An Update on the Management of Bone Metastases.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Increasing life expectancy among patients with advanced cancer has placed a greater emphasis on optimizing pain control and quality of life. Concurrently, significant advancements in radiotherapy for bone metastases have permitted for dose escalation strategies such as stereotactic radiotherapy. This review aims to provide updated information on the management of bone metastases in light of these developments. RECENT FINDINGS: We reviewed recent studies regarding the role and details of external beam radiotherapy for bone metastases, with emphasis on differences by treatment site as well as intention (palliative versus ablative for oligometastases). Conventional palliative radiotherapy remains a mainstay of management. While stereotactic radiotherapy may augment durability of pain relief and even survival time, there are significant questions remaining regarding optimal dosing and patient selection. Radiotherapy for bone metastases continues to evolve, particularly with increasing use of stereotactic radiotherapy. Future studies are needed to clarify optimal dose, fractionation, modality, and patient selection criteria among different radiotherapy approaches.

A multi-institutional phase 2 trial of stereotactic body radiotherapy in the treatment of bone metastases in pediatric and young adult patients with sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Metastasectomy is standard of care for pediatric patients with metastatic sarcoma with limited disease. For patients with unresectable disease, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) may serve as an alternative. Herein, the authors report the results of a prospective, multi-institutional phase 2 trial of SBRT in children and young adults with metastatic sarcoma. METHODS: Patients aged >3 years and ≤40 years with unresected, osseous metastatic nonrhabdomyosarcoma sarcomas of soft tissue and bone were eligible. Patients received SBRT to a dose of 40 Gray (Gy) in 5 fractions. Local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Fourteen patients with a median age of 17 years (range, 4-25 years) were treated to 37 distinct metastatic lesions. With a median follow-up of 6.8 months (30.5 months in surviving patients), the Kaplan-Meier patient-specific and lesion-specific LC rates at 6 months were 89% and 95%, respectively. The median PFS was 6 months and the median OS was 24 months. In a post hoc analysis, PFS (median, 9.3 months vs 3.7 months; log-rank P = .03) and OS (median not reached vs 12.7 months; log-rank P = .02) were improved when all known sites of metastatic disease were consolidated with SBRT compared with partial consolidation. SBRT was well tolerated, with 2 patients experiencing grade 3 toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT achieved high rates of LC in pediatric patients with inoperable metastatic nonrhabdomyosarcoma sarcomas of soft tissue and bone. These results suggest that the ability to achieve total consolidation of metastatic disease with SBRT is associated with improved PFS and OS.

Acute toxicity outcomes and dosimetric implications from incidental irradiation of adjacent tissues in tangent field hypofractionated breast radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Adjacent tissues-in-beam (TIB) may receive substantial incidental doses within standard tangent fields during hypofractioned whole breast irradiation (HF-WBI). To characterize the impact of dose to TIB, we analyzed dosimetric parameters of TIB and associated acute toxicity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Plans prescribed to 40.5 Gy/15 fractions from 4/2016-1/2018 were evaluated. Structures of interest were contoured: (1) TIB: all tissues encompassed by plan 30% isodose lines, (2) breast, (3) non-breast TIB (nTIB): TIB minus contoured breast. Volumes of TIB, breast, and nTIB receiving 100%-107% of prescription dose (V100-V107) were calculated. Twelve patient- and physician-reported acute toxicities were prospectively collected weekly. Correlations between volumetric and dosimetric parameters were assessed. Uni- and multivariable logistic regressions evaluated toxicity grade changes as a function of TIB, breast, and nTIB V100-V107 (in cm3). RESULTS: We evaluated 137 plans. Breast volume was positively correlated with nTIB and nTIB V100 (rho = 0.52, rho = 0.30, respectively, both p < 0.001). V107 > 2 cm3 were noted in 14% of breast and 21% of nTIB volumes. On multivariable analyses, increasing breast and nTIB V100 significantly raised odds of grade 2+ dermatitis and burning/twinging pain, respectively; increasing nTIB V105 elevated odds of hyperpigmentation and burning pain; and increasing nTIB V107 raised odds of burning pain. Threshold volumes for >6-fold odds of developing burning pain were TIB V105 > 100 cm3 and V107 > 5 cm3. CONCLUSIONS: For HF-WBI, doses to nTIB over the prescription predicted acute toxicities independent of breast doses. These data support inclusion of TIB as a region of interest in treatment planning and protocol design.

Impact of race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors on receipt of radiation after breast conservation surgery: analysis of the national cancer database.

INTRODUCTION: Many eligible women with invasive breast cancer do not receive recommended adjuvant radiation (RT), despite its role in local control and overall survival. We examined trends in RT use over 10 years, and the impact of sociodemographic factors on the receipt of standard-of-care RT, using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). MATERIALS/METHODS: Women under age 70 with invasive breast cancer who underwent BCS from 2004 to 2014 were analyzed. Receipt of RT was evaluated in the whole cohort and by time period to identify temporal trends. Multiple logistic regression models were used to assess associations between factors such as race, insurance status, ethnicity, and receipt of RT. RESULTS: A total of 501,733 patients met eligibility criteria. The percentage of patients undergoing adjuvant RT increased from 86.7% in 2004 to 92.4% in 2012, and then decreased in 2013 and 2014 to 88.9%. On univariate analysis, patients of white race were significantly more likely to receive RT compared with patients of black race (90.4% vs 86.9%, p < 0.0001), as were non-Hispanic women compared to Hispanic patients (90.2% vs. 85.3%, p < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, race, ethnicity, insurance status, education level, and age remained significantly associated with receipt of RT. On temporal analysis, gaps remained stable, with no significant improvements over time. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests a recent decline in guideline-concordant receipt of RT in women under 70, and persistent disparities in the use of RT after BCS by race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors. These findings raise concern for a recent detrimental change in patterns of care delivery.

Practice Patterns of Stereotactic Radiotherapy in Pediatrics: Results From an International Pediatric Research Consortium.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: There is little consensus regarding the application of stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) in pediatrics. We evaluated patterns of pediatric SRT practice through an international research consortium. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight international institutions with pediatric expertise completed a 124-item survey evaluating patterns of SRT use for patients 21 years old and younger. Frequencies of SRT use and median margins applied with and without SRT were evaluated. RESULTS: Across institutions, 75% reported utilizing SRT in pediatrics. SRT was used in 22% of brain, 18% of spine, 16% of other bone, 16% of head and neck, and <1% of abdomen/pelvis, lung, and liver cases across sites. Of the hypofractionated SRT cases, 42% were delivered with definitive intent. Median gross tumor volume to planning target volume margins for SRT versus non-SRT plans were 0.2 versus 1.4 cm for brain, 0.3 versus 1.5 cm for spine/other bone, 0.3 versus 2.0 cm for abdomen/pelvis, 0.7 versus 1.5 cm for head and neck, 0.5 versus 1.7 cm for lung, and 0.5 versus 2.0 cm for liver sites. CONCLUSIONS: SRT is commonly utilized in pediatrics across a range of treatment sites. Margins used for SRT were substantially smaller than for non-SRT planning, highlighting the utility of this approach in reducing treatment volumes.

Practice patterns of palliative radiation therapy in pediatric oncology patients in an international pediatric research consortium.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The practice of palliative radiation therapy (RT) is based on extrapolation from adult literature. We evaluated patterns of pediatric palliative RT to describe regimens used to identify opportunity for future pediatric-specific clinical trials. DESIGN/METHODS: Six international institutions with pediatric expertise completed a 122-item survey evaluating patterns of palliative RT for patients ≤21 years old from 2010 to 2015. Two institutions use proton RT. Palliative RT was defined as treatment with the goal of symptom control or prevention of immediate life-threatening progression. RESULTS: Of 3,225 pediatric patients, 365 (11%) were treated with palliative intent to a total of 427 disease sites. Anesthesia was required in 10% of patients. Treatment was delivered to metastatic disease in 54% of patients. Histologies included neuroblastoma (30%), osteosarcoma (18%), leukemia/lymphoma (12%), rhabdomyosarcoma (12%), medulloblastoma/ependymoma (12%), Ewing sarcoma (8%), and other (8%). Indications included pain (43%), intracranial symptoms (23%), respiratory compromise (14%), cord compression (8%), and abdominal distention (6%). Sites included nonspine bone (35%), brain (16% primary tumors, 6% metastases), abdomen/pelvis (15%), spine (12%), head/neck (9%), and lung/mediastinum (5%). Re-irradiation comprised 16% of cases. Techniques employed three-dimensional conformal RT (41%), intensity-modulated RT (23%), conventional RT (26%), stereotactic body RT (6%), protons (1%), electrons (1%), and other (2%). The most common physician-reported barrier to consideration of palliative RT was the concern about treatment toxicity (83%). CONCLUSION: There is significant diversity of practice in pediatric palliative RT. Combined with ongoing research characterizing treatment response and toxicity, these data will inform the design of forthcoming clinical trials to establish effective regimens and minimize treatment toxicity for this patient population.

The Effect of Radiation Dose on Swallowing: Evaluation of Aspiration and Kinematics.

Radiation oncologists have focused on the pharyngeal constrictors as the primary muscles of concern for dysphagia. However, our prior investigations have demonstrated that radiation dose to the geniohyoid rather than the constrictor muscles was more closely related to penetration aspiration scores (PAS). We examined the relationship between (1) radiation dose and swallowing temporal kinematics, and (2) between PAS and swallowing kinematics in these patients. Videofluoroscopic swallowing studies of 41 patients following radiation therapy for oropharyngeal cancer were analyzed for thin liquid boluses. Timing measures included duration of laryngeal vestibule closure (DLVC), duration to maximum hyoid elevation (DTMHE), duration to cricopharyngeal opening (DTCPO), and pharyngeal transit time (PTT). PAS was extracted for each swallow and considered normal if ≤ 2. As minimum and mean dose to the geniohyoid increased, DTMHE, DTCPO, and PTT increased. Worse PA scores were most strongly correlated with radiation dose received by geniohyoid (r = 0.445, p < 0.0001). Mean DLVC varied according to PAS group (normal PAS mean = 0.67 s, abnormal PAS mean = 0.13 s; p < 0.001). Similarly, DTCPO was significantly different based upon PAS (normal PAS mean = 0.22 s, abnormal PAS mean = 0.37 s, p = 0.016). As PAS increased, DTPCO and PTT increased (r = 0.208, p = 0.04; r = 0.204, p = 0.043). A negative correlation was noted between PAS and DLVC (r = -0.375, p = 0.001). Higher doses of radiation to the geniohyoid muscles are associated with increased severity of dysphagia as measured through both kinematics and PAS. Consideration of dose to the geniohyoid should be considered when planning radiation.

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

PURPOSE: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for palliative external beam radiation therapy (RT) in symptomatic bone metastases. METHODS: The ASTRO convened a task force to address 5 key questions regarding palliative RT in symptomatic bone metastases. Based on a systematic review by the Agency for Health Research and Quality, recommendations using predefined consensus-building methodology were established; evidence quality and recommendation strength were also assessed. RESULTS: For palliative RT for symptomatic bone metastases, RT is recommended for managing pain from bone metastases and spine metastases with or without spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Regarding other modalities with RT, for patients with spine metastases causing spinal cord or cauda equina compression, surgery and postoperative RT are conditionally recommended over RT alone. Furthermore, dexamethasone is recommended for spine metastases with spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Patients with nonspine bone metastases requiring surgery are recommended postoperative RT. Symptomatic bone metastases treated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy in 1 fraction (800 cGy/1 fx), 2000 cGy/5 fx, 2400 cGy/6 fx, or 3000 cGy/10 fx. Spinal cord or cauda equina compression in patients who are ineligible for surgery and receiving conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1 fx, 1600 cGy/2 fx, 2000 cGy/5 fx, or 3000 cGy/10 fx. Symptomatic bone metastases in selected patients with good performance status without surgery or neurologic symptoms/signs are conditionally recommended stereotactic body RT over conventional palliative RT. Spine bone metastases reirradiated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1 fx, 2000 cGy/5 fx, 2400 cGy/6 fx, or 2000 cGy/8 fx; nonspine bone metastases reirradiated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1 fx, 2000 cGy/5 fx, or 2400 cGy/6 fx. Determination of an optimal RT approach/regimen requires whole person assessment, including prognosis, previous RT dose if applicable, risks to normal tissues, quality of life, cost implications, and patient goals and values. Relatedly, for patient-centered optimization of treatment-related toxicities and quality of life, shared decision making is recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Based on published data, the ASTRO task force's recommendations inform best clinical practices on palliative RT for symptomatic bone metastases.

Molecularly targeted agents as radiosensitizers in cancer therapy--focus on prostate cancer.

As our understanding of the molecular pathways driving tumorigenesis improves and more druggable targets are identified, we have witnessed a concomitant increase in the development and production of novel molecularly targeted agents. Radiotherapy is commonly used in the treatment of various malignancies with a prominent role in the care of prostate cancer patients, and efforts to improve the therapeutic ratio of radiation by technologic and pharmacologic means have led to important advances in cancer care. One promising approach is to combine molecularly targeted systemic agents with radiotherapy to improve tumor response rates and likelihood of durable control. This review first explores the limitations of preclinical studies as well as barriers to successful implementation of clinical trials with radiosensitizers. Special considerations related to and recommendations for the design of preclinical studies and clinical trials involving molecularly targeted agents combined with radiotherapy are provided. We then apply these concepts by reviewing a representative set of targeted therapies that show promise as radiosensitizers in the treatment of prostate cancer.

Prognostication for Patients Receiving Palliative Radiation Therapy.

Estimation of patient prognosis plays a central role in guiding decision making for the palliative management of metastatic disease, and a number of statistical models have been developed to provide survival estimates for patients in this context. In this review, we discuss several well-validated survival prediction models for patients receiving palliative radiotherapy to sites outside of the brain. Key considerations include the type of statistical model, model performance measures and validation procedures, studies' source populations, time points used for prognostication, and details of model output. We then briefly discuss underutilization of these models, the role of decision support aids, and the need to incorporate patient preference in shared decision making for patients with metastatic disease who are candidates for palliative radiotherapy.

Radiotherapy Deserts: The Impact of Race, Poverty, and the Rural-Urban Continuum on Density of Providers and the Use of Radiation Therapy in the US.

PURPOSE: Prior efforts to characterize disparities in radiation therapy access and receipt have not comprehensively investigated interplay between race, socioeconomic status, and geography relative to oncologic outcomes. This study sought to define these complex relationships at the US county level for prostate cancer (PC) and invasive breast (BC) cancer to build a tool that facilitates identification of "radiotherapy deserts"-regions with mismatch between radiation therapy resources and oncologic need. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An ecologic study model was constructed using national databases to evaluate 3,141 US counties. Radiation therapy resources and use densities were operationalized as physicians to persons at risk (PPR) and use to persons at risk (UPR): the number of attending radiation oncologists and Medicare beneficiaries per 100,000 persons at risk, respectively. Oncologic need was defined by "hot zone" counties with ≥2 standard deviations (SDs) above mean incidence and death rates. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions examined links between PPR and UPR densities, epidemiologic variables, and hot zones for oncologic outcomes. Statistics are reported at a significance level of P < .05. RESULTS: The mean (SD) PPR and UPR densities were 2.1 (5.9) and 192.6 (557.6) for PC and 1.9 (5.3) and 174.4 (501.0) for BC, respectively. Counties with high PPR and UPR densities were predominately metropolitan (odds ratio [OR], 2.9-4.4), generally with a higher percentage of Black non-Hispanic constituents (OR, 1.5-2.3). Incidence and death rate hot zones were largely nonmetropolitan (OR, 0.3-0.6), generally with a higher percentage of Black non-Hispanic constituents (OR, 3.2-6.3). Lower PPR density was associated with death rate hot zones for both types of cancer (OR, 0.8-0.9); UPR density was generally not linked to oncologic outcomes on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The study found that mismatch between oncologic need with PPR and UPR disproportionately affects nonmetropolitan communities with a higher percentage of Black non-Hispanic constituents. An interactive web platform (bit.ly/densitymaps) was developed to visualize "radiotherapy deserts" and drive targeted investigation of underlying barriers to care in areas of highest need, with the goal of reducing health inequities in this context.

Adjuvant treatment decisions among adults aged 65 years and older with early-stage hormone receptor positive breast cancer seen in a simple multidisciplinary clinic versus standard consultation.

INTRODUCTION: Randomized studies support de-escalation of adjuvant therapy for a target population of older adults ≥65 years with stage I, estrogen-receptor (ER) positive breast cancer after breast conserving surgery. We sought to evaluate the impact of a simplified multidisciplinary clinic (s-MDC) in this population by comparing treatment patterns and patient perceptions of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) and hormone therapy (HT) between patients seen in s-MDC vs. standard consultations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for patients in the above target population who underwent surgery between August 2020 and May 2022 at our institution. Two cohorts were included: (1) patients seen in s-MDC, and (2) patients seen in standard clinic separately by medical and radiation oncology (non-s-MDC cohort). The non-s-MDC patients declined, could not attend, and/or were not referred to the s-MDC. Patients in the s-MDC cohort were prospectively administered validated questionnaires to evaluate patient reported data including the Decision Autonomy Preference Scale (DAPS), e-Prognosis, and Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Scale (MMS). Chi square, t-tests, and non-parametric equivalents compared demographics, and logistic regression evaluated RT and HT use and survey score outcomes between cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 127 patients met inclusion criteria, with 33 s-MDC and 94 non-s-MDC patients. There was no difference between the cohorts in age, margin status, histology, grade, or focality. In the s-MDC cohort there were significantly more patients without sentinel lymph node biopsy (71.3% vs 42.4%, p = 0.003) and mean tumor size was smaller (0.69 vs. 0.96 cm, p < 0.003), and Charlson comborbidity index (CCI) was higher (5.21 vs 4.96, p = 0.038). There was no significant difference in receipt of RT (65% s-MDC vs 77% standard; odds ratio [OR] = 0.55, p = 0.189), HT (78% ss-MDC vs 72% standard; OR = 1.36, p = 0.513), or both (50% s-MDC vs 59% standard; OR = 0.7, p = 0.429). The s-MDC cohort was significantly more likely to undergo accelerated (vs. standard hypofractionated) RT (70% vs 39%; OR = 3.59, p = 0.020). In s-MDC patients with completed questionnaires (n = 33), all whose selected "mostly patient (n=6)" based decision making by DAPS chose RT while all "mostly doctor (n=1)" chose no RT. Based on e-Prognosis, there were lower odds of RT for increasing Schonberg score/ higher 10 yr mortality risk (OR 0.600, p = 0.048). MMS score ≥ 40 ("maximizer") was strongly linked with the use of RT (OR 18.57, p = 0.011). DISCUSSION: For adults ≥65 years with early stage, ER positive breast cancer, s-MDC participation was not significantly associated with lower use of adjuvant RT or HT versus standard consultation but was significantly associated with shorter RT courses. DAPS and MMS results indicate that patient treatment preference may be predictable, highlighting an opportunity to tailor consultation discussions and recommendations based on intrinsic patient preferences and individual goals.

Comparing Ultra-hypofractionated Proton versus Photon Therapy in Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcoma.

Purpose: Recent single institution, phase II evidence has demonstrated the feasibility and efficacy of ultra-hypofractionated, preoperative photon therapy in 5 fractions for the treatment of soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Our purpose was to evaluate the dosimetric benefits of modern scanning beam proton therapy compared with conventional photon radiation therapy (RT) for the neoadjuvant treatment of adult extremity STS. Materials and Methods: Existing proton and photon plans for 11 adult patients with STS of the lower extremities previously treated preoperatively with neoadjuvant RT at our center were used to create proton therapy plans using Raystation Treatment Planning System v10.A. Volumes were delineated, and doses reported consistent with International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements reports 50, 62, and 78. Target volumes were optimized such that 100% clinical target volume (CTV) was covered by 99% of the prescription dose. The prescribed dose was 30 Gy for PT and RT delivered in 5 fractions. For proton therapy, doses are reported in GyRBE = 1.1 Gy. The constraints for adjacent organs at risk (OARs) within 1 cm of the CTV were the following: femur V30Gy ≤ 50%, joint V30Gy < 50%, femoral head V30Gy ≤ 5 cm3, strip V12 ≤ 10%, and skin V12 < 50%. Target coverage goals, OAR constraints, and integral dose were compared by Student t test with P < .05 significance. Results: A minimum 99% CTV coverage was achieved for all plans. OAR dose constraints were achieved for all proton and photon plans; however, mean doses to the femur (10.7 ± 8.5 vs 16.1 ± 7.7 GyRBE), femoral head (2.0 ± 4.4 vs 3.6 ± 6.4 GyRBE), and proximal joint (1.8 ± 2.4 vs 3.5 ± 4.4 GyRBE) were all significantly lower with PT vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) (all P < .05). Integral dose was significantly reduced for proton vs photon plans. Conformity and heterogeneity indices were significantly better for proton therapy. Conclusion: Proton therapy maintained target coverage while significantly reducing integral and mean doses to the proximal organs at risk compared with RT. Further prospective investigation is warranted to validate these findings and potential benefit in the management of adult STS.

Improving Quality Metrics in Radiation Oncology: Implementation of Pretreatment Peer Review for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in Patients with Thoracic Cancer.

Purpose: Traditional peer reviews occur weekly, and can take place up to 1 week after the start of treatment. The American Society for Radiation Oncology peer-review white paper identified stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as a high priority for contour/plan review before the start of treatment, considering both the rapid-dose falloff and short treatment course. Yet, peer-review goals for SBRT must also balance physician time demands and the desire to avoid routine treatment delays that would occur in the setting of a 100% pretreatment (pre-Tx) review compliance requirement or prolonging the standard treatment planning timeline. Herein, we report on our pilot experience of a pre-Tx peer review of thoracic SBRT cases. Methods and Materials: From March 2020 to August 2021, patients undergoing thoracic SBRT were identified for pre-Tx review, and placed on a quality checklist. We implemented twice-weekly meetings for detailed pre-Tx review of organ-at-risk/target contours and dose constraints in the treatment planning system for SBRT cases. Our quality metric goal was to peer review ≥90% of SBRT cases before exceeding 25% of the dose delivered. We used a statistical process control chart with sigma limits (ie, standard deviations [SDs]) to access compliance rates with pre-Tx review implementation. Results: We identified 252 patients treated with SBRT to 294 lung nodules. When comparing pre-Tx review completion from initial rollout to full implementation, our rates improved from 19% to 79% (ie, from 1 sigma limit [SDs]) below to >2 sigma limits (SDs) above. Additionally, early completion of any form of contour/plan review (defined as any pre-Tx or standard review completed before exceeding 25% of the dose delivered) increased from 67% to 85% (March 2020-November 2020) to 76% to 94% (December 2020-August 2021). Conclusions: We successfully implemented a sustainable workflow for detailed pre-Tx contour/plan review for thoracic SBRT cases in the context of twice-weekly disease site-specific peer-review meetings. We reached our quality improvement objective to peer review ≥90% of SBRT cases before exceeding 25% of the dose delivered. This process was feasible to conduct in an integrated network of sites across our system.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy versus conventional external beam radiotherapy for spinal metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to compare SBRT and cEBRT for treating spinal metastases through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched up to 6 May 2023 for RCTs comparing SBRT and cEBRT for spinal metastases. Overall and complete pain response, local progression, overall survival, quality of life and adverse events were extracted. Data were pooled using random-effects models. Results were reported as risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes, and hazard ratios (HRs) for time-to-event outcomes, along with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: Three RCTs were identified involving 642 patients. No differences were seen in overall pain response comparing SBRT and cEBRT (RR at 3 months: 1.12, 95% CI, 0.74-1.70, p = 0.59; RR at 6 months: 1.29, 95% CI, 0.97-1.72, p = 0.08). Only two of three studies presented complete pain response data. SBRT demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in complete pain response compared to cEBRT (RR at 3 months: 2.52; 95% CI, 1.58-4.01; P < 0.0001; RR at 6 months: 2.48; 95% CI, 1.23-4.99; P = 0.01). There were no significant differences in local progression and overall survival. Adverse events were similar, except for any grade radiation dermatitis, which was significantly lower in SBRT arm (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.03-0.96, P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: SBRT is a safe treatment option for spine metastases. It may provide better complete pain response compared to cEBRT. Additional trials are needed to determine the potential benefits of SBRT in specific patient subsets.

Integrating the Patient's Voice in Toxicity Reporting and Treatment Decisions for Breast Radiotherapy.

Breast cancer care is often defined by preference-sensitive decisions, in which no one choice clearly dominates, and the treatment approach is ideally guided by patient values and preferences. In this context, patients are vulnerable to suboptimal decision quality due to the number and complexity of choices. Arriving at a high-quality, patient-centered decision involves both an accurate understanding of the risks and benefits of treatment options, as well as concordance with the patient's preferences and values. These 2 objectives intersect at the informed consent discussion. In radiation oncology, informed consent has an added layer of complexity related to strong desire from patients to receive the most technologically advanced treatment, often out of balance with other rational considerations. These observations highlight challenges and opportunities unique to radiation oncology in improving communication and arriving at a high-quality decision.

Incidence and Severity of Myelosuppression With Palbociclib After Palliative Bone Radiation in Advanced Breast Cancer: A Single Center Experience and Review of Literature.

BACKGROUND: Palbociclib is a cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitor with a primary toxicity of myelosuppression, especially neutropenia, due to cytostatic CDK6 inhibition on bone marrow. Preclinical studies suggest palbociclib may enhance radiation toxicity, but this was only evaluated in limited case series of palliative radiotherapy and not specific to radiation targeting bony metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a single institution retrospective cohort study. We included female patients who initiated palbociclib for advanced breast cancer between 2015 and 2019. The primary exposure was receipt of palliative radiation to bony metastases within 1 year prior to starting palbociclib. The primary outcome was the incidence and severity of myelosuppression during cycle one. Secondary outcomes include treatment interruptions and cycle 2 dose reductions, with subgroup analysis of radiation timing, type, dose, and location. RESULTS: Of the 247 patients, 47 received radiation to bone metastases. Only absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) after cycle one of palbociclib was significantly lower in the group receiving radiation (median ALC 0.84 vs. 1.10 K/mm3, P < .001), with similar rates of neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia. Patients who received ≥10 fractions radiation were more likely to have cycle one interrupted than those receiving shorter radiation courses (42.9% vs. 11.1%, P = .03). No radiation characteristics were associated with other hematologic toxicities or dose reduction. CONCLUSION: Palliative bone radiation within 1 year prior to palbociclib initiation was associated with greater lymphopenia during the first cycle than patients unexposed to radiation, but not neutropenia, anemia, or thrombocytopenia that would modify treatment.

Society for Palliative Radiation Oncology: Report from the Ninth Annual Meeting (2022).

The Society for Palliative Radiation Oncology (SPRO) is an international group of clinicians whose primary aim is to advance the field of palliative radiation oncology by promoting evidence-based palliative radiation therapy and excellence in primary palliative care through research, education, collaboration, and patient advocacy. SPRO held its 9th Annual Meeting on October 23, 2022 in association with the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) 64th Annual Meeting. Accomplishments and goals from the previous year were discussed and newly appointed officers were announced. Dr. Dirk Rades from the University of Lubeck in Germany gave the keynote address, reviewing critical trials and evidence for the use of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in the palliative and oligometastatic settings. Recipients of the Lifetime Service Award and the Rising Star Award were announced and presented. This Meeting Report summarizes the proceedings of SPRO's 9th Annual Meeting.

Risk of Malignant Transformation of Giant Cell Tumors of Bone Is 8 Times Lower with Megavoltage vs. Orthovoltage Radiation Therapy.

Background: The first-line treatment for most giant cell tumors (GCTs) of bone is surgical; radiotherapy (RT) is reserved for inoperable or refractory cases. While RT techniques have undergone a dramatic change over the past few decades, with the higher energy megavoltage RT replacing orthovoltage RT, concerns for high rates of malignant transformation following RT have limited its use. Evidence suggests a lower incidence of secondary malignancy after treatment with megavoltage compared with orthovoltage RT, but this has not been studied in GCTs. Our main purpose was to compare the incidence of malignant transformation of GCTB between patients treated with orthovoltage vs. megavoltage RT. Methods: A literature review was performed to identify studies reporting GCTBs treated with RT from 01/1900 through 12/2019. Studies that did not report RT modality or separate orthovoltage and megavoltage results were excluded. Included in the analysis were 6 patients from our institution. Primary outcome was the incidence of malignant transformation; secondary outcomes were time to transformation and incidence of local recurrence. Fisher's exact tests and independent sample t-tests were used, and significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: Twenty-two studies were included, which reported on 168 GCTBs treated with orthovoltage and 393 treated with megavoltage RT. Transformation incidence was 14% (n = 24) for orthovoltage and 1.8% (n = 7) for megavoltage RT, an 8-fold difference (odds ratio (OR) 9.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.9-22, p < 0.001). Mean time to transformation was 8.7 years for orthovoltage and 11.2 years for megavoltage RT (p=0.28). Incidence of local recurrence was 38% (63/167) for orthovoltage and 17% (66/393) for megavoltage RT (OR 3.3, 95% CI 2.0-4.6, p < 0.001). Conclusions: The risk of developing a malignancy after RT of GCTB is 8 times lower with megavoltage than with orthovoltage. Malignant transformation with megavoltage, while not zero, is lower than that in historical series. Use of modern RT techniques in inoperable or refractory GCTB may be appropriate.

Establishing a Deaf and American Sign Language Inclusive Residency Program.

Improving diversity in residency programs has been increasingly emphasized as a means to address gender, racial, and ethnic disparities in medicine. However, limited attention has been given to the potential benefits of training physicians with differences other than gender or race and ethnicity. Americans with a disability represent about 27% of the U.S. population, whereas 1%-3% of physician trainees report having a disability. In 2013, a national survey identified only 86 physicians or trainees reporting deafness or hearing loss as a disability. To date, there are no published strategies on how to create an inclusive program for Deaf trainees. Herein, the authors report on the development of a Deaf and American Sign Language (ASL) inclusive residency program that can serve as an academic model for other programs, in any medical specialty, seeking to create an accessible training program for Deaf physicians and that can be adapted for trainees with other disabilities. In March 2017, the radiation oncology residency program at Johns Hopkins University matched an ASL-signing Deaf resident who would begin the program in July 2018. In preparation, department leadership engaged key stakeholders and leaders within the university's health system and among the department faculty, residents, and staff as well as the incoming resident to create an ASL inclusive program. A 5-step transition process for the training program was ultimately developed and implemented. The authors focused on engaging the Deaf trainee and interpreters, engaging health system and departmental leadership, contracting a training consultant and developing oral and written training materials for faculty and staff, and optimizing the workspace via accommodations. Through collaborative preparation, a Deaf and ASL-signing resident was successfully integrated into the residency program. The proposed 5-step transition process provides an effective, engaging model to encourage other institutions that are seeking to employ similar inclusivity initiatives.