A Case Report of Bilateral Adrenal Gland Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy to Manage Hypercortisolemia in a Patient With Ectopic Adrenocorticotropic Hormone (ACTH) Production From a Metastatic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor.

A 63-year-old woman presented with hypokalemia, hypertension, weight gain, limb edema, and tremors. She was diagnosed with Cushing syndrome, with a 24-hour urine cortisol level of 41,013 nmol/day. Investigations revealed a grade 2 pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor with extensive hepatic metastases. Owing to excessive adrenocorticotropic hormone production from her disease, her hypercortisolemia and Cushing symptoms worsened despite ketoconazole, somatostatin analogs, and right liver lobe chemoembolization. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) at a dose of 39 Gy in three fractions was administered to her bilateral adrenal glands in the hope of reducing her cortisol levels and improving her symptoms. Her 24-hour urine cortisol levels decreased following SBRT, but not rapidly enough; her clinical condition continued to deteriorate, and she died 21 days after treatment. SBRT was not effective as an urgent intervention in this setting; a greater latency to realize a response is likely necessary.

External Beam Radiation Therapy for Palliation of Symptomatic Bone Metastases: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline.

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.

A Systematic Review of Prognostic Factors in Patients with Cancer Receiving Palliative Radiotherapy: Evidence-Based Recommendations.

(1) Background: Prognostication in patients with cancer receiving palliative radiotherapy remains a challenge. To improve the process, we aim to identify prognostic factors in this population from the literature and offer evidence-based recommendations on prognostication in patients undergoing palliative radiotherapy for non-curable or advanced cancers. (2) Methods: A systematic review was performed on the medical literature from 2005 to 2023 to extract papers on the prognosis of palliative radiotherapy patients with advanced cancer. The initial selection was performed by at least two authors to determine study relevance to the target area. Studies were then classified based on type and evidence quality to determine final recommendations. (3) Results: The literature search returned 57 papers to be evaluated. Clinical and biological prognostic factors were identified from these papers to improve clinical decision making or construct prognostic models. Twenty prognostic models were identified for clinical use. There is moderate evidence supporting (i) evidence-based factors (patient, clinical, disease, and lab) in guiding decision making around palliative radiation; (ii) that certain biological factors are of importance; (iii) prognostication models in patients with advanced cancer; and that (iv) SBRT or re-irradiation use can be guided by predictions of survival by prognostic scores or clinicians. Patients with more favorable prognoses are generally better suited to SBRT or re-irradiation, and the use of prognostic models can aid in this decision making. (4) Conclusions: This evaluation has identified several factors or tools to aid in prognosis and clinical decision making. Future studies should aim to further validate these tools and factors in a clinical setting, including the leveraging of electronic medical records for data availability. To increase our understanding of how causal factors interact with palliative radiotherapy, future studies should also examine and include prediction of response to radiation as an outcome.

Radiotherapy for Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression with Increased Doses: Final Results of the RAMSES-01 Trial.

Patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) and favorable survival prognoses may benefit from radiation doses exceeding 10 × 3.0 Gy. In a multi-center phase 2 trial, patients receiving 15 × 2.633 Gy (41.6 Gy10) or 18 × 2.333 Gy (43.2 Gy10) were evaluated for local progression-free survival (LPFS), motor/sensory functions, ambulatory status, pain, distress, toxicity, and overall survival (OS). They were compared (propensity score-adjusted Cox regression) to a historical control group (n = 266) receiving 10 × 3.0 Gy (32.5 Gy10). In the phase 2 cohort, 50 (of 62 planned) patients were evaluated for LPFS. Twelve-month rates of LPFS and OS were 96.8% and 69.9%, respectively. Motor and sensory functions improved in 56% and 57.1% of patients, and 94.0% were ambulatory following radiotherapy. Pain and distress decreased in 84.4% and 78.0% of patients. Ten and two patients experienced grade 2 and 3 toxicities, respectively. Phase 2 patients showed significantly better LPFS than the control group (p = 0.039) and a trend for improved motor function (p = 0.057). Ambulatory and OS rates were not significantly different. Radiotherapy with 15 × 2.633 Gy or 18 × 2.333 Gy was well tolerated and appeared superior to 10 × 3.0 Gy.

A 15-Year Single-Institution Retrospective Study of Primary Pancreatic Cancer Treated with Non-Ablative Palliative Radiotherapy.

We studied the use of palliative radiotherapy (RT) among patients with primary, non-curable, locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In this subset of patients, with very poor survival, various palliative RT dose fractionation schemes are used; but, in the absence of a guideline, practice patterns vary, and dose choice is mainly based on the physician's intuition. We divided the patients into three groups, according to the dose fractionation schedules received: low (A), intermediate (B), and high (C) dose groups, to study the potential differences in outcome between the different dose prescriptions. Cohort: n = 184. Median age: 69 years. Male: n = 105 (57%), female: n = 79 (43%). Stage IV: n = 117 (64%). T4: n = 127 (69%). Tumor location: head: n = 109 (59%), body: n = 37 (20%), tail: n = 25 (14%), neck: n = 11 (6%), and uncinate: n = 2 (1%). Prior systemic therapy: n = 66 (36%). Most common dose fractionations received: 20 Gy in five fractions n = 67 (36%), 30 Gy in 10 fractions n = 49 (27%), and 8 Gy in one fraction n = 23 (13%). Group A: n = 33 (18%), median overall survival (OS) 19 days (95% CI 4-33). Group B: n = 84 (46%), median OS 52 days (95% CI 43-60). Group C: n = 67 (36%), median OS 126 days (95% CI 77-174). Median days to in-field progression: Group A 59 days (range 7-109), Group B 96 days (range 19-173), and Group C 97 days (range 13-475). To our knowledge, this is the largest reported retrospective cohort of patients receiving non-ablative palliative RT to treat their primary pancreatic tumors. Most patients had metastatic disease, T4 tumors of the pancreatic head and had not received prior systemic therapy. A significant survival benefit was seen favoring the high dose/longer RT fractionation group, presumably due to appropriate patient selection rather than an RT effect. Despite the relatively short median overall survival, one fifth of the patients were found to experience an in-field progression following RT.

Emergent radiotherapy for pelvic malignancies: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patients with primary genitourinary (GU), gynecologic (GYN) and gastrointestinal (GI) cancers can develop life-threatening or critical function-threatening symptoms that necessitate emergent intervention with palliative radiotherapy (RT). Unfortunately, research describing the use of RT in this critical setting is lacking. We aimed to review literature describing emergent palliative RT for primary pelvic malignancies and provide a narrative synthesis of relevant studies. METHODS: A medical librarian searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase Classic, and Embase databases for relevant English language references from 1946-2022. No restrictions were placed on study type, publication type or date. References for GU, GYN and GI cancers were grouped and synthesized separately. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: The treatment of bleeding from primary pelvic tumors was the only indication for emergent RT identified, however, no references reported dedicated cohorts of patients treated for bleeding in the emergent setting. Most references were retrospective single institution studies describing various dose fractionation schemes for non-emergent palliative RT. Outcome measures and response assessment times varied. The latency to hemostasis after RT commencement was not well described; most studies reported outcomes captured weeks or months following treatment. In general, high rates of hemostasis for GU, GYN and GI tumors have been reported following RT schedules ranging from a single fraction to many weeks of fractionated treatments. Bleeding seems to respond more favorably than other symptoms including pain and obstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Managing bleeding was the only indication for emergent RT identified in our search. Scant data exist that describe the latency to a hemostatic response following RT. This is an important knowledge gap in the literature given how commonly patients are affected by this complication of primary pelvic malignancies.

2023 Updated MASCC/ESMO Consensus Recommendations: prevention of radiotherapy- and chemoradiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

PURPOSE: Radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV and C-RINV) are common and distressing, and there is a need for guidance for clinicians to provide up to date optimal antiemetic prophylaxis and treatment. Through a comprehensive review of the literature concerning RINV and C-RINV, this manuscript aims to update the evidence for antiemetic prophylaxis and rescue therapy and provide a new edition of recommendations for the MASCC/ESMO antiemetic guidelines for RINV and C-RINV. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature including data published from May 1, 2015, to January 31, 2023, was performed. All authors assessed the literature. RESULTS: The searches yielded 343 references; 37 met criteria for full article review, and 20 were ultimately retained. Only one randomized study in chemoradiation had the impact to provide new recommendations for the antiemetic guideline. Based on expert consensus, it was decided to change the recommendation for the "low emetic risk" category from "prophylaxis or rescue" to "rescue" only, while the drugs of choice remain unchanged. CONCLUSION: As for the previous guideline, the serotonin receptor antagonists are still the cornerstone in antiemetic prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting induced by high and moderate emetic risk radiotherapy. The guideline update provides new recommendation for the management of C-RINV for radiotherapy and concomitant weekly cisplatin. To avoid overtreatment, antiemetic prophylaxis is no longer recommended for the "low emetic risk" category.