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 American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) convened a task force to address 5 key questions regarding palliative RT in symptomatic bone metastases. Based on a systemic 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 non-spine bone metastases requiring surgery are recommended postoperative RT. Symptomatic bone metastases treated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy in 1 fraction (800 cGy/1fx), 2000 cGy/5fx, 2400 cGy/6fx, or 3000 cGy/10fx. Spinal cord or cauda equina compression in patients ineligible for surgery and receiving conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1fx, 1600 cGy/2fx, 2000 cGy/5fx, or 3000 cGy/10fx. Symptomatic bone metastases in selected patients with good performance status without surgery or neurological symptoms/signs are conditionally recommended SBRT over conventional palliative RT. Spine bone metastases re-irradiated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1fx, 2000 cGy/5fx, 2400 cGy/6fx, or 2000 cGy/8fx; non-spine bone metastases re-irradiated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1fx, 2000 cGy/5fx, or 2400 cGy/6fx. 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.

40 Gray in 5 Fractions for Salvage Reirradiation of Spine Lesions Previously Treated With Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A retrospective single-center analysis of the safety and efficacy of reirradiation to 40 Gy in 5 fractions (reSBRT) in patients previously treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy to the spine was performed. METHODS: We identified 102 consecutive patients treated with reSBRT for 105 lesions between 3/2013 and 8/2021. Sixty-three patients (61.8%) were treated to the same vertebral level, and 39 (38.2%) to overlapping immediately adjacent levels. Local control was defined as the absence of progression within the treated target volume. The probability of local progression was estimated using a cumulative incidence curve. Death without local progression was considered a competing risk. RESULTS: Most patients had extensive metastatic disease (54.9%) and were treated to the thoracic spine (53.8%). The most common regimen in the first course of stereotactic body radiotherapy was 27 Gy in 3 fractions, and the median time to reSBRT was 16.4 months. At the time of simulation, 44% of lesions had advanced epidural disease. Accordingly, 80% had myelogram simulations. Both the vertebral body and posterior elements were treated in 86% of lesions. At a median follow-up time of 13.2 months, local failure occurred in 10 lesions (9.5%). The 6- and 12-month cumulative incidences of local failure were 4.8% and 6%, respectively. Seven patients developed radiation-related neuropathy, and 1 patient developed myelopathy. The vertebral compression fracture rate was 16.7%. CONCLUSION: In patients with extensive disease involvement, reSBRT of spine metastases with 40 Gy in 5 fractions seems to be safe and effective. Prospective trials are needed to determine the optimal dose and fractionation in this clinical scenario.

Palliative Care as a Component of High-Value and Cost-Saving Care During Hospitalization for Metastatic Cancer.

PURPOSE: Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that palliative care (PC) can improve quality of life and survival for outpatients with advanced cancer, but there are limited population-based data on the value of inpatient PC. We assessed PC as a component of high-value care among a nationally representative sample of inpatients with metastatic cancer and identified hospitalization characteristics significantly associated with high costs. METHODS: Hospitalizations of patients 18 years and older with a primary diagnosis of metastatic cancer from the National Inpatient Sample from 2010 to 2019 were analyzed. We used multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression to assess medical services, patient demographics, and hospital characteristics associated with higher charges billed to insurance and hospital costs. Generalized linear mixed-effects models were used to determine cost savings associated with provision of PC. RESULTS: Among 397,691 hospitalizations from 2010 to 2019, the median charge per admission increased by 24.9%, from $44,904 in US dollars (USD) to $56,098 USD, whereas the median hospital cost remained stable at $14,300 USD. Receipt of inpatient PC was associated with significantly lower charges (odds ratio [OR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.64]; P < .001) and costs (OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.61]; P < .001). Factors associated with high charges were receipt of invasive medical ventilation (P < .001) or systemic therapy (P < .001), Hispanic patients (P < .001), young age (18-49 years, P < .001), and for-profit hospitals (P < .001). PC provision was associated with a $1,310 USD (-13.6%, P < .001) reduction in costs per hospitalization compared with no PC, independent of the receipt of invasive care and age. CONCLUSION: Inpatient PC is associated with reduced hospital costs for patients with metastatic cancer, irrespective of age and receipt of aggressive interventions. Integration of inpatient PC may de-escalate costs incurred through low-value inpatient interventions.

Radiation Therapy in the Management of Leptomeningeal Disease From Solid Tumors.

Purpose: Leptomeningeal disease (LMD) is clinically detected in 5% to 10% of patients with solid tumors and is a source of substantial morbidity and mortality. Prognosis for this entity remains poor and treatments are palliative. Radiation therapy (RT) is an essential tool in the management of LMD, and a recent randomized trial demonstrated a survival benefit for proton craniospinal irradiation (CSI) in select patients. In the setting of this recent advance, we conducted a review of the role of RT in LMD from solid tumors to evaluate the evidence basis for RT recommendations. Methods and Materials: In November 2022, we conducted a comprehensive literature search in PubMed, as well as a review of ongoing clinical trials listed on ClinicalTrials.gov, to inform a discussion on the role of RT in solid tumor LMD. Because of the paucity of high-quality published evidence, discussion was informed more by expert consensus and opinion, including a review of societal guidelines, than evidence from clinical trials. Results: Only 1 prospective randomized trial has evaluated RT for LMD, demonstrating improved central nervous system progression-free survival for patients with breast and lung cancer treated with proton CSI compared with involved-field RT. Modern photon CSI techniques have improved upon historical rates of acute hematologic toxicity, but the overall benefit of this modality has not been prospectively evaluated. Multiple retrospective studies have explored the use of involved-field RT or the combination of RT with chemotherapy, but clear evidence of survival benefit is lacking. Conclusions: Optimal management of LMD with RT remains reliant upon expert opinion, with proton CSI indicated in patients with good performance status and extra-central nervous system disease that is either well-controlled or for which effective treatment options are available. Photon-based CSI traditionally has been associated with increased marrow and gastrointestinal toxicities, though intensity modulated RT/volumetric-modulated arc therapy based photon CSI may have reduced the toxicity profile. Further work is needed to understand the role of radioisotopes as well as combined modality treatment with intrathecal or central nervous system penetrating systemic therapies.

Prophylactic Radiation Therapy Versus Standard of Care for Patients With High-Risk Asymptomatic Bone Metastases: A Multicenter, Randomized Phase II Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: External-beam radiation therapy (RT) is standard of care (SOC) for pain relief of symptomatic bone metastases. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of radiation to asymptomatic bone metastases in preventing skeletal-related events (SRE). METHODS: In a multicenter randomized controlled trial, adult patients with widely metastatic solid tumor malignancies were stratified by histology and planned SOC (systemic therapy or observation) and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive RT to asymptomatic high-risk bone metastases or SOC alone. The primary outcome of the trial was SRE. Secondary outcomes included hospitalizations for SRE and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 78 patients with 122 high-risk bone metastases were enrolled between May 8, 2018, and August 9, 2021, at three institutions across an affiliated cancer network in the United States. Seventy-three patients were evaluable for the primary end point. The most common primary cancer types were lung (27%), breast (24%), and prostate (22%). At 1 year, SRE occurred in one of 62 bone metastases (1.6%) in the RT arm and 14 of 49 bone metastases (29%) in the SOC arm (P < .001). There were significantly fewer patients hospitalized for SRE in the RT arm compared with the SOC arm (0 v 4, P = .045). At a median follow-up of 2.5 years, OS was significantly longer in the RT arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.89; P = .018), which persisted on multivariable Cox regression analysis (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.85; P = .01). CONCLUSION: Radiation delivered prophylactically to asymptomatic, high-risk bone metastases reduced SRE and hospitalizations. We also observed an improvement in OS with prophylactic radiation, although a confirmatory phase III trial is warranted.

Proton therapy in the palliative setting.

Given its sharp dose fall off and ability to spare healthy surrounding tissue, proton beam therapy (PBT) has traditionally been used to treat various types of malignancies in the definitive setting, with strong, empirical data supporting its utility and safety. In the palliative setting, however, photon therapy has generally remained the standard of care in radiation treatment delivery due to lower cost, and greater availability. However, recent data suggest that the use of PBT may provide benefit in terms of symptom management and disease control in patients with locally advanced or recurrent disease who do not qualify for definitive therapy or with metastatic disease. Additionally, due to its unique dosimetric properties, PBT may confer less overall toxicity, thus helping preserve or improve the quality of life in this patient population, especially for those who are nearing end of life. While there is a need for further study, initial data analyzed from both retrospective and prospective single-institution and multi-institution trials are promising. This review aims to explore the efficacy and safety of PBT in the palliative setting among adults and to summarize pertinent studies that support its usage. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first review of the literature pertaining to PBT used in the palliative setting across multiple disease sites.

A Worksheet to Facilitate Discussions of Values for Patients With Metastatic Cancer: A Pilot Study.

CONTEXT: Individual goals and values should drive medical decision making for patients with serious illness. Unfortunately, clinicians' existing strategies to encourage reflection and communication regarding patients' personal values are generally time-consuming and limited in scope. OBJECTIVES: Herein, we develop a novel intervention to facilitate at-home reflection and discussion about goals and values. We then conduct a pilot study of our intervention in a small population of patients with metastatic cancer. METHODS: We first engaged former cancer patients and their families to adapt an existing serious illness communication guide to a worksheet format. We then distributed this adapted "Values Worksheet" to 28 patients with metastatic cancer. We surveyed participants about their perceptions of the Worksheet to assess its feasibility. RESULTS: Of 30 patients approached, 28 agreed to participate. Seventeen participants completed the Values Worksheet, and of those 11 (65%) responded to the follow-up survey. Seven of eleven reported that the Values Worksheet was a good use of time, and nine of eleven would be likely to recommend it to other patients with cancer. Eight of ten reported mild distress, two of ten reported moderate to severe distress. CONCLUSION: The Values Worksheet was a feasible way to facilitate at-home discussions of goals and values for select patients with metastatic cancer. Further research should focus on identifying which patients are most likely to benefit from the Values Worksheet, and should employ the Worksheet as one tool to facilitate reflection on the questions that arise around serious illness, as an adjunct to serious illness conversations with a physician.

Radiation Therapy at the End of-Life: Quality of Life and Financial Toxicity Considerations.

In patients with advanced cancer, radiation therapy is considered at various time points in the patient's clinical course from diagnosis to death. As some patients are living longer with metastatic cancer on novel therapeutics, radiation oncologists are increasingly using radiation therapy as an ablative therapy in appropriately selected patients. However, most patients with metastatic cancer still eventually die of their disease. For those without effective targeted therapy options or those who are not candidates for immunotherapy, the time frame from diagnosis to death is still relatively short. Given this evolving landscape, prognostication has become increasingly challenging. Thus, radiation oncologists must be diligent about defining the goals of therapy and considering all treatment options from ablative radiation to medical management and hospice care. The risks and benefits of radiation therapy vary based on an individual patient's prognosis, goals of care, and the ability of radiation to help with their cancer symptoms without undue toxicity over the course of their expected lifetime. When considering recommending a course of radiation, physicians must broaden their understanding of risks and benefits to include not only physical symptoms, but also various psychosocial burdens. These include financial burdens to the patient, to their caregiver and to the healthcare system. The burden of time spent at the end-of-life receiving radiation therapy must also be considered. Thus, the consideration of radiation therapy at the end-of-life can be complex and requires careful attention to the whole patient and their goals of care.

Participation of Patients From Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups in Phase 1 Early Cancer Drug Development Trials in the US, 2000-2018.

Importance: Despite federal initiatives encouraging the enrollment of individuals from racial and ethnic minority groups in US clinical trials, no studies to date have specifically examined demographic disparities among participants in phase 1 drug development trials for patients with metastatic cancer. Objective: To assess trends in the enrollment of patients from racial and ethnic minority groups in US phase 1 therapeutic drug trials for metastatic cancer from 2000 to 2018. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, ClinicalTrials.gov was queried in July 2021 to identify completed phase 1 drug trials for metastatic cancer in the US from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2018, with published results, yielding 221 phase 1 trials with 8309 participants aged 18 years or older with metastatic solid tumors. Proportions of each racial and ethnic group of trial participants were compared with that from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries' Cancer in North America (CiNA) database. Statistical analysis was performed from July 12, 2021, to March 15, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: For each racial and ethnic group, the difference between trial and CiNA proportions was examined using a 2-sample test for equality of proportions with continuity correction. Results: The 8309 phase 1 trial participants (4198 men [50.5%]; median age, 59 years) included 23 American Indian or Alaska Native participants (0.3%), 371 Asian or Pacific Islander participants (4.5%), 514 Black participants (6.2%), 401 of 5076 Hispanic or Latinx participants (7.9%), and 7154 White participants (86.1%). Industry funded 165 of the 221 trials (74.7%). White patients were overrepresented overall compared with the corresponding CiNA cohort (7154 of 8309 [86.1%] vs 4 113 096 of 4 891 486 [84.1%]; difference, 2.0 percentage points; P < .001). There was an increase in overrepresentation of White patients from 2000 to 2011 (trials, 2780 of 3245 [85.7%]; CiNA, 2 378 019 of 2 800 711 [84.9%]; difference, 0.8 percentage points; P = .23) to 2012-2018 (trials, 4374 of 5063 [86.4%]; CiNA, 1 735 077 of 2 090 775 [82.9%]; difference, 3.5 percentage points; P < .001) and corresponding worsening representation of American Indian or Alaska Native patients (2000-2011: trials, 10 of 3245 [0.3%]; CiNA, 10 905 of 2 800 711 [0.4%]; difference, -0.08 percentage points; 2012-2018: trials, 13 of 5063 [0.3%]; CiNA, 9484 of 2 090 775 [0.5%]; difference, -0.20 percentage points), Asian or Pacific Islander patients (2000-2011: trials, 121 of 3245 [3.7%]; CiNA, 75 033 of 2 800 711 [2.7%]; difference, 1.1 percentage points; 2012-2018: trials, 151 of 5063 [3.0%]; CiNA 70 535 of 2 090 775 [3.4%]; difference, -0.75 percentage points), Black patients (2000-2011: trials, 244 of 3245 [7.5%]; CiNA, 322 701 of 2 800 711 [11.5%]; difference, -4.0 percentage points; 2012-2018: trials, 270 of 5063 [5.3%]; CiNA, 255 625 of 2 090 775 [12.2%]; difference, -6.9 percentage points), and Hispanic or Latinx patients (2000-2011: trials, 161 of 1792 [9.0%]; CiNA, 169 297 of 2 800 711 [6.0%]; difference, 3.0 percentage points; 2012-2018: trials, 240 of 3295 [7.3%]; CiNA, 156 118 of 2 090 775 [7.5%]; difference, -0.2 percentage points). Similar disparities were observed when comparing industry-funded and academic center-sponsored trials. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of participants in phase 1 clinical trials of drugs for metastatic cancer, worsening disparities were observed over time in the accrual of patients from racial and ethnic minority groups. These findings may represent widening inequalities in access to trial sites and worsening systemic biases. More efforts are needed to diversify phase 1 cancer drug trials to improve equity in access to new treatments and to ensure that safety and efficacy findings from early drug trials are generalizable across populations.

Assessment of Guideline-Nonconcordant Radiotherapy in Medicare Beneficiaries With Metastatic Cancer Near the End of Life, 2015-2017.

This cross-sectional study uses data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to assess the use of professional society guideline-nonconcordant radiotherapy in patients at the end of life.

Multidisciplinary Treatment of Non-Spine Bone Metastases: Results of a Modified Delphi Consensus Process.

Purpose: Local treatment for bone metastases is becoming increasingly complex. National guidelines traditionally focus only on radiation therapy (RT), leaving a gap in clinical decision support resources available to clinicians. The objective of this study was to reach expert consensus regarding multidisciplinary management of non-spine bone metastases, which would facilitate standardizing treatment within an academic-community partnership. Methods and Materials: A multidisciplinary panel of physicians treating metastatic disease across the Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) Cancer Alliance, including community-based partner sites, was convened. Clinical questions rated of high importance in the management of non-spine bone metastases were identified via survey. A literature review was conducted, and panel physicians drafted initial recommendation statements. Consensus was gathered on recommendation statements through a modified Delphi process from a full panel of 17 physicians from radiation oncology, orthopaedic surgery, medical oncology, interventional radiology, and anesthesia pain. Consensus was defined a priori as 75% of respondents indicating "agree" or "strongly agree" with the consensus statement. Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy was employed to assign evidence strength for each statement. Results: Seventeen clinical questions were identified, of which 11 (65%) were selected for the consensus process. Consensus was reached for 16 of 17 answer statements (94%), of which 12 were approved after Round 1 and additional 4 approved after Round 2 of the modified Delphi voting process. Topics included indications for referral to surgery or interventional radiology, radiation fractionation and appropriate use of stereotactic approaches, and the handling of systemic therapies during radiation. Evidence strength was most commonly C (n = 7), followed by B (n = 5) and A (n = 3). Conclusions: Consensus among a multidisciplinary panel of community and academic physicians treating non-spine bone metastases was feasible. Recommendations will assist clinicians and potentially provide measures to reduce variation across diverse practice settings. Findings highlight areas for further research such as pathologic fracture risk estimation, pre-operative radiation, and percutaneous ablation.

Clinical Outcomes of Dose-Escalated Hypofractionated External Beam Radiation Therapy (5 Gy × 5 Fractions) for Spine Metastasis.

Purpose: The objective of this study was to determine the toxicities and outcomes of patients with spinal metastasis treated with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) to 25 Gy in 5 fractions. Methods and Materials: Data were extracted from an institutional tumor registry for patients with spinal metastasis who were treated with EBRT to 25 Gy in 5 fractions to their spinal lesion(s). Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses to determine local control and overall survival (OS) were employed. Results: Seventy-five patients with 86 total treated spinal metastatic tumors were identified. The median follow-up was 7 months. The median age was 66 years. Fifty-six patients (75.7%) experienced partial or complete pain relief for a median duration of 6 months (range, 1-33). Fifty-one (59.3%) cases were planned using intensity modulated radiation therapy while 19 (22.1%) employed 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy and 16 (18.6%) cases used nonconformal radiation technique. Greater than 90% of cases had a point dose maximum to the spinal cord/cauda equina <27.5 Gy. No patient experienced treatment-related myelopathy. The most common toxicities were fatigue (23.3%), pain flare (14.0%), and nausea (8.1%). There were no grade 3 toxicities. One-year local control was 80.6%, and 1-year OS was 38.4%. Higher Karnofsky performance status (P = .001) and radiosensitive tumor histology (P = .014) were significant predictors for better OS. Conclusions: Our single-institutional retrospective analysis of patients with spinal metastasis suggested that palliative EBRT to 25 Gy in 5 fractions is safe, with a low toxicity profile and minimal risk for myelopathy with an achievable dose maximum to the spinal cord and cauda equina ≤27 Gy (equivalent total dose in 2-Gy fractions ≤50 Gy), and it may provide durable palliation and local control in cases where stereotactic body radiation therapy may not be indicated.

Personalized Treatment Selection Leads to Low Rates of Local Salvage Therapy for Bone Metastases.

PURPOSE: Local therapy for patients with nonspine bone metastases is evolving, with data supporting the use of single-fraction treatments, and more recently, showing possible benefit from stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). However, the rate of local salvage therapy (LST) after each technique has not been characterized in real-world clinic settings where patients are selected at physician discretion. We examined rates of LST in patients with nonspine bone metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We reviewed records of RT for nonspine bone metastases at our institution from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018. We defined LST as the first occurrence of RT or surgery for oncologic progression to a bone metastasis after initial RT. Cumulative incidence functions for retreatment were generated. We conducted multivariate analysis to identify variables associated with LST. RESULTS: A total of 1754 patients were analyzed, with median follow-up of 16.2 months (range, 0-36.8 months). Of all episodes of RT, 51.5% were multifraction external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), 7.0% were single-fraction EBRT, and 41.4% were SBRT. Altogether, 88 patients (5.0%) required LST, with an incidence at 6 months of 2.5%. Incidence of LST at 6 months was 2.1% for SBRT, 5.3% for single-fraction conventional regimens, and 2.4% for multifraction conventional regimens (P = .26). Patients of younger age, who had a higher Karnofsky performance status, and/or who had lesions in the pelvis had a higher risk of retreatment. CONCLUSIONS: In this large institutional cohort, the rate of LST was low, with no difference between RT techniques. The findings indicated that SBRT for patients at high risk for treatment failure may reduce the rate of retreatment overall. When treatment modality was selected based on patient characteristics, rates of LST were lower than when treatment was randomly selected.

Disparities in Care Management During Terminal Hospitalization Among Adults With Metastatic Cancer From 2010 to 2017.

Importance: Many patients with metastatic cancer receive high-cost, low-value care near the end of life. Identifying patients with a high likelihood of receiving low-value care is an important step to improve appropriate end-of-life care. Objective: To analyze patterns of care and interventions during terminal hospitalizations and examine whether care management is associated with sociodemographic status among adult patients with metastatic cancer at the end of life. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, population-based cross-sectional study used data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project to analyze all-payer, encounter-level information from multiple inpatient centers in the US. All utilization and hospital charge records from national inpatient sample data sets between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017 (n = 58 761 097), were screened. The final cohort included 21 335 patients 18 years and older at inpatient admission who had a principal diagnosis of metastatic cancer and died during hospitalization. Data for the current study were analyzed from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2017. Exposures: Patient demographic characteristics, patient insurance status, hospital location, and hospital teaching status. Main Outcomes and Measures: Receipt of systemic therapy (including chemotherapy and immunotherapy), receipt of invasive mechanical ventilation, emergency department (ED) admission, time from hospital admission to death, and total charges during a terminal hospitalization. Results: Among 21 335 patients with metastatic cancer who had terminal hospitalizations between 2010 and 2017, the median age was 65 years (interquartile range, 56-75 years); 54.0% of patients were female; 0.5% were American Indian, 3.3% were Asian or Pacific Islander, 14.1% were Black, 7.5% were Hispanic, 65.9% were White, and 3.1% were identified as other; 58.2% were insured by Medicare or Medicaid, and 33.2% were privately insured. Overall, 63.2% of patients were admitted from the ED, 4.6% received systemic therapy, and 19.2% received invasive mechanical ventilation during hospitalization. Racial and ethnic minority patients had a higher likelihood of being admitted from the ED (Asian or Pacific Islander patients: odds ratio [OR], 1.43 [95% CI, 1.20-1.72]; P < .001; Black patients: OR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.27-1.52]; P < .001; and Hispanic patients: OR, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.28-1.64]; P < .001), receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (Black patients: OR, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.44-1.75]; P < .001), and incurring higher total charges (Asian or Pacific Islander patients: OR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.13-1.60]; P = .001; Black patients: OR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.13-1.34]; P < .001; and Hispanic patients: OR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.34-1.69]; P < .001) compared with White patients. Privately insured patients had a lower likelihood of being admitted from the ED (OR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.44-0.51]; P < .001), receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.69-0.82]; P < .001), and incurring higher total charges (OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.59-0.68]; P < .001) compared with Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, patients with metastatic cancer from racial and ethnic minority groups and those with Medicare or Medicaid coverage were more likely to receive low-value, aggressive interventions at the end of life. Further studies are needed to evaluate the underlying factors associated with disparities at the end of life to implement prospective interventions.

Adjuvant Radiation Field Extent and Sites of Failure in Node Positive Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer.

PURPOSE: In patients with node-positive endometrial cancer, adjuvant radiation therapy with chemotherapy decreases local-regional recurrence compared with chemotherapy alone. However, the optimal radiation field borders and extent of nodal coverage have not been well studied. In a multi-institutional cohort, survival outcomes and sites of failure were analyzed for patients with International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC endometrioid endometrial cancer treated with pelvic radiation therapy (PRT) versus extended-field radiation therapy (EFRT), which encompassed high para-aortic lymph nodes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In a multi-institutional retrospective study, 143 patients with FIGO stage IIIC1 or IIIC2 endometrioid endometrial cancer treated with adjuvant radiation therapy from 2000 to 2016 were identified. Patient subgroups were classified by substage and radiation field extent: stage IIIC1 received EFRT, stage IIIC1 received PRT, and stage IIIC2 received EFRT. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and out-of-field recurrence were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Sites of failure were categorized as within or outside the radiation field. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 59 months; 87% of patients received chemotherapy. The 5-year RFS and OS rates were 73% and 87%, respectively. By subgroup, 5-year RFS rates were 79% for stage IIIC1 EFRT, 73% for stage IIIC1 PRT, and 69% for stage IIIC2 EFRT (P = .4). On multivariate analysis, the recurrence risk was highest for stage IIIC2 EFRT, although this result was not statistically significant (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.0; P = .4). In-field vaginal and nodal recurrences were observed in 2 patients (1%) and 4 patients (3%), respectively. Of 78 patients with stage IIIC1 cancer treated with PRT, 5 (6%) had isolated para-aortic nodal relapse outside the radiation field; 3 were long-term survivors (more than 6 years after salvage therapy). For patients with para-aortic recurrence, 86% had lymphovascular invasion, 71% had myometrial invasion of ≥50%, and 57% had grade 3 disease. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant chemoradiation therapy resulted in excellent survival outcomes for patients with FIGO stage IIIC endometrioid endometrial cancer. For patients with positive pelvic nodes, isolated para-aortic relapse outside the PRT field was uncommon and amenable to salvage therapy.

Postradiation Fractures after Combined Modality Treatment in Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcomas.

Soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of the extremities is typically treated with limb-sparing surgery and radiation therapy; with this treatment approach, high local control rates can be achieved. However, postradiation bone fractures, fractures occurring in the prior radiation field with minimal or no trauma, are a serious late complication that occurs in 2-22% of patients who receive surgery and radiation for STS. Multiple risk factors for sustaining a postradiation fracture exist, including high radiation dose, female sex, periosteal stripping, older age, femur location, and chemotherapy administration. The treatment of these pathological fractures can be difficult, with complications including delayed union, nonunion, and infection posing particular challenges. Here, we review the mechanisms, risk factors, and treatment challenges associated with postradiation fractures in STS patients.

Novel Inpatient Radiation Oncology Consult Service Model Reduces Hospital Length of Stay.

Palliative care and radiation therapy have played an expanding role in the management of patients with advanced cancers. Recent advances in our understanding of oligometastatic disease have led to increasing demand for familiarity with ablative techniques. Recognizing the demands of hospitalized patients for rapid access to care, we created an inpatient radiation oncology consult service (IROC) with consolidated expertise in palliative radiation and ablative techniques. In this quality improvement cohort study, we analyzed inpatient radiation oncology consults placed before and after IROC implementation and found that IROC led to increased delivery of specialty care and decreased hospital length of stay (median 8 days v 7 days, P = .005). This difference was most pronounced for patients for whom radiation therapy was indicated (14.5 v 11 days, P = .007). Our institutional experience demonstrates the value of recognizing metastatic disease as a distinct discipline and providing rapid access to palliative treatments for patients with advanced malignancies.

Replacing 30 Gy in 10 fractions with stereotactic body radiation therapy for bone metastases: A large multi-site single institution experience 2016-2018.

BACKGROUND: Bone metastases cause significant morbidity in patients with cancer, and radiation therapy (RT) is an effective treatment approach. Indications for more complex ablative techniques are emerging. We sought to evaluate RT trends at a large multi-site tertiary cancer center. METHODS: Patients who received RT for bone metastases at a single institution (including regional outpatient clinics) from 2016 to 2018 were identified. Patients were grouped by RT regimen: single-fraction conventional RT (8 Gy × 1), 30 Gy in 10 fractions, SBRT, and "other". Multinomial logistic regression was performed to assess trends in regimens over time. Binary logistic regression was performed to evaluate factors associated with receipt of SBRT. RESULTS: Between 2016 and 2018, 5,952 RT episodes were received by 2,969 patients with bone metastases. Overall, 76% of episodes were ≤ 5 fractions. The median number of fractions planned for SBRT and non-SBRT episodes was 3 (IQR 3-3) and 5 (IQR 5-10), respectively. Use of SBRT increased from 2016 to 2018 (39% to 53%, p < 0.01) while use of 30 Gy in 10 fractions decreased (26% to 12%, p < 0.01), and 8 Gy × 1 was stable (5.3% to 6.9%, p = 0.28). SBRT was associated with higher performance status (p < 0.01) and non-radiosensitive histology (p < 0.01). Use of SBRT increased in the regional network (19% to 48%, p < 0.01) and at the main center (52% to 59%, p = 0.02), but did not increase within 30 days of death. More patients treated with 8 Gy × 1 than SBRT died within 30 days of treatment (24% vs 3.8%, respectively, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: SBRT is replacing 30 Gy in 10 fractions for bone metastases, especially among patients with high performance status and non-radiosensitive histologies. Better prognostic algorithms could further improve patient-centered treatment selection at the end of life.