Patient out-of-pocket costs for cannabis use during cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: We assessed patient costs associated with cannabis use during cancer treatment. METHODS: Adults treated for cancer at a large, comprehensive center completed an anonymous survey regarding their thoughts and experiences with cannabis and cancer. Bivariate and weighted multivariable logistic regression assessed clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with patient-reported out-of-pocket costs for cannabis products. RESULTS: Overall, 248 cannabis users provided data on cost and were analyzed. Median monthly out-of-pocket cost for cannabis was $80 (interquartile range = $25-$150). On regression analysis, male gender (odds ratio = 2.5, 95% confidence interval = 1.2 to 5.5, P = .026) and being 45 years of age or older (odds ratio = 7.5, 95% confidence interval = 1.9 to 30.0, P = .0042) were associated with spending $100 a month or more on cannabis. Of the 166 patients who stopped using cannabis early or used less than preferred, 28% attributed it to cost and 26% to lack of insurance coverage. CONCLUSION: Cannabis use during cancer treatment may contribute to significant out-of-pocket costs, with men and younger patients more likely to pay higher costs.

Role of primary care in opioid prescribing for older head and neck cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Older head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors have concerning rates of potentially unsafe opioid prescribing. Identifying the specialties of opioid prescribers for HNC survivors is critical for targeting the settings for opioid safety interventions. This study hypothesized that oncology and surgery providers are primarily responsible for opioid prescriptions in the year after treatment but that primary care providers (PCPs) are increasingly involved in prescribing over time. METHODS: Using linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data, a retrospective analysis was conducted of adults aged >65 years diagnosed between 2014 and 2017 with stage I-III HNC and who had ≥6 months of treatment-free follow-up through 2019. Starting at treatment completion, opioid fills were assigned to a prescriber specialty: oncology, surgery, primary care, pain management, or other. Prescriber patterns were summarized for each year of follow-up. Multinomial logistic regression models captured the likelihood of opioids being prescribed by each specialty. RESULTS: Among 5135 HNC survivors, 2547 (50%) had ≥1 opioid fill (median, 2.1-year follow-up). PCPs prescribed 47% of all fills (42%-55% each year). PCPs prescribed opioids to 45% of survivors with ≥1 opioid fill, which was a greater share than other specialties. PCPs prescribed longer supplies of opioids (median, 20 days/fill; median, 30 days/year) than oncologists or surgeons. The likelihood of an opioid being prescribed by an oncology provider was four times lower than that of it being prescribed by a PCP. CONCLUSIONS: PCP involvement in opioid prescribing remains high throughout HNC survivorship. Interventions to improve the safety of opioid prescribing should target primary care, as is typical for opioid reduction efforts in the noncancer population.

Skin cancer screening recommendations by U.S. cancer centers: Inconsistency with national guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: The incidence of melanoma has increased dramatically over the past four decades, while overall mortality has remained stable. This increase in incidence without a change in overall mortality may be due to overdiagnosis through skin cancer screening. Despite the USPSTF citing insufficient evidence for or against professional skin cancer screening in average-risk adults, U.S. skin cancer screening practices may be leading to overdiagnosis of skin cancers. METHODS: Two reviewers examined the online recommendations for skin cancer screening of 1113 U.S. cancer centers accredited by the Commission on Cancer, including 66 designated by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Recommendations on skin cancer screening, such as age, frequency, and patient population (i.e. high-risk of developing skin cancer, "people of color") were documented. RESULTS: We found that 18% of centers (202) recommended professional screening in average-risk adults, 35.8% (399) advised regular self-examination, and only 3.4% (38) cited insufficient evidence for screening practices; 49% of NCI centers (32/66) recommended screening in high-risk adults compared to 13% of non-NCI centers (135/1047; p = 0.0004); 0.45% of centers (5) mentioned the potential harms of screening, while 3.5% (39) specifically recommended screening for people of color. CONCLUSION: Our study reveals that many U.S. cancer centers advise some form of skin cancer screening despite a lack of evidence for or against these practices. Few centers mentioned the potential harms of screening, including overdiagnosis. This indicates a need for stronger evidence for specific screening guidelines and for greater public awareness of the potential benefits and harms of routine skin cancer screening.

Industry Payments to Physicians Endorsing Drugs and Devices on a Social Media Platform.

This study evaluates adherence to industry and professional standards among physicians endorsing drugs and devices on a social media platform.

Public cervical cancer screening recommendations from US cancer centers: Assessing adherence to national guidelines.

Though widespread adoption of cervical cancer screening (CCS) in the US has been associated with a reduction in cervical cancer incidence and mortality, screening also carries with it potential risks. Newer national guidelines recommend decreased screening frequency to optimize the benefit/risk balance and to prevent over-screening. Here, we examined the alignment of US cancer center websites' public recommendations on CCS with national guidelines. We reviewed the websites of 1024 cancer centers accredited by the US Commission on Cancer during January-August 2022. We recorded the recommended frequency and type of CCS and any screening risks mentioned, comparing against national US Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) and American Cancer Society (ACS) guidelines. Of 1024 US cancer centers, 60% (610) provided CCS recommendations. Most centers are in alignment with the screening starting age (96%, 544/565) and stopping age (94%, 440/470) recommended by national guidelines. Of 508 centers specifying the frequency of standalone cervical cytology, 83% (419) recommended a screening interval of three years; however, 14% (73) recommended cervical cytology more frequently than the three-year interval recommended by the ACS/USPSTF. Screening risks were mentioned by 20% (124/610) of centers. Our findings highlight the importance of education on screening benefits and risks for physicians and patients to enable shared decision making based on evidence-based guidelines.

Pain management for post-treatment survivors of complex cancers: a qualitative study of opioids and cannabis.

Aim: We aimed to understand experiences with opioids and cannabis for post-treatment cancer survivors. Patients & methods: We conducted seven focus groups among head and neck and lung cancer survivors, using standard qualitative methodology to explore themes around 1) post-treatment pain and 2) utilization, perceived benefits and perceived harms of cannabis and opioids. Results & conclusion: Survivors (N = 25) experienced addiction fears, stigma and access challenges for both products. Opioids were often perceived as critical for severe pain. Cannabis reduced pain and anxiety for many survivors, suggesting that anxiety screening, as recommended in guidelines, would improve traditional pain assessment. Opioids and cannabis present complex harms and benefits for post-treatment survivors who must balance pain management and minimizing side effects.

Game-based learning to improve diagnostic accuracy: a pilot randomized-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Perform a pilot study of online game-based learning (GBL) using natural frequencies and feedback to teach diagnostic reasoning. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter randomized-controlled trial of computer-based training. We enrolled medical students, residents, practicing physicians and nurse practitioners. The intervention was a 45 min online GBL training vs. control education with a primary outcome of score on a scale of diagnostic accuracy (composed of 10 realistic case vignettes, requesting estimates of probability of disease after a test result, 0-100 points total). RESULTS: Of 90 participants there were 30 students, 30 residents and 30 practicing clinicians. Of these 62 % (56/90) were female and 52 % (47/90) were white. Sixty were randomized to GBL intervention and 30 to control. The primary outcome of diagnostic accuracy immediately after training was better in GBL (mean accuracy score 59.4) vs. control (37.6), p=0.0005. The GBL group was then split evenly (30, 30) into no further intervention or weekly emails with case studies. Both GBL groups performed better than control at one-month and some continued effect at three-month follow up. Scores at one-month GBL (59.2) GBL plus emails (54.2) vs. control (33.9), p=0.024; three-months GBL (56.2), GBL plus emails (42.9) vs. control (35.1), p=0.076. Most participants would recommend GBL to colleagues (73 %), believed it was enjoyable (92 %) and believed it improves test interpretation (95 %). CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, a single session with GBL nearly doubled score on a scale of diagnostic accuracy in medical trainees and practicing clinicians. The impact of GBL persisted after three months.

Low-Value Surgical Procedures in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Scoping Review.

Importance: Overuse of surgical procedures is increasing around the world and harms both individuals and health care systems by using resources that could otherwise be allocated to addressing the underuse of effective health care interventions. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), there is some limited country-specific evidence showing that overuse of surgical procedures is increasing, at least for certain procedures. Objectives: To assess factors associated with, extent and consequences of, and potential solutions for low-value surgical procedures in LMICs. Evidence Review: We searched 4 electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and Global Index Medicus) for studies published from database inception until April 27, 2022, with no restrictions on date or language. A combination of MeSH terms and free-text words about the overuse of surgical procedures was used. Studies examining the problem of overuse of surgical procedures in LMICs were included and categorized by major focus: the extent of overuse, associated factors, consequences, and solutions. Findings: Of 4276 unique records identified, 133 studies across 63 countries were included, reporting on more than 9.1 million surgical procedures (median per study, 894 [IQR, 97-4259]) and with more than 11.4 million participants (median per study, 989 [IQR, 257-6857]). Fourteen studies (10.5%) were multinational. Of the 119 studies (89.5%) originating from single countries, 69 (58.0%) were from upper-middle-income countries and 30 (25.2%) were from East Asia and the Pacific. Of the 42 studies (31.6%) reporting extent of overuse of surgical procedures, most (36 [85.7%]) reported on unnecessary cesarean delivery, with estimated rates in LMICs ranging from 12% to 81%. Evidence on other surgical procedures was limited and included abdominal and percutaneous cardiovascular surgical procedures. Consequences of low-value surgical procedures included harms and costs, such as an estimated US $3.29 billion annual cost of unnecessary cesarean deliveries in China. Associated factors included private financing, and solutions included social media campaigns and multifaceted interventions such as audits, feedback, and reminders. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review found growing evidence of overuse of surgical procedures in LMICs, which may generate significant harm and waste of limited resources; the majority of studies reporting overuse were about unnecessary cesarean delivery. Therefore, a better understanding of the problems in other surgical procedures and a robust evaluation of solutions are needed.

Clinician Testing and Treatment Thresholds for Management of Urinary Tract Infection.

Greater understanding of clinical decision thresholds may improve inappropriate testing and treatment of urinary tract infection (UTI). We used a survey of clinicians to examine UTI decision thresholds. Although overestimates of UTI occurred, testing and treatment thresholds were generally rational, were lower than previously reported, and differed by type of clinician.

Cannabis use among recently treated cancer patients: perceptions and experiences.

PURPOSE: To characterize cannabis use among cancer patients, we aimed to describe 1) patterns of cannabis use across multiple cancer sites; 2) perceived goals, benefits, harms of cannabis; and 3) communication about cannabis. METHODS: Patients with 9 different cancers treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between March and August 2021 completed an online or phone survey eliciting cannabis use, attitudes, and communication about cannabis. Multivariable logistic regression estimated the association of cancer type and cannabis use, adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and prior cannabis use. RESULTS: Among 1258 respondents, 31% used cannabis after diagnosis, ranging from 25% for lung cancer to 59% for testicular cancer. Characteristics associated with cannabis use included younger age, lower education level, and cancer type. In multivariable analysis, compared to lung cancer patients, gastrointestinal cancer patients were more likely to use cannabis (odds ratio [OR] 2.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-5.43). Cannabis use in the year prior to diagnosis was strongly associated with cannabis use after diagnosis (OR 19.13, 95% CI 11.92-30.72). Among users, reasons for use included difficulty sleeping (48%); stress, anxiety, or depression (46%); and pain (42%). Among respondents who used cannabis to improve symptoms, 70-90% reported improvement; < 5% reported that any symptom worsened. Only 25% discussed cannabis with healthcare providers. CONCLUSIONS: Almost a third of cancer patients use cannabis, largely for symptom management. Oncologists may not know about their patients' cannabis use. To improve decision making about cannabis use during cancer care, research is needed to determine benefits and harms of cannabis use.

The Herbal Medicine Suanzaoren (Ziziphi Spinosae Semen) for Sleep Quality Improvements: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sleep disturbances are common and bothersome among cancer and noncancer populations. Suanzaoren (Ziziphi Spinosae Semen) is commonly used to improve sleep, yet its efficacy and safety are unclear. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE from inception through October 5, 2021, to identify randomized trials of Suanzaoren. We included randomized trials comparing Suanzaoren to placebo, medications, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), or usual care for improving sleep outcomes in cancer and noncancer patients with insomnia or sleep disturbance. We performed a risk of bias analysis following Cochrane guidelines. Depending on heterogeneity, we pooled studies with similar comparators using fixed- and random-effects models. RESULTS: We included participants with insomnia disorder (N = 785) or sleep disturbance (N = 120) from 9 trials. Compared with placebo, Suanzaoren led to significant subjective sleep quality improvements in participants with insomnia and patients with sleep disturbance combined (standard mean difference -0.58, 95% CI -1.04, -0.11; P < .01); Compared with benzodiazepines or CBT, Suanzaoren was associated with a significant decrease in insomnia severity (mean difference -2.68 points, 95% CI -5.50, -0.22; P = .03) at 4 weeks in the general population and cancer patients. The long-term effects of Suanzaoren were mixed among trials. Suanzaoren did not increase the incidence of major adverse events. The placebo-controlled studies had a low risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Suanzaoren is associated with short-term patient-reported sleep quality improvements among individuals with insomnia or sleep disturbance. Due to the small sample size and variable study quality, the clinical benefits and harms of Suanzaoren, particularly in the long term, should be further assessed in a sufficiently powered randomized trial. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021281943.

Student High Value Care Initiative: a Longitudinal Model for Student-Led Implementation and Scholarship.

BACKGROUND: Educating medical trainees to practice high value care is a critical component to improving quality of care and should be introduced at the beginning of medical education. AIM: To create a successful educational model that provides medical students and junior faculty with experiential learning in quality improvement and mentorship opportunities, and produce effective quality initiatives. SETTING: A tertiary medical center affiliated with a medical school in New York City. PARTICIPANTS: First year medical students, junior faculty in hospital medicine, and a senior faculty course director. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The Student High Value Care initiative is a longitudinal initiative comprised of six core elements: (1) project development, (2) value improvement curriculum, (3) mentorship, (4), Institutional support, (5) scholarship, and (6) student leadership. PROGRAM EVALUATION: During the first 3 years, 68 medical students and ten junior faculty participated in 10 quality improvement projects. Nine projects were successful in their measured outcomes, with statistically significant improvements. Nine had an abstract accepted to a regional or national meeting, and seven produced publications in peer-reviewed literature. DISCUSSION: In the first 3 years of the initiative, we successfully engaged medical students and junior faculty to create and support the implementation of successful quality improvement initiatives. Since that time, the program continues to offer meaningful mentorship and scholarship opportunities.

Ginseng and Ginseng Herbal Formulas for Symptomatic Management of Fatigue: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objectives: Ginseng has been widely used in fatigue management. However, its efficacy on fatigue remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ginseng and ginseng herbal formulas for fatigue in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Methods: The authors searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) databases from inception to July 6, 2022. Outcomes included fatigue severity, quality of life (QoL), and adverse events (AEs). Quality of evidence was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. They pooled all included data and performed subgroup analysis by fatigue type, assessment instrument, and ginseng type. Results: The authors included 19 RCTs. Pooled analyses found no significant reduction in fatigue severity with ginseng versus controls (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.82 to 0.11, p = 0.13). In subgroup analysis, there was significant fatigue reduction with the ginseng herbal formula (SMD: -0.39, 95% CI: -0.66 to -0.13, p = 0.004) and chronic fatigue (CF) (SMD: -0.30, 95% CI: -0.56 to -0.03, p = 0.03) compared to controls. Ginseng produced significant reductions in general (i.e., non-disease-specific) fatigue compared to controls (SMD: -0.48, 95% CI: -0.71 to -0.25, p < 0.0001). Ginseng was associated with a trend toward QoL improvement (p = 0.05) and did not increase AEs compared with controls. Effect sizes were small. Conclusion: Ginseng herbal formulas improved fatigue severity compared to controls, especially among patients with CF, but with a small effect size. Rigorous RCTs as well as guidelines for standard ginseng usage are needed to further evaluate the effects of ginseng for fatigue and ensure proper use.

Prognostic value of procalcitonin in cancer patients with coronavirus disease 2019.

OBJECTIVES: Many biomarkers have been studied to assist in the risk stratification and prognostication of patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Procalcitonin (PCT), a circulating precursor of the hormone calcitonin, has been studied with mixed results as a predictor of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the general population; however, to date, no studies have focused on the utility of PCT in predicting disease severity and death from COVID-19 in the cancer population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of cancer patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at a comprehensive cancer center over a 10-month period who had PCT recorded on admission. We assessed associations between variables of clinical interest and the primary outcomes of progression of COVID-19 and death during or within 30 days of hospitalization using univariable and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: The study included 209 unique patients. In the univariate analysis, elevated PCT on admission was associated with higher odds of progression of COVID-19 or death (Odds ratio [OR] 1.40, 95% CI 1.08-1.93) and mortality alone (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.17-2.11). In multivariate regression, PCT remained significantly associated with progression or death after holding chronic kidney disease (CKD) status constant (OR 1.40, 95% CI: 1.08, 1.93, p=0.003). Similarly, the association of PCT and death remained significant after adjusting for age (OR 1.54, 95% CI: 1.17-2.15). CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized COVID-19 patients with underlying cancer, initial PCT levels on admission may be associated with prognosis, involving higher odds of progression of COVID-19 and/or mortality.

Effectiveness of MRNA booster vaccine among healthcare workers in New York City during the Omicron surge, December 2021 to January 2022.

OBJECTIVE: To describe effectiveness of mRNA vaccines by comparing 2-dose (2D) and 3-dose (3D) healthcare worker (HCW) recipients in the setting of Omicron variant dominance. Performance of 2D and 3D vaccine series against SARS-CoV-2 variants and the clinical outcomes of HCWs may inform return-to-work guidance. METHODS: In a retrospective study from December 15, 2020 to January 15, 2022, SARS-CoV-2 infections among HCWs at a large tertiary cancer centre in New York City were examined to estimate infection rates (aggregated positive tests / person-days) and 95% CIs over the Omicron period in 3D and 2D mRNA vaccinated HCWs and were compared using rate ratios. We described the clinical features of post-vaccine infections and impact of prior (pre-Omicron) COVID infection on vaccine effectiveness. RESULTS: Among the 20857 HCWs in our cohort, 20,660 completed the 2D series with an mRNA vaccine during our study period and 12461 had received a third dose by January 15, 2022. The infection rate ratio for 3D versus 2D vaccinated HCWs was 0.667 (95% CI 0.623, 0.713) for an estimated 3D vaccine effectiveness of 33.3% compared to two doses only during the Omicron dominant period from December 15, 2021 to January 15, 2022. Breakthrough Omicron infections after 3D + 14 days occurred in 1,315 HCWs. Omicron infections were mild, with 16% of 3D and 11% 2D HCWs being asymptomatic. DISCUSSION: Study demonstrates improved vaccine-derived protection against COVID-19 infection in 3D versus 2D mRNA vaccinees during the Omicron surge. The advantage of 3D vaccination was maintained irrespective of prior COVID-19 infection status.

Attitudes and access to resources and strategies to improve quality of radiotherapy among US radiation oncologists: A mixed methods study.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to assess contouring-related practices among US radiation oncologists and explore how access to and use of resources and quality improvement strategies vary based on individual- and organization-level factors. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods study with a sequential explanatory design. Surveys were emailed to a random 10% sample of practicing US radiation oncologists. Participating physicians were invited to a semi-structured interview. Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and a multivariable regression model were used to evaluate associations. Interview data were coded using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Survey overall response rate was 24%, and subsequent completion rate was 97%. Contouring-related questions arise in ≥50% of clinical cases among 73% of respondents. Resources accessed first include published atlases (75%) followed by consulting another radiation oncologist (60%). Generalists access consensus guidelines more often than disease-site specialists (P = 0.04), while eContour.org is more often used by generalists (OR 4.3, 95% CI 1.2-14.8) and younger physicians (OR 1.33 for each 5-year increase, 95% CI 1.08-1.67). Common physician-reported barriers to optimizing contour quality are time constraints (58%) and lack of access to disease-site specialists (21%). Forty percent (40%, n = 14) of physicians without access to disease-site specialists indicated it could facilitate the adoption of new treatments. Almost all (97%) respondents have formal peer review, but only 43% have contour-specific review, which is more common in academic centres (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Potential opportunities to improve radiation contour quality include improved access to disease-site specialists and contour-specific peer review. Physician time must be considered when designing new strategies.

In the weeds: a retrospective study of patient interest in and experience with cannabis at a cancer center.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis products, including the cannabinoids CBD and THC, are rising in popularity and increasingly used for medical purposes. While there is some evidence that cannabinoids improve cancer-associated symptoms, understanding regarding appropriate use remains incomplete. PURPOSE: To describe patient experiences with medical cannabis with focus on use contexts and patients' reported benefits and harms. METHODS: A standardized intake form was implemented in a dedicated medical cannabis clinic at an NCI-designated cancer center; data from this form was abstracted for all initial visits from October 2019 to October 2020. We report descriptive statistics, chi-square analysis, and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 163 unique new patients, cannabis therapy was commonly sought for sleep, pain, anxiety, and appetite. Twenty-nine percent expressed interest for cancer treatment; 40% and 46% reported past use of CBD and THC, respectively, for medical purposes. Among past CBD users, the most commonly reported benefits were less pain (21%) or anxiety (17%) and improvement in sleep (15%); 92% reported no side effects. Among those with past THC use, reported benefits included improvement in appetite (40%), sleep (32%), nausea (28%), and pain (17%); side effects included feeling "high." Seeking cannabis for anti-neoplastic effects was associated with receipt of active cancer treatment in both univariate and multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Cancer patients seek medical cannabis to address a wide variety of concerns despite insufficient evidence of benefits and harms. As more states move to legalize medical and recreational cannabis, cancer care providers must remain aware of emerging data and develop knowledge and skills to counsel their patients about its use.

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.