities were assessed via a recent blood sample.

Results

Of n = 33 patients treated with ≥5 radiotherapy courses and being alive, 20 (60.6%) participated in this study. The most common primary tumor was non-small cell lung cancer (n = 14, 42.4%). The most common sites of irradiation were brain (n = 78, 37.1%) and bone metastases (n = 59, 28.1%). All participating patients reported that they had experienced a subjective benefit from multiple repeat radiotherapy and denied increased side effects in later radiotherapy courses. Yet, 45% (n = 9) of the patients reported an increase of psychological distress with increasing numbers of radiotherapy treatments. While global health status was stable, patients having received multiple repeat radiotherapy reported increased fatigue (p = <0.006). Blood analysis showed significantly reduced hemoglobin and lymphocyte levels compared to the healthy population (p = <0.03).

Discussion and conclusion

Patient-reported experiences and satisfaction of long-term cancer patients treated with multiple repeat radiotherapy are positive. However, increased levels of fatigue and significantly reduced hemoglobin and lymphocyte levels were observed. These data indicate the need to further investigate the effects of multiple courses of radiotherapy in chronic cancer patients.

Local Radiation Therapy Before and During Induction Delays Stem Cell Mobilization and Collection in Multiple Myeloma Patients

In multiple myeloma, local radiation therapy (RT) of osseous lesions before peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) mobilization is assumed to impair the PBSC mobilization and collection. However, the results of previously published studies are inconsistent and do not evaluate detailed metrics of RT and PBSC outcome parameters. In total, 352 patients undergoing PBSC mobilizations and RT in first-line treatment were evaluated. Patients were grouped into RT (n = 283) and no RT (n = 69) before PBSC mobilization. Except for the International Staging System score, both groups were homogeneous regarding the first diagnosis characteristics, first-line treatments, and response parameters. RT metrics (RT yes versus no, volume of irradiated hematopoietic bone marrow [BM], biologically equivalent doses in 2 Gy fractions [EQD2]) were analyzed for the following PBSC outcome parameters: achievement of the PBSC collection goal, CD34+ cell collection yield, duration of the mobilization phase, and number of leukapheresis (LP) sessions to reach the collection goal. No statistically significant differences in the percentage of collection failures to reach at least 3 sufficient PBSC transplants were identified comparing patients with (n = 32 [11%]) and without RT (n = 4 [6%]) before PBSC mobilization (P = .265). However, patients with RT before PBSC mobilization showed a significant prolongation of the PBSC mobilization (median 1 day, P =.026) and required a higher number of LP sessions to reach the collection goal (median 1 LP, P < .001) compared with patients who received RT after PBSC mobilization. Moreover, patients with RT before PBSC mobilization reached a significantly lower CD34+ cell collection result (mean 8.94 versus 9.81 × 10⁶/kg body weight [bw], P = .002). No correlation was identified between the overall CD34+ cell yield and the volume of irradiated hematopoietic BM or EQD2, respectively. In the RT before PBSC mobilization group, patients who required more than 1 LP session to reach the PBSC collection goal after RT had a significantly higher percentage of radiated hematopoietic BM compared to those who required only 1 LP session (mean 9.7% versus 7.2%, P = .002). Overall, our study indicates a negative impact of RT on PBSC mobilization and collection. Apart from emergency settings, it might be beneficial to postpone RT to a post-PBSC collection time point. © 2021 American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Future-proof Radiation therapist (RTT) practice in a pandemic - Lessons learnt from COVID-19

•

RT is an essential service that must continue despite the challenges posed by COVID-19.

•

Our study suggests changes were implemented into RTT practice in response to COVID-19.

•

Proactive measures are needed to protect both RTTs and patients in future Covid surges.

Background and Purpose

The European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology Radiation Therapist Committee (ESTRO RTTC) published a guidance document and infographic providing recommendations to minimise risk of COVID-19 transmission in radiotherapy (RT) departments. The purpose of this study was to investigate the changes embedded in RT practice in the COVID-19 era and to recommend proactive measures to protect RT practice in future pandemics.

Materials and Methods

The study was initiated by the ESTRO Radiation Oncology Safety and Quality Committee (ROSQC). A survey consisting of multiple choice, open ended and Likert scale questions was created to analyse the extent of changes embedded in RT practice in response to the COVID-19 pandemic under the four domains: patient care, RTT workflow, remote working and RT practice. This online survey was distributed globally in May 2020.

Results

229 respondents across 27 countries completed the survey. 60% of respondents reported continuing/commencing RT in COVID-19 patients. Routine testing of patients and RTTs was not common. Split teams' procedures, hot linacs and separate entrances were implemented by 50% of respondents. Remote working was implemented for RT team members where face to face patient contact was not essential. Lack of staff, connectivity issues and lack of confirmed positive cases in the department were the main reasons cited for not implementing recommended measures.

Conclusion

It is suggested that RT departments have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic and implemented certain changes in RT practice. RT departments should act now to implement recommended proactive measures to protect patients and RTTs – frontline healthcare workers.

Association between Preoperative Pelvic Irradiation and Toxicity of Subsequent Chemotherapy in Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials have shown a lower efficacy of postoperative chemotherapy in rectal cancer patients having received preoperative radiotherapy than in nonirradiated colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. We hypothesized that preoperative radio(chemo)therapy impairs the relative dose intensity (RDI) of further chemotherapy because of long-term radiation damage. This retrospective study aimed to test this hypothesis.

METHODS

The analysis was conducted on 220 consecutive patients with CRC who received FOLFOX-4 postoperatively or because of cancer relapse. Of these, 41 patients with rectal cancer had preoperatively received radio(chemo)therapy (study group) and the remaining 179 with CRC had not (control group). The RDI of oxaliplatin at 8 and 16 weeks was calculated.

RESULTS

The median RDI of oxaliplatin at 8 weeks was 95.91% in the study group and 96.15% in the control group (p = 0.79). The corresponding percentages at 16 weeks were 87.6 and 86.5%, respectively (p = 0.55). It was found that within 0-8 weeks, 26.9% of the patients in the study group and 26.3% in the control group had grade 3+ toxicity, hypersensitivity reactions, or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor administration (p = 0.94). The corresponding percentages for 0-16 weeks were 44.8 and 43.9%, respectively (p = 0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no association between preoperative radio(chemo)therapy and the RDI of FOLFOX-4. We failed to explain the inferior efficacy of postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer who had preoperatively received irradiation compared to those with CRC who had not.