Outcome Quality of Inpatient and Day-Clinic Treatment in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry-A Naturalistic Study.

BACKGROUND: Child and adolescent psychiatry has only recently been established as a separate specialty and is practiced in different settings. The epidemiology of psychological problems in childhood is high and varied, thus qualitative work is essential. Assessment of outcome as part of quality management is central to assure the service of psychiatric care to be effective. METHOD: Over a three-year period consecutively admitted patients from inpatient and day-clinic treatment were prospectively evaluated. A total of 200 from 442 patients (m = 80, f = 120; age 15.1 ± 2.8 y) agreed to participate. Patients, caregivers, and therapists answered a range of questionnaires to provide a multi-personnel rating. Questionnaires used for outcome assessment were Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and Youth-Self-Report (YSR) (at admission, discharge, and 6 weeks after discharge) and the problem score of the Inventory of Quality of Life for children (ILK), treatment satisfaction, and process quality by the Questionnaire for Treatment Satisfaction (FBB, at discharge) and as real-life outcome control assessment of quality of life (ILK) was added (admission, discharge, and 6 wks after discharge). RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in psychopathologicalsymptoms (CBCL, YSR) and in the problem score. Furthermore, there was a significant increase in quality of life. QoL score and YSR/CBCL scores returned to normal levels. Treatment satisfaction was high and so was satisfaction with process quality. Factors significantly influencing outcome were severity of disease and the relationship to the therapist. No differences were found for gender and setting. CONCLUSION: The quality management analysis revealed significant improvements of symptom load, a significant increase in QoL and a high treatment satisfaction. Furthermore, process quality was scored highly by parents and therapists.

Continued versus Interrupted Targeted Therapy during Metastasis-Directed Stereotactic Radiotherapy: A Retrospective Multi-Center Safety and Efficacy Analysis.

The increasing use of targeted therapy (TT) has resulted in prolonged disease control and survival in many metastatic cancers. In parallel, stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) is increasingly performed in patients receiving TT to obtain a durable control of resistant metastases, and thereby to prolong the time to disseminated disease progression and switch of systemic therapy. The aims of this study were to analyze the safety and efficacy of SRT combined with TT in metastatic cancer patients and to assess the influence of continuous vs. interrupted TT during metastasis-directed SRT. The data of 454 SRTs in 158 patients from the international multicenter database (TOaSTT) on metastatic cancer patients treated with SRT and concurrent TT (within 30 days) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and log rank testing. Toxicity was defined by the CTCAE v4.03 criteria. The median FU was 19.9 mo (range 1-102 mo); 1y OS, PFS and LC were 59%, 24% and 84%, respectively. Median TTS was 25.5 mo (95% CI 11-40). TT was started before SRT in 77% of patients. TT was interrupted during SRT in 44% of patients, with a median interruption of 7 (range 1-42) days. There was no significant difference in OS or PFS whether TT was temporarily interrupted during SRT or not. Any-grade acute and late SRT-related toxicity occurred in 63 (40%) and 52 (33%) patients, respectively. The highest toxicity rates were observed for the combination of SRT and EGFRi or BRAF/MEKi, and any-grade toxicity was significantly increased when EGFRi (p = 0.016) or BRAF/MEKi (p = 0.009) were continued during SRT. Severe (≥grade 3) acute and late SRT-related toxicity were observed in 5 (3%) and 7 (4%) patients, respectively, most frequently in patients treated with EGFRi or BRAF/MEKi and in the intracranial cohort. There was no significant difference in severe toxicity whether TT was interrupted before and after SRT or not. In conclusion, SRT and continuous vs. interrupted TT in metastatic cancer patients did not influence OS or PFS. Overall, severe toxicity of combined treatment was rare; a potentially increased toxicity after SRT and continuous treatment with EGFR inhibitors or BRAF(±MEK) inhibitors requires further evaluation.

Metastasis directed stereotactic radiotherapy in NSCLC patients progressing under targeted- or immunotherapy: efficacy and safety reporting from the 'TOaSTT' database.

BACKGROUND: Metastasis directed treatment (MDT) is increasingly performed with the attempt to improve outcome in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving targeted- or immunotherapy (TT/IT). This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of metastasis directed stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) concurrent to TT/IT in NSCLC patients. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter cohort of stage IV NSCLC patients treated with TT/IT and concurrent (≤ 30 days) MDT was established. 56% and 44% of patients were treated for oligoprogressive disease (OPD) or polyprogressive disease (PPD) under TT/IT, polyprogressive respectively. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and log rank testing. Toxicity was scored using CTCAE v4.03 criteria. Predictive factors for overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS) and time to therapy switch (TTS) were analyzed with uni- and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: MDT of 192 lesions in 108 patients was performed between 07/2009 and 05/2018. Concurrent TT/IT consisted of EGFR/ALK-inhibitors (60%), immune checkpoint inhibitors (31%), VEGF-antibodies (8%) and PARP-inhibitors (1%). 2y-OS was 51% for OPD and 25% for PPD. After 1 year, 58% of OPD and 39% of PPD patients remained on the same TT/IT. Second progression after MDT was oligometastatic (≤ 5 lesions) in 59% of patients. Severe acute and late toxicity was observed in 5.5% and 1.9% of patients. In multivariate analysis, OS was influenced by the clinical metastatic status (p = 0.002, HR 2.03, 95% CI 1.30-3.17). PFS was better in patients receiving their first line of systemic treatment (p = 0.033, HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.05-2.77) and with only one metastases-affected organ (p = 0.023, HR 2.04, 95% CI 1.10-3.79). TTS was 6 months longer in patients with one metastases-affected organ (p = 0.031, HR 2.53, 95% CI 1.09-5.89). Death was never therapy-related. CONCLUSIONS: Metastases-directed SRT in NSCLC patients can be safely performed concurrent to TT/IT with a low risk of severe toxicity. To find the ideal sequence of the available multidisciplinary treatment options for NSCLC and determine what patients will benefit most, a further evaluated in a broader context within prospective clinical trials is needed continuation of TT/IT beyond progression combined with MDT for progressive lesions appears promising but requires prospective evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: retrospectively registered.

Stereotactic radiotherapy combined with immunotherapy or targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) concurrently receiving targeted therapy (TT) or immunotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data on patients with mRCC were extracted from a retrospective international multicentre register study (TOaSTT), investigating SRT concurrent (≤30 days) with TT/immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), local metastasis control (LC) and time to systemic therapy switch were analysed using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank testing. Clinical and treatment factors influencing survival were analysed using multivariate Cox regression. Acute and late SRT-induced toxicity were defined according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.4.03. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients who underwent 128 sessions of SRT were included, of whom 58% presented with oligometastatic disease (OMD). ICIs and TT were received by 32% and 68% of patients, respectively. Twenty patients (37%) paused TT for a median (range) of 14 (2-21) days. ICI therapy was not paused in any patient. A median (range) of 1 (1-5) metastatic tumour was treated per patient, with a median (range) SRT dose of 65 (40-129.4) Gy (biologically effective dose). The OS, LC and PFS rates at 1 year were 71%, 75% and 25%, respectively. The median OS and PFS were not significantly different among patients receiving TT vs those receiving ICIs (P = 0.329). New lesions were treated with a repeat radiotherapy course in 46% of patients. After 1 year, 62% of patients remained on the same systemic therapy as at the time of SRT; this was more frequent for ICI therapy compared to TT (83% vs 36%; P = 0.035). OMD was an independent prognostic factor for OS (P = 0.004, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.035-0.528) and PFS (P = 0.004; 95% CI 0.165-0.717) in multivariate analysis. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) was the other independent prognostic factor for OS (P = 0.001, 95% CI 0.001-0.351). Acute grade 3 toxicity was observed in two patients, and late grade 3 toxicity in one patient. No grade 4 or 5 toxicity was observed. CONCLUSION: Combined treatment with TT or immunotherapy and concurrent SRT was safe, without signals of increased severe toxicity. As we observed no signal of excess toxicity, full-dose SRT should be considered to achieve optimal metastasis control in patients receiving TT or immunotherapy. Favourable PFS and OS were observed for patients with oligometastatic RCC with a good ECOG-PS, which should form the basis for prospective testing of this treatment strategy in properly designed clinical trials.

Repeated Courses of Radiosurgery for New Brain Metastases to Defer Whole Brain Radiotherapy: Feasibility and Outcome With Validation of the New Prognostic Metric Brain Metastasis Velocity.

Purpose: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is the preferred primary treatment option for patients with a limited number of asymptomatic brain metastases. In case of relapse after initial SRS the optimal salvage treatment is not well defined. Within this retrospective analysis, we investigated the feasibility of repeated courses of SRS to defer Whole-Brain Radiation Therapy (WBRT) and aimed to derive prognostic factors for patient selection. Materials and Methods: From 2014 until 2017, 42 patients with 197 brain metastases have been treated with multiple courses of SRS at our institution. Treatment was delivered as single fraction (18 or 20 Gy) or hypo-fractionated (6 fractions with 5 Gy) radiosurgery. Regular follow-up included clinical examination and contrast-enhanced cMRI at 3-4 months' intervals. Besides clinical and treatment related factors, brain metastasis velocity (BMV) as a newly described clinical prognostic metric was included and calculated between first and second treatment. Results: A median number of 1 lesion (range: 1-13) per course and a median of 2 courses (range: 2-6) per patient were administered resulting in a median of 4 (range: 2-14) metastases treated over time per patient. The median interval between SRS courses was 5.8 months (range: 0.9-35 months). With a median follow-up of 17.4 months (range: 4.6-45.5 months) after the first course of treatment, a local control rate of 84% was observed after 1 year and 67% after 2 years. Median time to out-of-field-brain-failure (OOFBF) was 7 months (95%CI 4-8 months). WBRT as a salvage treatment was eventually required in 7 patients (16.6%). Median overall survival (OS) has not been reached. Grouped by ds-GPA (≤ 2 vs. >2) the survival curves showed a significant split (p = 0.039). OS differed also significantly between BMV-risk groups when grouped into low vs. intermediate/high risk groups (p = 0.025). No grade 4 or 5 acute or late toxicity was observed. Conclusion: In selected patients with relapse after SRS for brain metastases, repeat courses of SRS were safe and minimized the need for rescue WBRT. The innovative, yet easy to calculate metric BMV may facilitate treatment decisions as a prognostic factor for OS.

Toxicity of concurrent stereotactic radiotherapy and targeted therapy or immunotherapy: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Both stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) and immune- or targeted therapy play an increasingly important role in personalized treatment of metastatic disease. Concurrent application of both therapies is rapidly expanding in daily clinical practice. In this systematic review we summarize severe toxicity observed after concurrent treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for English literature published up to April 2016 using keywords "radiosurgery", "local ablative therapy", "gamma knife" and "stereotactic", combined with "bevacizumab", "cetuximab", "crizotinib", "erlotinib", "gefitinib", "ipilimumab", "lapatinib", "sorafenib", "sunitinib", "trastuzumab", "vemurafenib", "PLX4032", "panitumumab", "nivolumab", "pembrolizumab", "alectinib", "ceritinib", "dabrafenib", "trametinib", "BRAF", "TKI", "MEK", "PD1", "EGFR", "CTLA-4" or "ALK". Studies performing SRT during or within 30days of targeted/immunotherapy, reporting severe (⩾Grade 3) toxicity were included. RESULTS: Concurrent treatment is mostly well tolerated in cranial SRT, but high rates of severe toxicity were observed for the combination with BRAF-inhibitors. The relatively scarce literature on extra-cranial SRT shows a potential risk of increased toxicity when SRT is combined with EGFR-targeting tyrosine kinase inhibitors and bevacizumab, which was not observed for cranial SRT. CONCLUSIONS: This review gives a best-possible overview of current knowledge and its limitations and underlines the need for a timely generation of stronger evidence in this rapidly expanding field.

Services Use of Children and Adolescents before Admission to Psychiatric Inpatient Care.

BACKGROUND: Although 20% of children and adolescents in Europe suffer from overt mental health problems, their illness-related service utilisation is often unknown. If at all, existing research has only addressed the health care sector while services requirements in mental health care go far beyond the health care system, including the social, the educational and the criminal justice system. AIMS OF STUDY: This paper aims at describing the service contact patterns of children and adolescents within and outside the health care sector before they are admitted to a child and adolescent mental health hospital. Additionally, we evaluate the private out-of-pocket payments that occur for primary carers. METHOD: A cohort of consecutive admissions to a child and adolescent hospital in Austria was prospectively analysed. We collected data on service use and out-of-pocket expenses before hospital admission from primary carers through face-to-face interviews using an adapted version of the European Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service Receipt Inventory (EU-CAMHSRI). Clinical data came from validated questionnaires (CBCL, YSR) and from the anamnestic documentation. RESULT: Ninety percent from a cohort of 441 patients had some contact with services or took medication before they were admitted to hospital. Most often, services in the health care outpatient setting were used. Outside of the health care system, support in school, as well as counselling services, were used most frequently, whereas the persons hardly sought support in living or employment. Roughly 32,400 per 100 patients was spent privately, yet these out-of pocket expenses were very unevenly distributed. Service use and out-of-pocket spending increased with social status and were gender-specific. The more severe external behaviour symptoms were, the more non-health care services were used. DISCUSSION: Mentally ill children and adolescents use a broad range of services across sectors before admission to hospital. Service use is associated with specific symptoms of the disease, yet not with the diagnosis. For some carers, this is linked to considerable financial burden because many of those services are only partly publicly funded or are not part of the health sector. A limitation of the study is the uncertainty of self-reports. Furthermore, we do not know whether the services used were needs-based and effective, and what the utilisation patterns of non-hospitalised children and adolescents are. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: Mental health policy for children and adolescents in Austria needs to focus on how to organise a needs-oriented and coordinated services mix across different sectors that is equally accessible regardless of the patients' socio-economic background. IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH: To support planning, further research on the factors that predict service use and on the cost-effectiveness of services is required.