30 Gy in 4 Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Fractions for Complex Spinal Metastases: Mature Outcomes Supporting This Novel Regimen

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Sacral Metastases: Deviation From Recommended Target Volume Delineation Increases the Risk of Local Failure

PURPOSE

Although spine stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is considered a standard of care in the mobile spine, mature evidence reporting outcomes specific to sacral metastases is lacking. Furthermore, there is a need to validate the existing sacral SBRT international consensus contouring guidelines to define the optimal contouring approach. We report mature rates of local failure (LF), adverse events, and the effect of contouring deviations in the largest experience to date specific to sacrum SBRT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Consecutive patients who underwent sacral SBRT from 2010 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary endpoint was magnetic resonance imaging-based LF with a focus on adherence to target volume contouring recommendations. Secondary endpoints included vertebral compression fracture and neural toxicity.

RESULTS

Of the 215 sacrum segments treated in 112 patients, most received 30 Gy/4 fractions (51%), 24 Gy/2 fractions (31%), or 30 Gy/5 fractions (10%). Sixteen percent of segments were nonadherent to the consensus guideline with a more restricted target volume (undercontoured). The median follow-up was 21.4 months (range, 1.5-116.9 months). The cumulative incidence of LF at 1 and 2 years was 18.4% and 23.1%, respectively. In those with guideline adherent versus nonadherent contours, the LF rate at 1 year was 15.1% versus 31.4% and at 2 years 18.8% versus 40.0% (hazard ratio [HR], 2.5; 95% CI, 1.4-4.6; P = .003), respectively. On multivariable analysis, guideline nonadherence (HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.3-4.7; P = .008), radioresistant histology (HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.4-4.1; P < .001), and extraosseous extension (HR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.3-4.7; P = .005) predicted for an increased risk of LF. The cumulative incidence of vertebral compression fracture was 7.1% at 1 year and 12.3% at 2 years. Seven patients (6.3%) developed peripheral nerve toxicity, of whom 4 had been previously radiated.

CONCLUSIONS

Sacral SBRT is associated with high efficacy rates and an acceptable toxicity profile. Adhering to consensus guidelines for target volume delineation is recommended to reduce the risk of LF.

Optimizing Clinical Implementation of Hypofractionation: Comprehensive Evidence Synthesis and Practical Guidelines for Low- and Middle-Income Settings

The global cancer burden, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), worsens existing disparities, amplified by the rising costs of advanced treatments. The shortage of radiation therapy (RT) services is a significant issue in LMICs. Extended conventional treatment regimens pose significant challenges, especially in resource-limited settings. Hypofractionated radiotherapy (HRT) and ultra-hypofractionated/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) offer promising alternatives by shortening treatment durations. This approach optimizes the utilization of radiotherapy machines, making them more effective in meeting the growing demand for cancer care. Adopting HRT/SBRT holds significant potential, especially in LMICs. This review provides the latest clinical evidence and guideline recommendations for the application of HRT/SBRT in the treatment of breast, prostate, and lung cancers. It emphasizes the critical importance of rigorous training, technology, stringent quality assurance, and safety protocols to ensure precise and secure treatments. Additionally, it addresses practical considerations for implementing these treatments in LMICs, highlighting the need for comprehensive support and collaboration to enhance patient access to advanced cancer care.

Determining patients with spinal metastases suitable for surgical intervention: A cost-effective analysis

BACKGROUND

Both nonoperative and operative treatments for spinal metastasis are expensive interventions. Patients' expected 3-month survival is believed to be a key factor to determine the most suitable treatment. However, to the best of our knowledge, no previous study lends support to the hypothesis. We sought to determine the cost-effectiveness of operative and nonoperative interventions, stratified by patients' predicted probability of 3-month survival.

METHODS

A Markov model with four defined health states was used to estimate the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs for operative intervention with postoperative radiotherapy and radiotherapy alone (palliative low-dose external beam radiotherapy) of spine metastases. Transition probabilities for the model, including the risks of mortality and functional deterioration, were obtained from secondary and our institutional data. Willingness to pay thresholds were prespecified at $100,000 and $150,000. The analyses were censored after 5-year simulation from a health system perspective and discounted outcomes at 3% per year. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the study design.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $140,907 per QALY for patients with a 3-month survival probability >50%, $3,178,510 per QALY for patients with a 3-month survival probability <50%, and $168,385 per QALY for patients with independent ambulatory and 3-month survival probability >50%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study emphasizes the need to choose patients carefully and estimate preoperative survival for those with spinal metastases. In addition to reaffirming previous research regarding the influence of ambulatory status on cost-effectiveness, our study goes a step further by highlighting that operative intervention with postoperative radiotherapy could be more cost-effective than radiotherapy alone for patients with a better survival outlook. Accurate survival prediction tools and larger future studies could offer more detailed insights for clinical decisions.