Changes in Bladder Volume During Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Patients irradiated for prostate cancer may experience urinary toxicity, particularly if the bladder volume is small. A mobile application (app) that reminds the patients to drink water prior to each radiation fraction may help avoid small volumes. This study investigating bladder volumes during a radiotherapy course is a prerequisite for a prospective trial testing such a reminder app. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Frequency of bladder volumes <200 ml and seven potential risk factors were retrospectively evaluated in 72 patients receiving external beam radiotherapy for non-metastatic prostate cancer. RESULTS: The mean and median values of the numbers of radiation fractions with bladder volumes <200 ml were 17.8 (standard deviation=12.0) and 16.5 (interquartile range Q1-Q3=7.5-29.5) fractions, respectively. Higher numbers of fractions with volumes <200 ml were significantly associated with pre-radiotherapy bladder volumes <200 ml (p<0.001) and high-risk prostate cancer (p=0.014). CONCLUSION: The proportion of bladder volumes <200 ml during the radiotherapy course was high and needs to be decreased. Pre-radiotherapy bladder volume and risk level of prostate cancer were significant risk factors for higher numbers of fractions with volumes <200 ml. These results are important for designing a prospective trial.

Pre-treatment Emotional Distress in Patients Receiving Radiotherapy for Gynecologic Cancers.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Patients with gynecologic cancers selected for external-beam radiotherapy or brachytherapy may experience emotional distress. We aimed to identify patients who may benefit from early psycho-oncological intervention. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We investigated 10 potential risk factors of emotional distress in a retrospective series of 122 patients planned for radiotherapy of gynecologic cancers. Factors included COVID-19 pandemic, number of physical problems, age, performance status, tumor site/stage, surgery, chemotherapy, brachytherapy, and history of another tumor. p-Values <0.005 indicated significance, and p-values <0.06 trends. RESULTS: Frequencies of worry, fear, sadness, depression, nervousness, and loss of interest were 41%, 57%, 39%, 16%, 38%, and 20%, respectively. Significant associations with at least one of these symptoms were found for ≥5 physical problems and no upfront surgery. Trends were observed for chemoradiotherapy, history of another tumor, worse performance status, and younger age. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of pre-radiotherapy emotional distress was remarkable in patients with gynecologic cancers. Patients with risk factors may benefit from immediate psycho-oncological assistance.

Emotional Distress Prior to Chemoradiation for Rectal or Anal Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Anticipation of chemoradiation has been reported to cause psychosocial distress in patients with rectal cancer. This study provides additional data regarding prevalence and risk factors of emotional distress in patients who received chemoradiation for rectal or anal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-four patients were analyzed for emotional distress utilizing 12 factors. When applying the Bonferroni correction, p-values <0.0042 were considered significant. RESULTS: Worry, fears, sadness, depression, nervousness, and loss of interest in usual activities were reported by 31%, 47%, 33%, 11%, 47%, and 19% of patients, respectively. More physical problems were associated with fears (p=0.0030) and loss of interest (p=0.0021). Strong trends were observed for associations between female sex and sadness (p=0.0098) and between lower performance score and worry (p=0.0068) or fears (p=0.0064). CONCLUSION: A considerable proportion of patients reported emotional distress prior to chemoradiation for rectal or anal cancer. High-risk patients may benefit from early psycho-oncological support.

Pre-treatment Emotional Distress in Patients Irradiated for Malignant Glioma.

BACKGROUND/AIM: A recommendation of radiotherapy for patients with malignant gliomas may trigger emotional distress. Frequency and risk factors of this complication were investigated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prevalence of six emotional problems and 11 potential risk factors were evaluated in 103 patients irradiated for grade II-IV gliomas. p-Values <0.0045 were considered significant. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients (74%) had ≥1 emotional problem. Prevalence of specific emotional problems ranged between 23% and 63%. Associations were found between ≥5 physical problems and worry (p=0.0010), fear (p=0.0001), sadness (p=0.0023), depression (p=0.0006), and loss of interest (p=0.0006), and Karnofsky performance score ≤80 and depression (p=0.0002). Trends were found for physical problems and nervousness (p=0.040), age ≥60 years and depression (p=0.043) or loss of interest (p=0.045), grade IV glioma and sadness (p=0.042), and ≥2 involved sites and loss of interest (p=0.022). CONCLUSION: Three-fourths of glioma patients had pre-radiotherapy emotional distress. Psychological support should be offered very soon, particularly for high-risk patients.

Prevalence of and Risk Factors for Emotional Distress in Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy for Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Quality of life of patients with lung cancer can be impaired by psychological distress. This study evaluated prevalence of and risk factors for emotional distress in patients undergoing radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fourteen potential risk factors were retrospectively investigated in 144 patients. Emotional distress was evaluated with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer. Values of p<0.0036 (Bonferroni correction) were considered significant. RESULTS: At least one emotional problem (worry, fear, sadness, depression, nervousness, loss of interest) was reported by the majority of patients (N=93, 65%). Prevalence of these problems was 37%, 38%, 31%, 15%, 32% and 23%, respectively. Physical problems were significantly associated with worry (p=0.0029), fear (p=0.0030), sadness (p<0.0001), depression (p=0.0008), nervousness (p<0.0001), and loss of interest (p<0.0001). Age ≤69 years was associated with worry (p=0.0003), and female sex with fear (p=0.0002) and sadness (p=0.0026). Trends were found for associations of age with sadness (p=0.045), female sex with nervousness (p=0.034), and chemoradiotherapy with worry (p=0.027). CONCLUSION: Many patients with lung cancer experience emotional distress. Early psycho-oncological assistance may be important, particularly for high-risk patients.

Emotional Distress in Head-and-neck Cancer Patients Scheduled for Chemoradiation or Radiotherapy Alone.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Radiotherapy for head-and-neck cancer is often associated with significant toxicities, which may cause emotional distress. We evaluated prevalence and risk factors for pre-treatment emotional problems in patients irradiated for head-and-neck cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twelve characteristics were retrospectively investigated in 213 patients for associations with emotional problems (worry, fear, sadness, depression, nervousness, loss of interest). After Bonferroni adjustment, p-values <0.0042 were regarded significant. RESULTS: At least one emotional problem was reported by 131 patients (61.5%). Specific prevalence for emotional problems ranged between 10% and 44%. Physical complaints showed significant associations with all six emotional problems (p<0.0001) and female sex with sadness (p=0.0013). Trends were found for associations between female sex and fear (p=0.0097), history of another tumor and sadness (p=0.043), worse performance status and nervousness (p=0.012), and cancer site (oropharynx/oral cavity) and nervousness (p=0.063). CONCLUSION: More than 60% of patients reported emotional distress prior to radiotherapy for head-and-neck cancer. Patients with risk factors likely require near-term psycho-oncological assistance.

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Emotional Distress in Patients With Prostate Cancer Assigned to External-beam Radiotherapy With or Without High-dose Rate Brachytherapy.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Upcoming radiotherapy for prostate cancer may lead to emotional distress. This study aimed to identify the prevalence and risk factors in a retrospective cohort of 102 patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirteen characteristics were evaluated for six emotional problems. To account for multiple comparisons, Bonferroni correction was used; p-values <0.0038 were significant (alpha level <0.05). RESULTS: Prevalence of worry, fears, sadness, depression, nervousness, and loss of interest in usual activities was 25%, 27%, 11%, 11%, 18%, and 5%, respectively. A greater number of physical problems was significantly associated with worry (p=0.0037) and fears (p<0.0001) and showed trends regarding sadness (p=0.011) and depression (p=0.011). Trends were also found for associations between younger age and worry (p=0.021), advanced primary tumor stage and fears (p=0.025), patient's history of another malignancy and nervousness (p=0.035), and between external-beam radiotherapy alone and fears (p=0.042) or nervousness (p=0.037). CONCLUSION: Although the prevalence of emotional distress was comparably low, patients with risk factors may benefit from early psychological support.

A New Clinical Instrument for Estimating the Ambulatory Status after Irradiation for Malignant Spinal Cord Compression.

Estimating post-treatment ambulatory status can improve treatment personalization of patients irradiated for malignant spinal cord compression (MSCC). A new clinical score was developed from data of 283 patients treated with radiotherapy alone in prospective trials. Radiotherapy regimen, age, gender, tumor type, interval from tumor diagnosis to MSCC, number of affected vertebrae, other bone metastases, visceral metastases, time developing motor deficits, ambulatory status, performance score, sensory deficits, and sphincter dysfunction were evaluated. For factors with prognostic relevance in the multivariable logistic regression model after backward stepwise variable selection, scoring points were calculated (post-radiotherapy ambulatory rate in % divided by 10) and added for each patient. Four factors (primary tumor type, sensory deficits, sphincter dysfunction, ambulatory status) were used for the instrument that includes three prognostic groups (17-21, 22-31, and 32-37 points). Post-radiotherapy ambulatory rates were 10%, 65%, and 97%, respectively, and 2-year local control rates were 100%, 75%, and 88%, respectively. Positive predictive values to predict ambulatory and non-ambulatory status were 97% and 90% using the new score, and 98% and 79% using the previous instrument. The new score appeared more precise in predicting non-ambulatory status. Since patients with 32-37 points had high post-radiotherapy ambulatory and local control rates, they may not require surgery.

Prognostic Value of Preclinical Markers after Radiotherapy of Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression-An Additional Analysis of Patients from Two Prospective Trials.

For optimal personalization of treatment for metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC), the patient's survival prognosis should be considered. Estimation of survival can be facilitated by prognostic factors. This study investigated the prognostic value of pre-treatment preclinical markers, namely hemoglobin, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and c-reactive protein (CRP), in 190 patients from two prospective trials who had poor or intermediate survival prognoses and were irradiated for MSCC with motor deficits. In addition, clinical factors including radiation regimen, age, gender, tumor type, interval from tumor diagnosis to MSCC, number of affected vertebrae, visceral metastases, other bone metastases, time developing motor deficits, ambulatory status, sensory function, and sphincter function were evaluated. On univariate analyses, NLR (p = 0.033), LDH (p < 0.001), CRP (p < 0.001), tumor type (p < 0.001), pre-radiotherapy ambulatory status (p < 0.001), and sphincter function (p = 0.011) were significant. In the subsequent Cox regression analysis, LDH (p = 0.007), CRP (p = 0.047), tumor type (p = 0.003), and ambulatory status (p = 0.010) maintained significance. In addition to clinical factors, preclinical markers may help in estimating the survival of patients irradiated for MSCC. Additional prospective trials are warranted.

A New and Easy-to-Use Survival Score for Patients Irradiated for Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression.

PURPOSE: A survival score was created in 2008 to improve treatment personalization of patients irradiated for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC). Since then, targeted therapies improved survival of patients with cancer, which may decrease this score's predictive value. A new score appears necessary. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Two hundred sixty-four patients receiving radiation therapy without surgery in prospective trials (2010-2021) were included. A dose-fractionation regimen plus 15 factors were analyzed: age, sex, tumor type, interval tumor diagnosis to MESCC, MESCC sites, affected vertebrae, additional bone lesions, other distant lesions (yes or no), number of organs involved by metastases, time developing motor deficits, ambulatory status, sensory function, sphincter dysfunction, pain, and distress. Six-month survival rates (%) of independent prognostic factors were divided by 10 and summed for each patient. The score was compared with the previous tool for predicting death ≤6 months and survival ≥6 months. RESULTS: In a multivariate analysis, tumor type (P = .001), other distant lesions (P < .001), and ambulatory status (P < .001) were significant. Based on 6-month survival rates, 4 groups (8-9, 10-13, 14-17, and 18 points) were created with 6-month survival rates of 12.8%, 34.7%, 62.8%, and 90.0%, respectively (version A). For version B, "other distant lesions" was replaced by "number of organs involved by metastases." Version B included 4 groups (8-10, 11-14, 15-16, and 17 points) with 6-month survival rates of 11.1%, 42.0%, 68.6%, and 91.7%, respectively. Positive predictive values to predict death ≤6 months were 87.2% (version A) and 88.9% (version B) versus 76.6% (3 groups) and 84.6% (5 groups) for the previous score. Positive predictive values to predict survival ≥6 months were 90.0% and 91.7% versus 59.0% and 64.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Both versions of the new score were more precise than the previous tool. Version B appears slightly superior to version A but requires more extensive diagnostic staging that may not be readily available when emergently treating.