A review of the Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program in patients with advanced cancer referred for palliative radiotherapy over two decades.

INTRODUCTION: The Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program (RRRP) is an outpatient radiotherapy clinic for palliative cancer patients where consultation, planning, and radiation treatment can take place in 1 day, allowing for rapid access to care. The objective of this study was to compare the patient population and overall survival of patients seen in the RRRP from 2014 to 2017 to that of patients seen in 1999. METHOD: Patient characteristics including sex, primary cancer site, sites of metastases, and Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) were recorded at each clinic visit. Date of death (DOD) was retrieved from the Patient Care System (PCS) and Excelicare. To show overall survival from the first clinic visit, a Kaplan-Meier overall survival curve was generated in all patients from 2014 to 2017. RESULTS: Five hundred ninety-six patients were included in the final analysis. Most patients were male (n = 347) with a primary cancer site of the lung (n = 165) and metastases to the bone (n = 475). Actuarial median overall survival was 15.3 months. In 1999, 395 patients were analyzed, in which a primary of the lung (n = 143) and metastases to the bone (n = 277) were the most prevalent. An additional 72 patients in this population had brain metastases. The actuarial median survival of the 1999 population was 4.5 months. CONCLUSION: The changing patient population in the RRRP has resulted in visible changes in survival. This may reflect differences in the proportion of patients with specific primaries and sites of metastases, as well as improvements in the availability of palliative radiation over the last two decades.

Are we better a decade later in the accuracy of survival prediction by palliative radiation oncologists?

BACKGROUND: Clinician predicted survival (CPS) plays a crucial role in palliative care, informing physicians of appropriate treatment best suited to the patient. The primary objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of CPS of cancer patients referred for palliative radiotherapy. Secondary objectives included an analysis of factors predictive of accurate CPS, comparisons of the accuracy of survival predictions over subsequent clinic visits, and comparisons to the previous study in the Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program (RRRP) in 2005. METHODS: CPS was provided by one of four radiation oncologists from August 2014 to March 2017. Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), primary cancer site, and sites of metastases were recorded. Date of death was retrieved from the Patient Care System (PCS) and Excelicare. Mean difference between actual survival (AS) and CPS was used to determine the accuracy of survival predictions. RESULTS: One-hundred seventy-two patients were included in the final analysis. Survival was largely overestimated (n=135, 78.5%), with CPS being overestimated by 19.0 weeks on average. KPS (P=0.2), primary cancer site (P=0.08), and various sites of metastases were not significantly related to CPS accuracy. Gender was significantly related to CPS accuracy after multivariable analysis (P=0.04), but was no longer significant after excluding prostate and breast cancer patients in multivariable analysis (P=0.2). The mean difference between AS and CPS did not significantly change over subsequent visits (P=0.5) and CPS accuracy decreased significantly compared to the previous RRRP study (P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The survival estimates provided by radiation oncologists are inaccurately overestimated. Further research should aim to increase the accuracy of CPS in order to improve patient outcomes.

Development and Internal Validation of a Clinical Risk Score to Predict Pain Response After Palliative Radiation Therapy in Patients With Bone Metastases.

PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between patient and tumor characteristics and pain response in patients with metastatic bone disease, and construct and internally validate a clinical prediction model for pain response to guide individualized treatment decision making. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 965 patients with painful bone metastases undergoing palliative radiation therapy at a tertiary referral center between 1999 and 2007 were identified. Pain scores were measured at 1, 2, and 3 months after radiation therapy. Pain response was defined as at least a 2-point decrease on a pain score scale of 0-10, without increase in analgesics, or an analgesic decrease of at least 25% without an increase in pain score. Thirteen candidate predictors were identified from the literature and expert experience. After multiple imputation, final predictors were selected using stepwise regression and collapsed into a prediction model. Model performance was evaluated by calibration and discrimination and corrected for optimism. RESULTS: Overall 462 patients (47.9%) showed a response. Primary tumor site, performance status, and baseline pain score were predictive for pain response, with a corrected c-statistic of 0.63. The predicted response rates after radiation therapy increased from 37.5% for patients with the highest risk score to 79.8% for patients with the lowest risk score and were in good agreement with the observed response rates. CONCLUSIONS: A prediction score for pain response after palliative radiation therapy was developed. The model performance was moderate, showing that prediction of pain response is difficult. New biomarkers and predictors may lead to improved identification of the large group of patients who are unlikely to respond and who may benefit from other or innovative treatment options.

An update in symptom clusters using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System in a palliative radiotherapy clinic.

PURPOSE: To identify symptom clusters in advanced cancer patients attending a palliative radiotherapy clinic using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS). METHODS: Principal component analysis (PCA), exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) were used to identify symptom clusters among the nine ESAS items using scores from each patient's first visit. RESULTS: ESAS scores from 182 patients were analyzed. The PCA identified three symptom clusters (cluster 1: depression-anxiety-well-being, cluster 2: pain-tiredness-drowsiness, cluster 3: nausea-dyspnea-loss of appetite). The EFA identified two clusters (cluster 1: tiredness-drowsiness-loss of appetite-well-being-pain-nausea-dyspnea, cluster 2: depression-anxiety). The HCA identified three clusters similar to the PCA with an exception of the loss of appetite item being classified under cluster 1 rather than 3. Two to three symptom clusters were identified using three analytical methods, with similar patterns reported in the literature. Particular groups of items co-occurred consistently across all three analyses: depression and anxiety; nausea and dyspnea; as well as pain, tiredness, and drowsiness. CONCLUSION: Three similar symptom clusters were identified in our patient population using the PCA and HCA; whereas, the EFA produced two clusters: one physical and one psychological cluster. Given the implications of symptom clusters in the management of quality of life, clinicians should be aware of these clusters to aid in the palliative treatment of patients.

Prognostic value of pre- and post-treatment health-related quality of life in predicting survival of patients with brain metastases.

AIM: The present study aimed to determine the prognostic survival value of pretreatment health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and changes in HRQOL following whole-brain radiation treatment in patients with brain metastases. METHODS: Patients who were treated with whole-brain radiation treatment and completed HRQOL questionnaires were included. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models of overall survival (OS) were conducted for overall HRQOL and domain scores. RESULTS & CONCLUSION: Patients with lower HRQOL at baseline, especially lower physical functioning and motor dysfunction domains, were more likely to have poorer survival. Changes in overall HRQOL and its domains were not significantly related to OS. Pretreatment HRQOL, especially physical functioning and motor dysfunction, has added prognostic value in patients with brain metastases.

Collaboration between primary care physicians and radiation oncologists.

Communication between physicians is required to ensure important patient information is relayed during the workup, treatment, follow-up and subsequent transition of care back to the primary care physician (PCP). In this review we discuss how survivorship care is being increasingly recognized as an important component of the patient's cancer journey, and one often provided by the PCP. Palliative care and symptom control for patients with non-curable malignancy is often provided by the PCP during and after cancer treatment. Physician communication is paramount to ensure optimal patient care.

Effects of circadian rhythms and treatment times on the response of radiotherapy for painful bone metastases.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have observed how the time of radiotherapy delivery can impact toxicities and outcomes. The goal of this study was to determine whether treatment time influenced radiotherapy response for bone metastases. METHODS: Patients who received radiation treatment to painful bone metastases from January 2000 to December 2010 were included in our analysis. Demographic and treatment information including performance status, primary site, treatment dose and fraction, and response were collected prospectively. Treatment times were extracted from patient medical records. Patients were allocated to 8:00 AM-11:00 AM, 11:01 AM-2:00 PM, or 2:01 PM-5:00 PM cohorts based on their treatment times. To compare treatment response between the three cohorts, the Fisher exact test was used. A two-sided P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Analysis was repeated with males and females separately. RESULTS: A total of 194 patients were included. The median age was 68 years and 55.5% of patients responded to treatment. The dose and fraction of radiation received differed significantly between treatment cohorts using all allocation methods. Females in the 11:01 AM-2:00 PM cohort exhibited a significantly higher response rate (P=0.02) and differing proportions of response types (P=0.03) compared to the 8:00 AM- 11:00 AM and 2:01 PM-5:00 PM cohorts when allocated using all treatment times. No significant differences in response were seen between cohorts when all patients were analysed together or analysed for males only. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment time may affect response in female patients receiving radiotherapy for painful bone metastases. Subsequent chronotherapy studies in radiation should investigate these gender differences.

Could time of whole brain radiotherapy delivery impact overall survival in patients with multiple brain metastases?

OBJECTIVE: Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is commonly used to treat brain metastases. Previous studies have explored how radiotherapy treatment time can affect response. The present study evaluated the influence of treatment time on overall survival (OS) for cancer patients receiving WBRT. METHODS: Patients who received WBRT from 2004 to 2016 were included. Demographic information including age, performance status, primary site, dose, fraction, treatment time, and date of death were collected. Based on different percentages of treatment times falling into one time frame (i.e., 100%, ≥80%, ≥70%, or ≥60%), patients were allocated to three cohorts (8:00-11:00 AM, 11:01 AM-2:00 PM, 2:01-5:00 PM). Demographics were compared among cohorts using the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test and Fisher exact test. To control the multiple comparisons on select demographic variables a Bonferroni adjusted P value was considered statistically significant. Kaplan-Meier curves were created for OS. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard (PH) model were used to find predictive factors of OS in all patients, females and males. RESULTS: A total of 755 patients were included with a median age of 66 years. The actuarial median OS was 2.37 months. Treatment time was not associated with OS for all patients or males only. In elderly female patients (>65 years), a significant difference in OS was found among treatment cohorts (P=0.02). Treatment time (when ≥80% or ≥70% of treatment times were in one time frame), age, and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) were significant predictive factors of OS in univariate analysis for females. Only age and KPS remained significant in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Time of WBRT delivery for brain metastases was significantly related to OS upon univariate analyses in females only. Future investigations should be conducted prospectively with homogenous patient groups to elucidate the effect of chronotherapy in palliative brain metastases patients as time of WBRT administration may affect OS in specific subsets of patients.

Correlating symptoms and their changes with survival in patients with brain metastases.

OBJECTIVE: Having a clear prognosis for patients with brain metastases allows health care practitioners (HCPs) to determine appropriate palliative management and assist patients when making informed treatment decisions. The objective of this study was to determine the prognostic significance of commonly experienced symptoms as well as their changes. METHODS: Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the date of consultation for palliative radiotherapy to date of death or censored at last follow-up date. Symptom changes at follow up were defined as worsened, improved, or no change. Univariate and multivariate cox proportional hazard (PH) model of OS was conducted on 14 symptoms at baseline and on changes in those symptoms at 1-, 2-, and 3-month follow-ups. RESULTS: From 1999 to 2013, 1,660 patients were included for baseline symptom analysis. Through univariate analysis, fatigue, nausea, appetite loss, coordination, concentration, balance and depression were significantly related to OS. Upon multivariate analysis, fatigue and appetite loss were most predictive of short survival. For symptom change, 201 patients were included. The actuarial median OS was 5.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 4.3-7.0], 7.1 months (95% CI: 5.2-9.5) and 8.8 months (95% CI: 5.8-11.5) for patients with month 1, 2, and 3 follow-ups, respectively. The most common symptom changes following whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) were: worsened fatigue, appetite loss, and weakness. Worsened difficulty concentrating, fatigue, nausea and headaches were most predictive of a poorer survival outcome. CONCLUSIONS: HCPs should be aware of the shorter prognosis associated with patients exhibiting one or more of these symptoms and tailor care accordingly to maximize patients' remaining quality of life (QOL).

Symptoms and quality of life in patients with brain metastases receiving whole-brain radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: Patients with multiple brain metastases may be treated with whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT). For these patients, symptom palliation and improvement of quality of life (QOL) and performance status is of the upmost importance. The objective of the present study was to determine the symptom experience and overall QOL in patients with brain metastases before and after WBRT. METHODS: A total of 14 symptom scores and overall QOL were collected prospectively in 217 patients for up to 3 months. Wilcoxon signed rank test was applied to determine significant symptoms and QOL changes. Spearman's correlations were applied to determine the relationship between symptom scores and QOL. RESULTS: Appetite loss, weakness, and nausea significantly increased from baseline, while balance, headache, and anxiety significantly decreased from baseline. At baseline, all symptoms other than coordination were significantly correlated with QOL. At 1-month follow-up (FU), changes in concentration, weakness, coordination, and balance were significantly associated with QOL changes. At 2-month FU, changes in pain, insomnia, concentration, balance, and depression were significantly associated with QOL changes. At 3-month FU, only change in nausea was significantly associated with QOL changes. CONCLUSIONS: Following WBRT, certain symptoms may influence overall QOL to a greater extent than others, which may fluctuate with time.

Diagnosis, referral, and primary treatment decisions in newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients in a multidisciplinary diagnostic assessment program.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to report on data from the multidisciplinary diagnostic assessment program (DAP) at the Gale and Graham Wright Prostate Centre (GGWPC) at North York General Hospital (NYGH). We assessed referral, diagnosis, and treatment decisions for newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PCa) patients as seen over time, risk stratification, and clinic type to establish a deeper understanding of current decision-making trends. METHODS: From June 2007 to April 2012, 1277 patients who were diagnosed with PCa at the GGWPC were included in this study. Data was collected and reviewed retrospectively using electronic patient records. RESULTS: 1031 of 1260 patients (81.8%) were seen in a multidisciplinary clinic (MDC). Over time, a decrease in low-risk (LR) diagnoses and an increase intermediate-risk (IR) diagnoses was observed (p<0.0001). With respect to overall treatment decisions 474 (37.1%) of patients received primary radiotherapy, 340 (26.6%) received surgical therapy, and 426 (33.4%) had conservative management; 57% of patients who were candidates for active surveillance were managed this way. No significant treatment trends were observed over time (p=0.8440). Significantly, different management decisions were made in those who attended the MDC compared to those who only saw a urologist (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In our DAP, the vast majority of patients presented with screen-detected disease, but there was a gradual shift from low- to intermediate-risk disease over time. Timely multidisciplinary consultation was achievable in over 80% of patients and was associated with different management decisions. We recommend that all patients at risk for prostate cancer be worked up in a multi-disciplinary DAP.

Quality of life with Brain Symptom and Impact Questionnaire in patients with brain metastases.

BACKGROUND: To examine the baseline characteristics of patients who underwent different treatments for brain metastases. METHODS: Allocated into group A [whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) alone], or group B [stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or neurosurgery with or without WBRT], brain metastases patients with assigned treatment completed the Brain Symptom and Impact Questionnaire (BASIQ). Items of BASIQ were arranged as a symptom score or function score. RESULTS: Lung, breast, melanoma and renal cancer were the most prevalent primary cancer site among the study population, with 91 (53%), 25 (15%), 17 (10%) and 15 (9%) patients, respectively. Baseline BASIQ results were obtained before patients were treated with WBRT, neurosurgery, or SRS. Seventy-six (44%) and 96 patients (56%) were grouped to A and B, respectively. Group A reported lower quality of life (QOL) in all function scores (P<0.0001) and all symptom scores (P values from <0.0001 to 0.005) with the exception of energy (P=0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline QOL in patients assigned WBRT alone was statistically worse as compared to patients assigned SRS, neurosurgery with or without WBRT.

The incidence of neuropathic pain in bone metastases patients referred for palliative radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To estimate the prevalence of neuropathic pain in patients with symptomatic bone metastases referred for palliative radiotherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective study of patients with symptomatic bone metastases was conducted. Patients referred for palliative radiotherapy completed the Self-Reported Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S-LANSS) questionnaire to assess for neuropathic pain. Patient demographics, medication use, and radiotherapy prescribed were collected. Statistical approaches to identify relationships between the presence of neuropathic and other patient factors were conducted. RESULTS: 62 patients completed the S-LANSS and 16 (25.8%) patients had a score suggesting neuropathic pain. Fifty-nine (95.2%) patients received radiotherapy with total of 81 sites treated, the most common sites were spine and pelvis. No statistically significant difference in fractionation was found between patients with and without neuropathic pain. Of the 16 patients with neuropathic pain, only 2 were receiving a neuropathic specific analgesic. No significant difference between demographic factors or radiation treatments between patients with and without neuropathic pain was found. There was no significant difference in worst pain score between these two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Pain with neuropathic features remains prevalent in a population of patients referred for palliative radiotherapy. More frequent prescription of pain medications targeting neuropathic pain may be warranted in this patient population.

Second malignancies after radiotherapy for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between exposure to radiotherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer and subsequent second malignancies (second primary cancers). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. DATA SOURCES: Medline and Embase up to 6 April 2015 with no restrictions on year or language. STUDY SELECTION: Comparative studies assessing the risk of second malignancies in patients exposed or unexposed to radiotherapy in the course of treatment for prostate cancer were selected by two reviewers independently with any disagreement resolved by consensus. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Outcomes were synthesized with random effects models and Mantel-Haenszel weighting. Unadjusted odds ratios and multivariable adjusted hazard ratios, when available, were pooled. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Second cancers of the bladder, colorectal tract, rectum, lung, and hematologic system. RESULTS: Of 3056 references retrieved, 21 studies were selected for analysis. Most included studies were large multi-institutional reports but had moderate risk of bias. The most common type of radiotherapy was external beam; 13 studies used patients treated with surgery as controls and eight used patients who did not undergo radiotherapy as controls. The length of follow-up among studies varied. There was increased risk of cancers of the bladder (four studies; adjusted hazard ratio 1.67, 95% confidence interval 1.55 to 1.80), colorectum (three studies; 1.79, 1.34 to 2.38), and rectum (three studies; 1.79, 1.34 to 2.38), but not cancers of the hematologic system (one study; 1.64, 0.90 to 2.99) or lung (two studies; 1.45, 0.70 to 3.01), after radiotherapy compared with the risk in those unexposed to radiotherapy. The odds of a second cancer varied depending on type of radiotherapy: treatment with external beam radiotherapy was consistently associated with increased odds while brachytherapy was not. Among the patients who underwent radiotherapy, from individual studies, the highest absolute rates reported for bladder, colorectal, and rectal cancers were 3.8%, 4.2%, and 1.2%, respectively, while the lowest reported rates were 0.1%, 0.3%, and 0.3%. CONCLUSION: Radiotherapy for prostate cancer was associated with higher risks of developing second malignancies of the bladder, colon, and rectum compared with patients unexposed to radiotherapy, but the reported absolute rates were low. Further studies with longer follow-up are required to confirm these findings.

Do patients with brain metastases selected for whole brain radiotherapy have worse baseline quality of life as compared to those for radiosurgery or neurosurgery (with or without whole brain radiotherapy)?

BACKGROUND: The purpose was to examine the baseline characteristics, symptoms and quality of life (QOL) in patients who receive different treatments for brain metastases. METHODS: Eligible patients were divided and analysed based on their treatment: whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) alone versus stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or neurosurgery with or without WBRT. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain (FACT-Br) items were grouped according to different domains for summary scores. The domains used for summary scores were physical, social/family, emotional, functional well-being (FWB) and additional concerns. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients were enrolled, with 37 treated with WBRT alone and 83 with SRS or neurosurgery with or without WBRT. Of the 50 baseline FACT-Br items, only five items (I feel ill; I get support from my friends; I worry about dying; I have difficulty expressing my thoughts, I am able to put my thoughts into action) were statistically worse in patients treated with WBRT alone (P<0.05). Patients who received SRS or surgery with or without WBRT had statistically (P<0.05) higher scores for the FWB domain, additional concerns domain, and FACT-G total scores, indicating better QOL. CONCLUSIONS: Patients selected for WBRT alone reported statistically different baseline QOL as compared to patients who were treated with SRS or neurosurgery (with or without WBRT).

The Brain Symptom and Impact Questionnaire in brain metastases patients: a prospective long-term follow-up study.

AIMS: To assess the ability of the Brain Metastases Symptom and Impact Questionnaire (BASIQ) in evaluating symptoms and impact on daily life. PATIENTS & METHODS: Patients with brain metastases completed BASIQ, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General, FACT-Brain at baseline and at 1, 2 and 3 months follow-ups. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients completed all follow-ups. BASIQ correlated well (r ≥ 0.40) with FACT subscales, except for social/family and emotional wellbeing. Linear regression analysis found no significant changes in quality of life (QOL) over time in both the BASIQ and FACT scales. Therefore, the two questionnaires coincide as both detected nonchanges. CONCLUSION: The ability of the BASIQ in evaluating symptoms and impact on over longer assessment periods was supported by the FACT questionnaires.

Inadequate pain management in cancer patients attending an outpatient palliative radiotherapy clinic.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to assess the prevalence of undertreated cancer pain in an outpatient palliative radiotherapy clinic using the Pain Management Index (PMI). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a prospective database to assess pain management was done on patients with cancer pain enrolled from January 2009 to March 2015 using recorded pain intensity (0-10) and baseline pain medications. The pain intensities were categorized into no pain (0), mild pain (1), moderate pain (2), and severe pain (3), and an analgesic score was assigned to the most potent pain medication the patient was taking during the time of data collection. "0" was assigned to no analgesics, "1" to non-opioids, "2" to weak opioids, and "3" for strong opioids based on the WHO guidelines. The PMI was calculated for each patient by subtracting the pain score from the analgesic score. A negative value indicated undertreatment, and a value of 0 or greater corresponded to adequate pain management. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-four patients were included in the study. The incidence of inadequate pain management was 33.3 %, similar to that reported in our previous studies. Additionally, 106 patients were taking strong opioids and reporting severe pain despite being the PMI reporting adequately treated. CONCLUSION: The rate of undertreatment is similar to that reported in past studies; however, the rates have shown a slight increase in our palliative radiotherapy clinic since the last assessment. Inadequate management of cancer pain continues to be a problem.

Minimal important differences in the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL to determine meaningful change in palliative advanced cancer patients.

AIMS: Quality of life (QOL) is important for advanced cancer patients. Brief questionnaires are advantageous to reduce patient burden. In large clinical trials, statistically significant small changes can be achieved; however, whether such change is clinically relevant is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the minimal important differences (MID) of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life core 15 palliative questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL). METHODS: Patients undergoing palliative radiotherapy completed the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL at baseline and 1 month later. Anchor and distribution-based assessments were employed to determine the MID associated with this instrument. The anchor of overall QOL was used to determine meaningful change. RESULTS: In all, 276 patients were included in MID calculation. Mean age was 65 years and primary lung, breast or prostate cancers were most common. Statistically significant MID for improvement was seen in emotional functioning and pain (20.9 and 15.6, respectively). MID for deterioration required a 20.4, 24.5, 17.1 and 23.0 change in physical functioning, fatigue, pain and appetite loss, respectively, to constitute meaningful change. Distribution-based estimates of MID were closest to the standard error of measurement. MID for brain and bone metastases patients yielded MID larger than previously determined in the incorporation of all patients. CONCLUSION: Meaningful change in the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL is important for clinicians to determine the impact of treatment on the QOL of patients and can aid in determining the sample size required for clinical trials. Future studies should investigate MID in subgroups using symptom-specific modules.

Surgery Versus Radiotherapy for Clinically-localized Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: To date, there is no Level 1 evidence comparing the efficacy of radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy for patients with clinically-localized prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a meta-analysis assessing the overall and prostate cancer-specific mortality among patients treated with radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy for clinically-localized prostate cancer. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library through June 2015 without year or language restriction, supplemented with hand search, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. We used multivariable adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) to assess each endpoint. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Nineteen studies of low to moderate risk of bias were selected and up to 118 830 patients were pooled. Inclusion criteria and follow-up length varied between studies. Most studies assessed patients treated with external beam radiotherapy, although some included those treated with brachytherapy separately or with the external beam radiation therapy group. The risk of overall (10 studies, aHR 1.63, 95% confidence interval 1.54-1.73, p<0.00001; I(2)=0%) and prostate cancer-specific (15 studies, aHR 2.08, 95% confidence interval 1.76-2.47, p < 0.00001; I(2)=48%) mortality were higher for patients treated with radiotherapy compared with those treated with surgery. Subgroup analyses by risk group, radiation regimen, time period, and follow-up length did not alter the direction of results. CONCLUSIONS: Radiotherapy for prostate cancer is associated with an increased risk of overall and prostate cancer-specific mortality compared with surgery based on observational data with low to moderate risk of bias. These data, combined with the forthcoming randomized data, may aid clinical decision making. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed available studies assessing mortality after prostate cancer treatment with surgery or radiotherapy. While the studies used have a potential for bias due to their observational design, we demonstrated consistently higher mortality for patients treated with radiotherapy rather than surgery.

Survival of patients with multiple brain metastases treated with whole-brain radiotherapy.

AIM: To report the survival outcomes of patients with multiple brain metastases treated with whole-brain radiotherapy. PATIENTS & METHODS: From 2004 to 2012, patients with brain metastases treated with whole-brain radiotherapy were included. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the start of radiation treatment. Univariate and multivariate proportional hazard model of OS was conducted. Generalized R(2) statistic (ranged from 0 to 1) was calculated to determine the association with the outcome. RESULTS: Nine-hundred-ninety-one patients were included. The actuarial median OS time was 2.7 months (95% CI: 2.5-2.9). Patients of older age (>65 years), lower Karnofsky performance status, not postoperative and patients with gastrointestinal, genitourinary or lung as opposed to breast cancer were more likely to have a shorter survival. CONCLUSION: Short median survival of 2.7 months may reflect poorer prognosis of patients referred due to large amount of referrals for radiosurgery. Prognostic factors for survival should be considered at consultation.