Estimating prognosis at the time of repeat whole brain radiation therapy for multiple brain metastases: The reirradiation score

PURPOSE

Whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) remains the standard of care for patients with multiple brain metastases, but more than half of treated patients will develop intracranial progression. Because there is no clear consensus on the optimal therapeutic approach, a prognostic index would be helpful to guide treatment options at progression. We explored whether the recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) score prior to repeat WBRT is predictive of survival.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This multi-institutional pooled analysis included patients with 2 or more brain metastases from any solid primary tumor that was treated with 2 courses of WBRT. Information on demographics, disease characteristics, and intervals between courses was collected. RPA class was abstracted or retrospectively assigned, and descriptive statistics calculated. Median survival (MS) was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log rank tests. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed via Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

For 205 patients, the median age was 55 years (range, 25-83 years), 68% were female, 40.5% had non-small cell lung cancer, and 31.2% had small cell lung cancer. Prior to the second WBRT, 4.9% of patients were RPA class 1, 36.6% were RPA2, and 58.5% were RPA3, with an MS of 7.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.7-10.3), 5.2 months (95% CI, 3.7-6.7 months), and 2.9 months (95% CI, 2.2-2.9 months), respectively (P = .001). On univariate and multivariate analyses, a Karnofsky Performance Status of <80, extracranial metastases, interval between courses <9 months, small cell lung cancer histology, and uncontrolled primary significantly correlated with shorter MS. By assigning a score of 1 to each of these factors, a new prognostic index was created, the reirradiation (ReRT) score. Survival on the basis of ReRT score grouping ranged from 2.2 to 7.2 months and demonstrated significant differences in MS.

CONCLUSIONS

In the largest reported cohort to receive repeat WBRT, application of the RPA score was not predictive of MS. The new ReRT score is a simple tool based on readily available clinical information.

Value metrics of a nurse navigator patient support program within a multidisciplinary esophageal cancer clinic

158

Background: Esophageal cancer patients (pts) require multidisciplinary management involving thoracic and general surgeons, medical and radiation oncologists, gastroenterologists and psychiatrists. Pts navigate complex medical discussions and endure challenges to nutrition, body image, swallowing mechanics, energy level and weight, mood, and performance status. Coordination of care is complicated by multiple sites of pt entry, complex scheduling requirements, and incomplete information at multidisciplinary consultation. A nurse navigator to coordinate the patient experience may optimize treatment and improve outcomes, quality of life and patient satisfaction. Methods: The nurse navigator evaluates all pt records prior to initial appointment and coordinates scheduling, records acquisition, testing and specialty appointments. The nurse navigator serves as a liaison with pts throughout the course of care and provides a patient navigation book (PNB) as a central source for patient-directed information and record keeping. Benchmarks compared before and after creation of the nurse navigator position include: (1) time from appointment request to multidisciplinary evaluation and start of treatment; (2) completeness of medical records and data (scans, pathology slides); (3) patient awareness of support services for themselves and caregivers; (4) utilization of the PNB; (5) number and frequency of interim hospitalizations and emergency room visits; (6) patient, caregiver, and physician satisfaction. Results: From January to July 2012, 27 gastroesophageal cancer pts have been followed by the nurse navigator. Most of these patients remain on active treatment, hence benchmark analysis is ongoing. Metrics thus far suggest improvement in time to treatment start and awareness of patient resources, use of the PNB and patient satisfaction. Conclusions: Esophageal cancer pts undergo complex and toxic multimodality therapy with curative intent. A dedicated nurse navigator may improve the patient experience, optimize adherence to guideline based therapy and appropriate timeframes and provide continuity to pts undergoing multidisciplinary treatment.

Assessing the clinical significance of real-time quality of life data in cancer patients treated with radiation therapy

6108

Background: This pilot study evaluated whether providing clinicians with patient(pt) QOL results and symptom management pathways linked to QOL domains at the time of clinical appointment would result in improvement in QOL and treatment (tx) satisfaction. The objective was to obtain preliminary effect size estimates and logistical evidence for design of a larger, definitive trial. Methods: Oncology pts receiving 5-7 weeks of radiotherapy (RT) electronically completed QOL assessments (LASA) at baseline and biweekly prior to seeing clinicians. Was It Worth It (WIWI) and Interpersonal Patient-Provider Relationship (IPPRS) were measured at tx end. Pt endpoints (pro-rated primary endpoint LASA area under the curve (AUC), LASA changes from baseline, and WIWI responses) and clinician endpoints (IPPRS) were compared between the control group (Phase 1: no QOL feedback) and the intervention group (Phase 2: QOL feedback) via Wilcoxon, Chi-square and Fisher Exact tests. There was 80% power to detect a 10 point difference in average AUC. Results: 148 pts enrolled (79 Phase 1, 69 Phase 2) from 11/28/2008 to 09/20/2011 (sites GI (27%), Lung (22%) and Head and Neck (52%)). 68% received RT and chemo. There were consistently moderate effect sizes observed but no statistically significant differences in any AUC nor end of tx change from baseline scores. 20% fewer pts in phase 2 reported clinical deficits in overall QOL (pain). In pts receiving 7 weeks of RT, end of tx average overall QOL, mental well-being (WB), physical WB and pain severity were significantly better in Phase 2 pts. WIWI results showed 76% found participation worthwhile, 95% would participate again, and 92% would recommend the study to others. No differences between groups were found in communication between clinicians and pts (IPPRS). Conclusions: Preliminary estimates indicate potentially clinically significant improvements of moderate effect size in mental and physical WB and pain severity when clinicians received QOL real time with symptom management pathways. Further study is warranted in larger trial setting.