Prevalence of palliative radiotherapy abstracts presented at the annual scientific meetings of the Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology: 2003-2021.

PURPOSE: Approximately half of all radiotherapy (RT) is delivered with palliative intent. Clinical research in palliative RT aims to manage symptoms, improve quality of life (QoL), evaluate supportive care, and determine optimal dose-fractionation schedules. Our aim was to describe the prevalence of palliative research at the Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology (CARO) Annual Scientific Meeting (ASM) over time and compare this analysis to previously published work which evaluated the years 1992-2002. METHODS: Published abstracts (2003-2021) were independently reviewed by two authors who categorized each as curative-intent; palliative-intent; pertaining to both populations; or neither. Abstracts were considered palliative if they described incurable malignancy and interventions primarily for symptom control or QoL. Type of study, primary, site treated, and symptoms palliated were recorded. Descriptive and summary statistics were calculated including one-way ANOVA test for trend. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-nine out of 4566 abstracts (7.4%, range 2.4-13.9% per year) were classified as palliative. 7.7% (26/339) described phase I-III trials. The main primary site was the lung (39/339) and the most common metastatic site was the bone (34.2%). QoL, symptom and toxicity outcomes were reported in 31.6% (107/339), 37.8% (128/339) and 17.7% (60/339), respectively. The most common symptom investigated was pain (38/339). The proportion of abstracts classified as curative, palliative or reporting toxicity endpoints demonstrated significant change over time (all p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: While proportion of palliative themed abstracts has increased with time, there remains a significant gap before equivalence with the prevalence of palliative RT in clinical practice is achieved.

Do Radiation Oncology Residents Have a Preferred Radiation Treatment Planning Review Format?

In an era of increasing virtual communication, we aimed to investigate current formats used by radiation oncology residents for reviewing radiation treatment plans with attendings, preferences for formats, and reasons contributing to preferences. Residents enrolled in Canadian radiation oncology programs received questionnaires examining training level, typical review formats, preferred format, and reasons for preference. Analysis excluded PGY-1s due to insufficient exposure. Fifty-two residents participated. National response rate was 55%. Overall, hybrid review was the most used format (77%). Virtual review was the most preferred format (44%). Preference for virtual review was most common among junior residents (57%), while in-person review was most preferred by senior residents (45.4%). Few residents typically use their preferred format (35%). Reasons for preference varied between groups in convenience (p < 0.01), interactivity (p < 0.01), and teaching quality (p = 0.04). The persistence of e-learning suggests that virtual treatment planning education will continue to some degree. Junior residents prefer virtual review, while a clearly preferred review format was less apparent among senior residents. Preferences are multifactorial, and the trends seen in reasons for preference between formats may reflect advantages inherent to each. Progress is still needed in optimizing treatment planning education, as suggested by few residents using their preferred format. Residents and staff should collectively decide which educational format for treatment planning best meets educational needs.

A phase III, multicenter, randomized controlled trial of preoperative versus postoperative stereotactic radiosurgery for patients with surgically resectable brain metastases.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a standard management option for patients with resected brain metastases. Preoperative SRS may have certain advantages compared to postoperative SRS, including less uncertainty in delineation of the intact tumor compared to the postoperative resection cavity, reduced rate of leptomeningeal dissemination postoperatively, and a lower risk of radiation necrosis. The recently published ASCO-SNO-ASTRO consensus statement provides no recommendation for the preferred sequencing of radiotherapy and surgery for patients receiving both treatments for their brain metastases. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized controlled trial aims to recruit 88 patients with resectable brain metastases over an estimated three-year period. Patients with ten or fewer brain metastases with at least one resectable, fulfilling inclusion criteria will be randomized to postoperative SRS (standard arm) or preoperative SRS (investigational arm) in a 1:1 ratio. Randomization will be stratified by age (< 60 versus ≥60 years), histology (melanoma/renal cell carcinoma/sarcoma versus other), and number of metastases (one versus 2-10). In the standard arm, postoperative SRS will be delivered within 3 weeks of surgery, and all unresected metastases will receive primary SRS. In the investigational arm, enrolled patients will receive SRS of all brain metastases followed by surgery of resectable metastases within one week of SRS. In either arm, single fraction or hypofractionated SRS in three or five fractions is permitted. The primary endpoint is to assess local control at 12 months in both arms. Secondary endpoints include local control at other time points, regional/distant brain recurrence rates, leptomeningeal recurrence rates, overall survival, neurocognitive outcomes, and adverse radiation events including radiation necrosis rates in both arms. DISCUSSION: This trial addresses the unanswered question of the optimal sequencing of surgery and SRS in the management of patients with resectable brain metastases. No randomized data comparing preoperative and postoperative SRS for patients with brain metastases has been published to date. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov , NCT04474925; registered on July 17, 2020. Protocol version 1.0 (January 31, 2020). SPONSOR: Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Canada (Samir Patel, MD).

More Is Not Better When It Comes to Treating Rectal Cancer With Multimodal Chemoradiation Beyond the Standard Radiation Dose of 5040 cGy.

BACKGROUND: Radiation dose schedules for neoadjuvant chemoradiation for rectal cancers differ, with the most common dose schedule using 5040 cGy in 28 fractions. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the benefit of higher radiation doses beyond 5040 cGy in the context of pathological response and follow-up events. SETTING: The database from a provincial tertiary cancer center in Canada was the source of information for this study. PATIENTS: Included in this study were 508 consecutive patients with rectal cancer with locally advanced disease (clinical T3/T4 or N1/N2) who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery. Of the 508 patients, 281 received the standard radiation dose of 4500 to 5040 cGy and 227 received a dose >5040 cGy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The postsurgical pathology, late toxicities, and follow-up outcomes were analyzed. The outcomes were evaluated in relation to the dose of radiation received. RESULTS: Data regarding the clinical outcomes were comparable between the 4500 to 5040 cGy and >5040 cGy radiation groups with pathological complete response rates of 20.9% and 15.4% (p = 0.104); distant recurrence rates of 17.4% and 19.4% (p = 0.36); local recurrence rates of 3.2% and 3.5% (p = 0.36); and the median overall survival rates of 61 and 60.5 months (p = 0.8). No statistically significant correlation of improvement in outcomes was noted with radiation doses beyond 5040 cGy. LIMITATIONS: This is a retrospective study. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that dose escalation beyond the standard dose of 4500 to 5040cGy failed to achieve meaningful clinical outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B633. MS NO ES MEJOR CUANDO SE TRATA DE TRATAR EL CNCER DE RECTO CON QUIMIORRADIACIN MULTIMODAL MS ALL DE LA DOSIS DE RADIACIN ESTNDAR DE CGY: ANTECEDENTES:En neoadyuvancia de cáncer rectal es posible encontrar muchas variaciones, en radioterapia la dosis más común que usa 5040 cGy en 28 fracciones.OBJETIVOS:El objetivo de este estudio retrospectivo fue evaluar el beneficio de dosis de radiación más altas más allá de 5040cGy en el contexto de la respuesta patológica y en su seguimiento.AJUSTE:Base de datos de un centro de cáncer terciario provincial en Canadá.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron en este estudio quinientos ocho pacientes consecutivos con cáncer de recto y enfermedad localmente avanzada (clínica T3 / T4 o N1 / N2) que recibieron quimiorradiación neoadyuvante seguida de cirugía. De los 508 pacientes, 281 recibieron la dosis de radiación estándar de 4500-5040 cGy y 227 recibieron una dosis > 5040 cGy.PRINCIPAL MEDIDA DE RESULTADO:Se analizo evolucion posquirúrgica, toxicidad tardía y seguimiento. Los resultados se evaluaron en relación con la dosis de radiación recibida.RESULTADOS:Los datos con respecto a los resultados clínicos fueron comparables entre los grupos de radiación de 4500-5040 cGy y> 5040 cGy con tasas de respuesta patológica completa de 20,9% y 15,4% respectivamente (p = 0,104); tasas de recurrencia a distancia de 17,4% y 19,4%, respectivamente (p = 0,36); tasas de recurrencia local de 3,2% y 3,5%, respectivamente (p = 0,36); y la mediana de las tasas de supervivencia global de 61 y 60,5 meses, respectivamente (p = 0,8). No se observó una correlación estadísticamente significativa de mejoría en los resultados con dosis de radiación superiores a 5040 cGy.LIMITACIONES:Este es un estudio retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:Nuestro estudio mostró que el aumento de la dosis más allá de la dosis estándar de 4500-5040cGy no logró resultados clínicos significativos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B633. (Traducción-Dr. Gunther Bocic).

Comprehensive assessment during palliative radiotherapy consultation optimizes supportive care for patients with advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) in advanced cancer improves symptom control and quality of life. PRT consultations take place in various clinical settings, including through dedicated rapid access clinics. We examined holistic assessment and PRT delivery by consultation setting. METHODS: We analyzed patients with breast cancer who died (01/04/2013-31/03/2014), after at least one lifetime PRT consultation. Data abstracted included Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised (ESAS-r) ratings, and PRT timelines. Descriptive statistics, t tests of proportions, independent t tests, and chi-square tests were calculated. RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients were assessed for PRT over 224 consults, 28/224 (12.5%) in the rapid access clinic. In non-rapid access versus rapid access visits, KPS was documented in 30.1% versus 89.3%, and medication history in 53.6% versus 96.4%, respectively (both p < 0.0001). Baseline ESAS-r scores were available for 67.9% of rapid access visits, versus no non-rapid access visit. Rapid access consults had a higher proportion of subsequent supportive care referrals (46.4% versus 8.2%; p < 0.0001). Same day PRT start occurred in 37% of rapid access versus 23.4% of non-rapid access visits (p = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Assessment for PRT by a dedicated multidisciplinary team provides a comprehensive picture of patient needs and streamlines PRT delivery, essential to personalizing supportive care.

Clinical Learning, Didactic Education, and Research Experiences of Radiation Oncology Resident Physicians in Canada.

Changes in the field of radiation oncology (RO) impacts residency training. Assessing trainee experiences is essential to inform curriculum development. We aim to explore gaps and strengths in current Canadian RO training, as we move towards competency-based medical education (CBME). An online survey was distributed to residents at all Canadian RO training programs. Surveys consisted of 66 open-ended, Likert-scale, matrix-style, and multiple-choice questions, and assessed clinical exposure, didactic teaching, professional relationships, and research experiences. Statistics were calculated from anonymized, aggregate responses. Out of 128 eligible residents, 53 responded (41% response rate). Of these, 57% were male, and 77% were Canadian medical graduates. Senior residents (PGY-4 to PGY-5) perceived insufficient exposure to lymphoma and ocular malignancies, brachytherapy for breast and esophagus malignancies, and stereotactic radiotherapy of the pancreas, prostate, and adrenal gland. Half (51%) had training on image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) challenges, and 43% had a formal staff mentor. Most residents presented at least one research project at conferences (77%) and authored ≥ 1 publications (66%) during residency. Canadian RO residents are satisfied with their clinical training and educational experience in high-volume tumor sites and high-volume brachytherapy procedures. Areas identified for potential improvement are (1) low-volume tumor sites; (2) low-volume brachytherapy procedures; (3) low-volume stereotactic radiotherapy sites; (4) IGRT challenges; and (5) mentorship opportunities. These findings will inform future CBME curriculum revisions.

Impact of dose-capping chemotherapy in concurrent chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: The study evaluated the effect of chemotherapy dose-capping on disease recurrence, toxicity and survival of rectal cancer patients treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT). METHODS: 601 consecutive rectal cancer patients treated with concurrent CRT were retrospectively analysed. Dose-capped patients were defined as having a body surface area (BSA) ≥2.0 m2 and who received <95% full weight-based chemotherapy dose. Binary logistic regression was used to study the factors associated with the outcome variables (capped vs. uncapped). Kaplan-Meier estimation evaluated significant predictors of survival. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 7.54 years. The rate of disease recurrence was significantly higher in dose-capped patients (35%) compared to those without dose-capping (24%, P = 0.016). The adjusted odds ratio for dose-capped patients experiencing recurrence was 1.64 compared to uncapped patients (95% CI, 1.10-2.43). Overall, dose-capped patients were less likely to experience significant toxicity requiring dose reduction and/or treatment break when compared to uncapped patients (15% and 28% respectively, P = 0.008).There was significant differences in PFS between capped and uncapped group (77% vs. 85%; P = 0.017). The 5-year OS in the capped group was 75.0%, and 80% in the uncapped group (P = 0.149). CONCLUSIONS: Rectal cancer patients treated with dose-capped CRT were at increased risk of disease recurrence. Patients dosed by actual BSA did experience excessive toxicity compared to dose-capped group. We recommend that chemotherapy dose-capping based on BSA should not be practiced in rectal cancer patients undergoing CRT.

Motivations, Well-Being, and Career Aspirations of Radiation Oncology Resident Physicians in Canada.

Prior Pan-Canadian surveys of Radiation Oncology (RO) residents reveal a decrease in Canadian RO employment opportunities. Canadian RO resident levels increased from 130 in 2003, peaked at 209 in 2009, then decreased to 130 in 2017. Recognizing that RO has entered another period of transition, we re-examined resident motivations and perspectives on the job market and explored well-being and career aspirations among a contemporary cohort of Canadian RO residents. An online survey was distributed to residents at all Canadian RO training programs. Surveys consisted of 75 open-ended, Likert-scale, matrix-style, and multiple-choice questions. Student's t test compared subgroups, with statistical significance at p ≤ 0.05. Out of 128 eligible residents, 84 completed the survey (66% response rate) with representative sampling from each training year. Demographics reveal 53% male, and 85% Canadian registry-funded. Top training-related stressors were exam performance, job prospects, and physical/psychological demands of residency. Most intend to pursue fellowship post-residency (80%) and practice in Canada (88%). Few believe they can obtain staff positions treating preferred tumor sites (38%) or at preferred geographic locations (28%). Residents view job market being less competitive than 5 years ago (40%) and predict it will be less competitive in 5 years (60%). Canadian RO residents feel adequately trained, and most pursue post-residency fellowships. Current perceptions of the Canadian job market remain guarded, but appear more optimistic about the future. This update provides insights into current RO training and identifies areas that could be addressed by incoming competency-based medical education models for RO.

Frequency, Timing, and Predictors of Palliative Care Consultation in Patients with Advanced Cancer at a Tertiary Cancer Center: Secondary Analysis of Routinely Collected Health Data.

INTRODUCTION: Early integration of palliative care (PC) with oncological care is associated with improved outcomes in patients with advanced cancer. Limited information exists on the frequency, timing, and predictors of PC consultation in patients receiving oncological care. The Cross Cancer Institute (CCI) is the sole tertiary cancer center serving the northern half of the Canadian province of Alberta, located in the city of Edmonton. The objectives of this study were to estimate the proportion of patients with advanced cancer at the CCI who received consultation by the CCI PC program and the comprehensive integrated PC program in Edmonton, and to determine the timing and predictors of consultation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this secondary analysis of routinely collected health data, adult patients who died between April 2013 and March 2014, and had advanced disease while under the care of a CCI oncologist, were eligible. Data from the Alberta Cancer Registry, electronic medical records, and Edmonton PC program database were linked. RESULTS: Of 2,253 eligible patients, 810 (36%) received CCI PC consultation. Median time between consultation and death was 2 months (range, 1.1-5.4). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, age, residence, income, cancer type, and interval from advanced cancer diagnosis to death influenced odds of receiving consultation. Among 1,439 patients residing in Edmonton, 1,121 (78%) were referred to the Edmonton PC program. CONCLUSION: A minority of patients with advanced cancer received PC consultation at the tertiary cancer center, occurring late in the disease trajectory. Frequency and timing of PC consultation varied significantly, according to multiple factors. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Clinical and demographic factors are associated with variations in frequency and timing of palliative care consultation at a cancer center and may, in some cases, reflect barriers to access that warrant attention.

Informal caregiver quality of life in a palliative oncology population.

PURPOSE: Many patients with advanced cancer receive primary supports from informal caregivers (IC). As patient health deteriorates, IC assume increasing responsibility, often accompanied by distress. We investigated the quality of life (QOL) of IC of patients referred to a palliative radiotherapy (PRT) program. METHODS: IC accompanying patients to a dedicated PRT clinic completed a survey based on the validated Caregiver Quality of Life Index-Cancer (CQOLC). Demographics, burden, and engagement in support services were evaluated. Summary statistics were calculated, and parameters were assessed for association with CQOLC scores by a generalized linear model. RESULTS: Two hundred one surveys were analyzed representing 197 unique patients. The mean age was 68.3 years, with predominantly lung (25.0%) and prostate (19.3%) malignancies. 24.4% had been in hospital/long-term care within the previous 7 days. IC were 60.8% female, and 60.6% were the patient's spouse. 69.5% lived with the patient and 38.3% were additionally employed. IC spent a daily mean of 6.6 h (SD 7) assisting with instrumental (72.5%) and basic (37.5%) activities of daily living. Mean CQOLC score was 82.1/140 (SD 20). 63.8% of IC had previously accessed support service(s), most commonly home care (37.2%) and pharmacy (29.1%). 55.9% indicated interest in services not yet accessed. Multivariate analysis revealed additional employment, cohabitation, poor patient performance status, and interest in accessing more support services significantly correlated with higher IC burden. CONCLUSIONS: Employing the CQOLC to screen IC of patients referred to a PRT program permits early identification of vulnerable IC to facilitate linkage with appropriate supports.

Classification of painful bone metastases as mild, moderate, or severe using both EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL and EORTC QLQ-BM22.

PURPOSE: Previous studies have determined optimal cut points (CPs) for the classification of pain severity as mild, moderate, or severe using only the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) or the BPI in conjunction with a quality of life (QOL) tool. The purpose of our study was to determine the optimal CPs based on correlation with only QOL outcomes. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of 298 patients treated with radiation therapy for painful bone metastases on a phase III randomized trial. Prior to treatment, patients provided their worst pain score on a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), as well as completed the European Organization of Cancer Research and Treatment (EORTC) QOL Questionnaire Bone Metastases module (QLQ-BM22) and the EORTC QOL Questionnaire Core-15 Palliative (QLQ-C15-PAL). Optimal CPs were determined to be those that yielded the largest F ratio for the between category effect on each subscale of the QLQ-BM22 and QLQ-C15-PAL using the multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). RESULTS: The two largest F ratios for Wilk's λ, Pillai's Trace, and Hotelling's Trace were for CPs 5,6 and 5,7. Combining both, the optimal CPs to differentiate between mild, moderate, and severe pain were 5 and 7. Pain scores of 1-5, 6, and 7-10 were classified as mild, moderate, and severe, respectively. Patients with severe pain experienced greater functional interference and poorer QOL when compared to those with mild pain. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that, based on the impact of pain on QOL measures, pain scores should be classified as follows: 1-5 as mild pain, 6 as moderate pain, and 7-10 as severe pain. Optimal CPs vary depending on the type of outcome measurement used.

Minimal clinically important differences in the EORTC QLQ-BM22 and EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL modules in patients with bone metastases undergoing palliative radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Validated tools for evaluating quality of life (QOL) in patients with bone metastases include the EORTC QLQ-BM22 and QLQ-C15-PAL modules. A statistically significant difference in metric scores may not be clinically significant. To aid in their interpretation, we performed analyses to determine the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) for these QOL instruments. METHODS: Both anchor-based and distribution-based methods were used to determine the MCID among patients with bone metastases enrolled in a randomized phase III trial. For the anchor-based approach, overall QOL as measured by the QLQ-C15-PAL module was used as the anchor and only the subscales with moderate or better correlation were used for subsequent MCID analysis. In the anchor-based approach, patients were classified as improved, stable or deteriorated by the change in the overall QOL score from baseline to follow-up after 42 days. The MCID and confidence interval was then calculated for all subscales. In the distribution-based approach, the MCID was expressed as a proportion of the standard deviation and standard error measurement from the subscale score distribution. RESULTS: A total of 204 patients completed the questionnaires at baseline and follow-up. Only the dyspnea and insomnia subscales did not have at least moderate correlation with the overall QOL anchor. Using the anchor-based approach, 10/11 subscales had an MCID score significantly different than 0 for improvement and 3/11 subscales had a significant MCID score for deterioration. The magnitude of MCID scores was higher for improvement in comparison with deterioration. For improvement, the anchor-based approach showed good agreement with the distribution-based approach when using 0.5 SD as the MCID. However, there was greater lack of agreement between these approaches for deterioration. CONCLUSION: We present the MCID scores for the EORTC QLQ-BM22 and QLQ-C15-PAL QOL instruments. The results of this study can guide clinicians in the interpretation of these instruments. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY: NCT01248585.

Dexamethasone in the prophylaxis of radiation-induced pain flare after palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases: a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain flare occurs after palliative radiotherapy, and dexamethasone has shown potential for prevention of such flare. We aimed to compare the efficacy of dexamethasone with that of placebo in terms of reduction of incidence of pain flare. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, patients from 23 Canadian centres were randomly allocated (1:1) with a web-based system and minimisation algorithm to receive either two 4 mg dexamethasone tablets or two placebo tablets taken orally at least 1 h before the start of radiation treatment (a single 8 Gy dose to bone metastases; day 0) and then every day for 4 days after radiotherapy (days 1-4). Patients were eligible if they had a non-haematological malignancy and bone metastasis (or metastases) corresponding to the clinically painful area or areas. Patients reported their worst pain scores and opioid analgesic intake before treatment and daily for 10 days after radiation treatment. They completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life QLQ-C15-PAL, the bone metastases module (EORTC QLQ-BM22), and the Dexamethasone Symptom Questionnaire at baseline, and at days 10 and 42 after radiation treatment. Pain flare was defined as at least a two-point increase on a scale of 0-10 in the worst pain score with no decrease in analgesic intake, or a 25% or greater increase in analgesic intake with no decrease in the worst pain score from days 0-10, followed by a return to baseline levels or below. Primary analysis of incidence of pain flare was by intention-to-treat (patients with missing primary data were classified as having pain flare). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01248585, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between May 30, 2011, and Dec 11, 2014, 298 patients were enrolled. 39 (26%) of 148 patients randomly allocated to the dexamethasone group and 53 (35%) of 150 patients in the placebo group had a pain flare (difference 8·9%, lower 95% confidence bound 0·0, one-sided p=0·05). Two grade 3 and one grade 4 biochemical hyperglycaemic events occurred in the dexamethasone group (without known clinical effects) compared with none in the placebo group. The most common adverse events were bone pain (61 [41%] of 147 vs 68 [48%] of 143), fatigue (58 [39%] of 147 vs 49 [34%] of 143), constipation (47 [32%] of 147 vs 37 [26%] of 143), and nausea (34 [23%] of 147 vs 34 [24%] of 143), most of which were mild grade 1 or 2. INTERPRETATION: Dexamethasone reduces radiation-induced pain flare in the treatment of painful bone metastases. FUNDING: The NCIC CTG's programmatic grant from the Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute.

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.

Determining the destination: a co-designed chronic advanced cancer rehabilitation conceptual framework for engagement of individuals with lived experience in rehabilitation research.

BACKGROUND: Individuals living with chronic advanced cancer (CAC) often face distinct physical, functional, and cognitive issues. Their rehabilitation needs are not yet routinely met, warranting further CAC-specific rehabilitation-based research. Given the complexity of functional and symptom presentations, engagement of individuals living with CAC as partners in the research process is encouraged to better understand the lived perspective. Formal engagement requires both structured approaches and iterative processes. The aim was to co-design a conceptual framework to develop and integrate engagement strategies into rehabilitation research focused on CAC populations. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team of authors, including two individuals with lived experience, conducted an implementation-focused descriptive study to inform future research design, including: interviews and follow-up, review of current models and approaches, and development of a co-designed conceptual framework for engaging individuals with lived experience into CAC-specific rehabilitation research. RESULTS: Emergent themes include shared understanding, transparent appreciation, iterative processes and unique partnership needs. A definition, guiding principles and tools for engagement were identified. In consultation with individuals with lived experience, and application of the emergent themes in context, a conceptual framework to guide the engagement process was developed. CONCLUSION: A novel conceptual framework for engaging individuals with lived experience with CAC as partners in rehabilitation research is proposed to facilitate implementation-focused team-based approaches for this population.

Living with chronic advanced cancer (CAC) affects all parts of a person's life. Rehabilitation, such as physiotherapy, can be necessary. Healthcare data shows that rehabilitation needs of people with CAC are not yet being regularly met and that more research in this area is needed. Because CAC is complex and impacts each person differently, having people with CAC included as partners on the research team will likely help researchers better understand and explain rehabilitation needs of people with CAC.Our group of authors include different healthcare professionals, researchers, and two individuals with lived experience. Together, we carried out an implementation study and designed a framework to guide other researchers in including individuals living with CAC on research teams.We found that important themes for individuals with lived experience were: shared understanding, transparent appreciation, iterative processes (such as back and forth communication) and unique partnership needs.We titled the conceptual framework a "Co-designed Chronic ADVanced CANCer Rehabilitation" or "Co-ADVANCE" for short.

Improving access to specialist multidisciplinary palliative care consultation for rural cancer patients by videoconferencing: report of a pilot project.

PURPOSE: Palliative care (PC) and palliative radiotherapy (RT) consultation are integral to the care of patients with advanced cancer. These services are not universally available in rural areas, and travel to urban centers to access them can be burdensome for patients and families. The objectives of our study were to assess the feasibility of using videoconferencing to provide specialist multidisciplinary PC and palliative RT consultation to cancer patients in rural areas and to explore symptom, cost, and satisfaction outcomes. METHODS: The Virtual Pain and Symptom Control and Palliative Radiotherapy Clinic was piloted from January 2008 to March 2011. Cancer patients in rural northern Alberta attended local telehealth facilities, accompanied by nurses trained in symptom assessment. The multidisciplinary team at the Cross Cancer Institute in Edmonton was linked by videoconference. Team recommendations were sent to the patients' family physicians. Data were collected on referral, clinical, and consultation characteristics and symptom, cost, and satisfaction outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-four initial consultation and 28 follow-up visits took place. Mean Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale scores for anxiety and appetite were statistically significantly improved at the first follow-up visit (p < 0.01 and p = 0.03, respectively). Average per visit savings for patients seen by telehealth versus attending the CCI were 471.13 km, 7.96 hours, and Cdn $192.71, respectively. Patients and referring physicians indicated a high degree of satisfaction with the clinic. CONCLUSION: Delivery of specialist multidisciplinary PC consultation by videoconferencing is feasible, may improve symptoms, results in cost savings to patients and families, and is satisfactory to users.

Determinants of quality of life in advanced cancer patients with bone metastases undergoing palliative radiation treatment.

PURPOSE: Assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is critical to effective delivery of palliative care in patients with advanced cancer. The current study analyzes relationships between baseline social determinants of health and medical factors, and self-reported HRQOL in patients with bone metastases receiving palliative radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Advanced cancer patients referred for radiotherapy treatment of bone metastases completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire in multiple outpatient clinics internationally. Demographics and social determinants were collected as baseline information. Univariate and Bonferroni-adjusted multivariate linear regression analyses were used to detect significant correlations between baseline determinants and different HRQOL domains. RESULTS: Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) was correlated with better physical (p = 0.0002), role (p < 0.0001), emotional (p < 0.0001), and social (p < 0.0001) functioning, and global health scores (p = 0.0015) and predicted lower symptom scores for fatigue (p < 0.0001), pain (p < 0.0001), appetite loss (p < 0.0001), and constipation (p < 0.0001). Increased age was predictive of better social functioning (p < 0.0001) and less insomnia (p = 0.0036), higher education correlated with better global health status (p = 0.0043), and patients who were employed or retired had improved physical functioning (p = 0.0004 and p = 0.0030, respectively) and less financial challenges compared to patients who were unemployed (p = 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline KPS had the greatest influence on EORTC QLQ-C30 domain scores. Age, education level, and employment status had significant impacts, although on fewer domains. Further studies that investigate baseline determinants are worthwhile to clarify relationships in order to care for patients more effectively at the end of life.

Triage for palliative radiotherapy by clinical specialist radiation therapists: A scoping review.

Patients who could benefit from palliative radiotherapy (PRT) may be in different phases of the cancer journey: they may have minimal symptoms and preserved functional status, or could be near end of life, with multiple complex care needs. Efficient triage at PRT referral is crucial to match patients with an appropriate provider and care setting as quickly as possible. Many centres have a dedicated PRT clinic, for which triage occurs by a Palliative Clinical Specialist Radiation Therapist (PCSRT). We performed an English-language literature search of 15 databases, without date limits, based on the PICO framework. After independent screening of titles and abstracts by two authors, relevant full text papers were reviewed. Twenty studies (15 publications and five abstracts) and one government report met inclusion criteria. Studies were published over a 21-year period by investigators from four countries. By identifying bottlenecks, screening out inappropriate referrals, and assessing patients in advance of consult, PSCRT triage decreased wait times by approximately 50%, on average, compared to standard pathways (range 30-82%). Increasing efficiency by pre-booking and coordinating appointments increases patient volumes and optimizes use of resources. A triage PCSRT serving a navigator role improves continuity of care, and in decreasing the number of handoffs, safety as well. Shifting triage to a PCSRT allows multidisciplinary team members to work to their maximum scope. In one clinic, after incorporation of PCSRT triage, use of on-call services decreased, as more patients were seen during daytime appointments, contributing to cost-savings.

An Analysis of Clinical and Systemic Factors Associated with Palliative Radiotherapy Delivery and Completion at the End of Life in Alberta, Canada.

Radiotherapy (RT) is often utilized for symptom control at the end of life. Palliative RT (pRT) may not be taken to completion by patients, thus decreasing clinical benefits and adversely impacting resource allocation. We determined rates of incomplete pRT and examined predictors of non-completion using an electronic questionnaire. Methods: A questionnaire was embedded within the RT electronic prescribing system for all five cancer centers of Alberta, Canada, between 2017 and 2020. Prescribing radiation oncologists (ROs) were tasked with completing the questionnaire. Treatment variables were collected for 2040 patients prescribed pRT. Details on pRT courses delivered and completed were used to determine rates of incomplete RT. Electronic medical records of a subset of 367 patients randomly selected from the 2040 patients were then analyzed to examine for association of non-completion of RT with patient, disease, and therapy-related factors. Results: Overall, 10% of patients did not complete pRT. The rate of single fractions prescribed as a proportion of all RT fractions increased from 18% (pre-2017: pre-study era) to 29% (2017-2020: study era) (p < 0.0001). After conducting multivariate analysis on the overall group, multiple lifetime malignancies (OR:0.64) or increasing the number of pRT fractions (OR:0.08-0.17) were associated with non-completion. Being selected for stereotactic RT (OR:3.75) or survival > 30 days post-RT prescription (OR:2.20-5.02) were associated with greater rates of RT completion. The ROs' estimates of life expectancy at the time of RT prescription were not predictive of RT completion. In the multivariate analysis of the 367-patient subset, the presence of hepatic metastases (OR 2.59), survival 30-59 days (OR 6.61) and survival 90+ days (OR 8.18) post-RT prescription were associated with pRT completion. Only increasing pRT fractionation (OR:0.05-0.2) was associated with non-completion. Conclusion: One in ten patients prescribed pRT did not complete their treatment course. Decreasing pRT fractionation and improving prognostication in patients near the end of life may decrease rates of incomplete RT courses.

Effects of exercise during and after neoadjuvant chemoradiation on symptom burden and quality of life in rectal cancer patients: a phase II randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: We previously demonstrated that exercise during and after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NACRT) for rectal cancer may improve the rate of pathologic complete/near complete response. Here, we report the effects of exercise on symptom management and quality of life (QoL). METHODS: Rectal cancer patients (N = 36) were randomized to a supervised high-intensity interval training program during NACRT followed by unsupervised continuous exercise after NACRT or usual care. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline, post-NACRT, and presurgery including symptom burden (M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory) and QoL (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ- C30 and -CR29). RESULTS: During NACRT, exercise significantly worsened stool frequency (adjusted between-group difference, 25.8; 95% CI, 4.0 to 47.6; p = 0.022), role functioning (adjusted between-group difference, -21.3; 95% CI, -41.5 to -1.1; p = 0.039), emotional functioning (adjusted between-group difference, -11.7; 95% CI, -22.0 to -1.4; p = 0.028), and cognitive functioning (adjusted between-group difference, -11.6; 95% CI, -19.2 to -4.0; p = 0.004) compared to usual care. After NACRT, exercise significantly worsened diarrhea (adjusted between-group difference, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.1 to 2.3; p = 0.030) and embarrassment (adjusted between-group difference, 19.7; 95% CI, 7.4 to 32.1; p = 0.003) compared to usual care. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise exacerbated some symptoms and worsened QoL during NACRT; however, most negative effects dissipated after NACRT. Larger trials are necessary to confirm these findings. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: If the clinical benefit of exercise is confirmed, then the modest symptom exacerbation during NACRT may be considered tolerable. However, in the absence of any clinical benefit, exercise may be contraindicated in this clinical setting.