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.

Palliative radiation for bone metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma: practice patterns and the amount of remaining life spent receiving treatment.

BACKGROUND: Palliative radiation therapy (RT) for bone metastases (BMs) is a common practice. Wide variation exists in clinically used dose schema despite numerous studies demonstrating palliative equipoise between single and multifraction courses. We hypothesize that fraction scheme for palliating BMs for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) significantly affects how patients spend their remaining time. METHODS: Patients with osseous HCC metastases who received RT were identified from the National Cancer Database [2004-2013]. The percentage of remaining life spent receiving radiation therapy (PRLSRT) and the number of incomplete RT courses were calculated. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate trends and predictors. RESULTS: A total of 1,331 patients met the inclusion criteria. Median overall survival (OS) was 3.3 months. Just 49 (3.7%) of patients received single fraction RT and 34% received >10 fractions. The mean and median PRLSRT were as follows: 1 fraction (8.9% and 3.0%), 2-5 fractions (32.9% and 24.3%), 6-10 fractions (27.2% and 15.9%), and >10 fractions (24.1% and 14.4%). Of the patients with PRLSRT >50%, 99.6% received multifraction RT. The proportion of incomplete RT courses increased as fraction size decreased from 17.6% with 4 Gy to 34% with 2 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: Single fraction palliative RT is vastly underutilized despite no additional palliative benefit with multifraction RT. PRLSRT significantly increased with multifraction RT. In the palliative treatment of painful BMs from HCC, single fraction treatment reduces time spent receiving radiation treatments and maximizes the number of patients who complete the prescribed treatment.

Top 10 Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Radiation Oncology.

As palliative care (PC) moves upstream in the course of advanced illness, it is critical that PC providers have a broad understanding of curative and palliative treatments for serious diseases. Possessing a working knowledge of radiation therapy (RT), one of the three pillars of cancer care, is crucial to PC providers given RT's role in both the curative and palliative settings. This article provides PC providers with a primer on the vocabulary of RT; the team of people involved in the planning of RT; and common indications, benefits, and side effects of treatment.

Randomized Phase II Study Comparing Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation Alone to Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation and Consolidative Extracranial Irradiation for Extensive-Disease Small Cell Lung Cancer (ED SCLC): NRG Oncology RTOG 0937.

INTRODUCTION: NRG Oncology RTOG 0937 is a randomized phase II trial evaluating 1-year overall survival (OS) with prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) or PCI plus consolidative radiation therapy (PCI+cRT) to intrathoracic disease and extracranial metastases for extensive-disease SCLC. METHODS: Patients with one to four extracranial metastases were eligible after a complete response or partial response to chemotherapy. Randomization was to PCI or PCI+cRT to the thorax and metastases. Original stratification included partial response versus complete response after chemotherapy and one versus two to four metastases; age younger than 65 years versus 65 years or older was added after an observed imbalance. PCI consisted of 25 Gy in 10 fractions. cRT consisted of 45 Gy in 15 fractions. To detect an improvement in OS from 30% to 45% with a 34% hazard reduction (hazard ratio = 0.66) under a 0.1 type 1 error (one sided) and 80% power, 154 patients were required. RESULTS: A total of 97 patients were randomized between March 2010 and February 2015. Eleven patients were ineligible (nine in the PCI group and two in the PCI+cRT group), leaving 42 randomized to receive PCI and 44 to receive PCI+cRT. At planned interim analysis, the study crossed the futility boundary for OS and was closed before meeting the accrual target. Median follow-up was 9 months. The 1-year OS was not different between the groups: 60.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 41.2-74.7) for PCI and 50.8% (95% CI: 34.0-65.3) for PCI+cRT (p = 0.21). The 3- and 12-month rates of progression were 53.3% and 79.6% for PCI and 14.5% and 75% for PCI+cRT, respectively. Time to progression favored PCI+cRT (hazard ratio = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.32-0.87, p = 0.01). One patient in each arm had grade 4 therapy-related toxicity and one had grade 5 therapy-related pneumonitis with PCI+cRT. CONCLUSIONS: OS exceeded predictions for both arms. cRT delayed progression but did not improve 1-year OS.

Preoperative Radiation Therapy Followed by Reexcision May Improve Local Control and Progression-Free Survival in Unplanned Excisions of Soft Tissue Sarcomas of the Extremity and Chest-Wall.

Background. The management for unplanned excision (UE) of soft tissue sarcomas (STS) has not been established. In this study, we compare outcomes of UE versus planned excision (PE) and determine an optimal treatment for UE in STS. Methods. From 2000 to 2014 a review was performed on all patients treated with localized STS. Clinical outcomes including local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier estimate. Univariate (UVA) and multivariate (MVA) analyses were performed to determine prognostic variables. For MVA, Cox proportional hazards model was used. Results. 245 patients were included in the analysis. 14% underwent UE. Median follow-up was 2.8 years. The LR rate was 8.6%. The LR rate in UE was 35% versus 4.2% in PE patients (p < 0.0001). 2-year PFS in UE versus PE patients was 4.2 years and 9.3 years, respectively (p = 0.08). Preoperative radiation (RT) (p = 0.01) and use of any RT for UE (p = 0.003) led to improved PFS. On MVA, preoperative RT (p = 0.04) and performance status (p = 0.01) led to improved PFS. Conclusions. UEs led to decreased LC and PFS versus PE in patients with STS. The use of preoperative RT followed by reexcision improved LC and PFS in patients who had UE of their STS.