Minimal clinically important differences in the EORTC QLQ-C30 and brief pain inventory in patients undergoing re-irradiation for painful bone metastases.

PURPOSE: The EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) are validated tools for measuring quality of life (QOL) and the impact of pain in patients with advanced cancer. Interpretation of these instrument scores can be challenging and it is difficult to know what numerical changes translate to clinically significant impact in patients' lives. To address this issue, our study sought to establish the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) for these two instruments in a prospective cohort of patients with advanced cancer and painful bone metastases. METHODS: Both anchor-based and distribution-based methods were used to estimate the MCID scores from patients enrolled in a randomized phase III trial evaluating two different re-irradiation treatment schedules. For the anchor-based method, the global QOL item from the QLQ-C30 was chosen as the anchor. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated for all items and only those items with moderate or better correlation (|r| ≥ 0.30) with the anchor were used for subsequent analysis. A 10-point difference in the global QOL score was used to classify improvement and deterioration, and the MCID scores were calculated for each of these categories. These results were compared with scores obtained by the distribution-method, which estimates the MCID purely from the statistical characteristics of the sample population. RESULTS: A total of 375 patients were included in this study with documented pain responses and completed QOL questionnaires at 2 months. 9/14 items in the QLQ-C30 and 6/10 items in the BPI were found to have moderate or better correlation with the anchor. For deterioration, statistically significant MCID scores were found in all items of the QLQ-C30 and BPI. For improvement, statistically significant MCID scores were found in 7/9 items of the QLQ-C30 and 2/6 items of the BPI. The MCID scores for deterioration were uniformly higher than the MCIDs for improvement. Using the distribution-based method, there was good agreement between the 0.5 standard deviation (SD) values and anchor-based scores for deterioration. For improvement, there was less agreement and the anchor-based scores were lower than the 0.5 SD values obtained from the distribution-based method. CONCLUSION: We present MCID scores for the QLQ-C30 and BPI instruments obtained from a large cohort of patients with advanced cancer undergoing re-irradiation for painful bone metastases. The results from this study were compared to other similar studies which showed larger MCID scores for improvement compared to deterioration. We hypothesize that disease trajectory and patient expectations are important factors in understanding the contrasting results. The results of this study can guide clinicians and researchers in the interpretation of these instruments.

Gender and age make no difference in the re-irradiation of painful bone metastases: A secondary analysis of the NCIC CTG SC.20 randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patient's gender and age may influence physicians in prescribing palliative radiotherapy. The purpose of this secondary analysis of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Symptom Control Trial SC.20 was to explore the gender and age differences in pain and patient reported outcomes in cancer patients with bone metastases undergoing re-irradiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Response to radiation was evaluated using the International Bone Metastases Consensus Endpoint Definitions. Patients completed the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (C30) before and 2 months after re-irradiation. RESULTS: A total of 847 patients were analyzed. At baseline, men had more dyspnea, and mild pain. Older patients consumed less analgesic. More women reported clinically significant improvement in mood and enjoyment of life in the BPI after radiation. Similarly, younger patients reported better improvement in enjoyment of life. There were no significant gender or age differences in overall survival, response to radiation, or in C30 scores at 2 months. CONCLUSION: Similar benefit in terms of pain relief was observed across all patient groups. Cancer patients with bone metastases should be offered palliative re-irradiation irrespective of gender or age. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00080912; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00080912.

Predictive model for survival in patients having repeat radiation treatment for painful bone metastases.

PURPOSE: To establish a survival prediction model in the setting of a randomized trial of re-irradiation for painful bone metastases. METHODS: Data were randomly divided into training and testing sets with an approximately 3:2 ratio. Baseline factors of gender, primary cancer site, KPS, worst-pain score and age were included with backward variable selection to derive a model using the training set. A partial score was assigned by dividing the value of each statistically significant regression coefficient by the smallest statistically significant regression coefficient. The survival prediction score (SPS) was obtained by adding together partial scores for the variables that were statistically significant. Three risk groups were modelled. RESULTS: The training set included 460 patients and the testing set 351 patients. Only KPS and primary cancer site reached the 5%-significance level. Summing up the partial scores assigned to KPS (90-100, 0; 70-80, 1; 50-60, 2) and primary cancer site (breast, 0; prostate, 1.3; other, 2.6; lung, 3) totalled the SPS. The 1/3 and 2/3 percentiles of the SPS were 2 and 3.6. For the testing set, the median survival of the 3 groups was not reached, 11.3 (95% C.I. 8.5 - not reached) and 5.2 months (95% C.I. 3.7-6.5). The 3, 6 and 12 month survival rates for the worst group were 64.4% (95% C.I. 55.3-72.1%), 43.0% (95% C.I. 34.0-51.8%) and 19.7% (95% C.I. 12.4-28.1%) respectively, similar to that in the training set. CONCLUSION: This survival prediction model will assist in choosing dose fractionation. We recommend a single 8 Gy in the worst group identified.

Revisiting classification of pain from bone metastases as mild, moderate, or severe based on correlation with function and quality of life.

PURPOSE: The objective of our study was to determine the optimal cut points for classification of pain scores as mild, moderate, and severe based on interference with function and quality of life (QOL). METHODS: We evaluated 822 patients who completed the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and/or the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QOL Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) prior to receiving repeat radiation therapy for previously irradiated painful bone metastases. Optimal cut points for mild, moderate, and severe pain were determined by the MANOVA that yielded the largest F ratio for the between category effect on the seven interference items of BPI and the six functional domains of QOL (physical, role, emotional, cognitive, social functioning, and global QOL) as indicated by Pillai's Trace, Wilk's λ, and Hostelling's Trace F statistics. RESULTS: For BPI and for QOL domains separately, the two largest F ratios for Wilk's λ, Pillai's Trace, and Hotelling's Trace F statistics were from the cut points 4, 8 and 6, 8. When combining both, the optimal cut points were 4, 8 with 1-4 (mild), 5-8 (moderate), and 9-10 (severe). With this classification, the mean scores of all the seven interference items in BPI and the six functional domains were all highly statistically different. Patients with severe pain survived significantly shorter than those with mild and moderate pain (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our analysis supports the classification of pain scores as follows: 1-4 as mild pain, 5-8 as moderate pain, and 9-10 as severe pain. This may facilitate conduct of future clinical trials.

Impact of reirradiation of painful osseous metastases on quality of life and function: a secondary analysis of the NCIC CTG SC.20 randomized trial.

PURPOSE: We previously demonstrated that 48% of patients with pain at sites of previously irradiated bone metastases benefit from reirradiation. It is unknown whether alleviating pain also improves patient perception of quality of life (QOL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used the database of a randomized trial comparing radiation treatment dose fractionation schedules to evaluate whether response, determined using the International Consensus Endpoint (ICE) and Brief Pain Inventory pain score (BPI-PS), is associated with patient perception of benefit, as measured using the European Organisation for Resesarch and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and functional interference scale of the BPI (BPI-FI). Evaluable patients completed baseline and 2-month follow-up assessments. RESULTS: Among 850 randomly assigned patients, 528 were evaluable for response using the ICE and 605 using the BPI-PS. Using the ICE, 253 patients experienced a response and 275 did not. Responding patients had superior scores on all items of the BPI-FI (ie, general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life) and improved QOL, as determined by scores on the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales of physical, role, emotional and social functioning, global QOL, fatigue, pain, and appetite. Similar results were obtained using the BPI-PS; observed improvements were typically of lesser magnitude. CONCLUSION: Patients responding to reirradiation of painful bone metastases experience superior QOL scores and less functional interference associated with pain. Patients should be offered re-treatment for painful bone metastases in the hope of reducing pain severity as well as improving QOL and pain interference.

Single versus multiple fractions of repeat radiation for painful bone metastases: a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Although repeat radiation treatment has been shown to palliate pain in patients with bone metastases from multiple primary origin sites, data for the best possible dose fractionation schedules are lacking. We aimed to assess two dose fractionation schedules in patients with painful bone metastases needing repeat radiation therapy. METHODS: We did a multicentre, non-blinded, randomised, controlled trial in nine countries worldwide. We enrolled patients 18 years or older who had radiologically confirmed, painful (ie, pain measured as ≥2 points using the Brief Pain Inventory) bone metastases, had received previous radiation therapy, and were taking a stable dose and schedule of pain-relieving drugs (if prescribed). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either 8 Gy in a single fraction or 20 Gy in multiple fractions by a central computer-generated allocation sequence using dynamic minimisation to conceal assignment, stratified by previous radiation fraction schedule, response to initial radiation, and treatment centre. Patients, caregivers, and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall pain response at 2 months, which was defined as the sum of complete and partial pain responses to treatment, assessed using both Brief Pain Inventory scores and changes in analgesic consumption. Analysis was done by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00080912. FINDINGS: Between Jan 7, 2004, and May 24, 2012, we randomly assigned 425 patients to each treatment group. 19 (4%) patients in the 8 Gy group and 12 (3%) in the 20 Gy group were found to be ineligible after randomisation, and 140 (33%) and 132 (31%) patients, respectively, were not assessable at 2 months and were counted as missing data in the intention-to-treat analysis. In the intention-to-treat population, 118 (28%) patients allocated to 8 Gy treatment and 135 (32%) allocated to 20 Gy treatment had an overall pain response to treatment (p=0·21; response difference of 4·00% [upper limit of the 95% CI 9·2, less than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 10%]). In the per-protocol population, 116 (45%) of 258 patients and 134 (51%) of 263 patients, respectively, had an overall pain response to treatment (p=0·17; response difference 6·00% [upper limit of the 95% CI 13·2, greater than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 10%]). The most frequently reported acute radiation-related toxicities at 14 days were lack of appetite (201 [56%] of 358 assessable patients who received 8 Gy vs 229 [66%] of 349 assessable patients who received 20 Gy; p=0·011) and diarrhoea (81 [23%] of 357 vs 108 [31%] of 349; p=0·018). Pathological fractures occurred in 30 (7%) of 425 patients assigned to 8 Gy and 20 (5%) of 425 assigned to 20 Gy (odds ratio [OR] 1·54, 95% CI 0·85-2·75; p=0·15), and spinal cord or cauda equina compressions were reported in seven (2%) of 425 versus two (<1%) of 425, respectively (OR 3·54, 95% CI 0·73-17·15; p=0·094). INTERPRETATION: In patients with painful bone metastases requiring repeat radiation therapy, treatment with 8 Gy in a single fraction seems to be non-inferior and less toxic than 20 Gy in multiple fractions; however, as findings were not robust in a per-protocol analysis, trade-offs between efficacy and toxicity might exist. FUNDING: Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute, US National Cancer Institute, Cancer Council Australia, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Dutch Cancer Society, and Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris.

Single-fraction radiotherapy versus multifraction radiotherapy for palliation of painful vertebral bone metastases-equivalent efficacy, less toxicity, more convenient: a subset analysis of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trial 97-14.

BACKGROUND: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) trial 97-14 revealed no difference between radiation delivered for painful bone metastases at a dose of 8 gray (Gy) in 1 fraction (single-fraction radiotherapy [SFRT]) and 30 Gy in 10 fractions (multifraction radiotherapy [MFRT]) in pain relief or narcotic use 3 months after randomization. SFRT for painful vertebral bone metastases (PVBM) has not been well accepted, possibly because of concerns about efficacy and toxicity. In the current study, the authors evaluated the subset of patients that was treated specifically for patients with PVBM. METHODS: PVBM included the cervical, thoracic, and/or lumbar spine regions. Among patients with PVBM, differences in retreatment rates and in pain relief, narcotic use, and toxicity 3 months after randomization were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 909 eligible patients, 235 (26%) had PVBM. Patients with and without PVBM differed in terms of the percentage of men (55% vs 47%, respectively; P = .03) and the proportion of patients with multiple painful sites (57% vs 38%, respectively; P < .01). Among those with PVBM, more patients who received MFRT had multiple sites treated (65% vs 49% for MFRT vs SFRT, respectively; P = .02). There were no statistically significant treatment differences in terms of pain relief (62% vs 70% for MFRT vs SFRT, respectively; P = .59) or freedom from narcotic use (24% vs 27%, respectively; P = .76) at 3 months. Significant differences in acute grade 2 through 4 toxicity (20% vs 10% for MFRT vs SFRT, respectively; P = .01) and acute grade 2 through 4 gastrointestinal toxicity (14% vs 6%, respectively; P = .01) were observed at 3 months, with lower toxicities seen in the patients treated with SFRT. Late toxicity was rare. No myelopathy was recorded. SFRT produced higher 3-year retreatment rates (5% vs 15%; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Results for the subset of patients with PVBM in the RTOG 94-17 randomized controlled trial were comparable to those for the entire population. SFRT produced less acute toxicity and a higher rate of retreatment than MFRT. SFRT and MFRT resulted in comparable pain relief and narcotic use at 3 months.

RTOG 0017: a phase I trial of concurrent gemcitabine/carboplatin or gemcitabine/paclitaxel and radiation therapy ("ping-pong trial") followed by adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with favorable prognosis inoperable stage IIIA/B non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: The optimal dose of gemcitabine that can be used with concurrent radiation therapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer has not been well defined. This trial addresses this question in an alternating sequence "ping-pong" design trial to find the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for gemcitabine/carboplatin (Sequence A) or gemcitabine/paclitaxel (Sequence B) and thoracic radiation therapy followed by adjuvant gemcitabine/carboplatin chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-five patients with histologically confirmed Stage IIIA/B non-small cell lung cancer were entered into two separate sequences, each with multiple cohorts. A dose level was considered acceptable if, of the first six eligible patients on each cohort, fewer than three experienced dose limiting toxicities. RESULTS: Sequence B of this 2 sequence "ping-pong" trial closed early due to toxicity in cohort 2 (gemcitabine 300 mg/m/wk and paclitaxel 30 mg/m/wk). On Sequence A, the MTD was the cohort 5 dose: gemcitabine 450 mg/m/wk and carboplatin 2 area under curve (AUC) concurrently with thoracic radiation. Cohort 7 (gemcitabine 600 mg/m/wk and carboplatin 2 AUC) showed 4 dose limiting toxicities: 2 grade 3 esophagitis; one grade 3 febrile neutropenia; and one grade 4 neutropenia. CONCLUSION: Concurrent gemcitabine/paclitaxel chemoradiation regimen followed by adjuvant gemcitabine/carboplatin produced excessive toxicity at the lowest tested dose combination and was not suitable for further study in this trial. Meanwhile, the MTD of concurrent gemcitabine/carboplatin chemoradiation was determined to be gemcitabine 450 mg/m and carboplatin AUC-2. This combination was found to be tolerable. Although not a primary end point, survival results are summarized as well.

Can physicians accurately predict survival time in patients with metastatic cancer? Analysis of RTOG 97-14.

PURPOSE: To determine if physician prediction of survival duration (PSD) is accurate for patients with metastatic breast or prostate cancer. METHODS: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9714 (RTOG 9714) was a randomized comparison of radiotherapy schedules for treatment of bone metastases. The treating physician assigned a baseline Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS) and predicted survival duration at study entry. Patients completed the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT). These three were compared to actual survival time. RESULTS: Eight hundred ninety-eight patients were eligible and analyzable. Actual median survival was 9.3 months. The median PSD was 12 months. PSD, KPS, and FACT were all moderately correlated with actual survival. Patients with higher KPS had a longer survival time (882 patients, Spearman's rho = 0.259, p < 0.0001). The median survival of the 618 expired patients is 6.5 months (PSD was 12 months). The PSD was within 1 month of actual survival in 61 (10%), with 177 (29%) patients surviving more than 1 month longer than predicted and 375 (61%) surviving more than 1 month less than predicted. A univariate analysis of actual overall survival was performed, dividing the PSD into 4 groups. For predicted survivals of 6 months or less, less than 6 to less than 12 months, 12 months, and more than 12 months, median actual survivals were 7.0, 7.2, 9.7. and 13.5 months (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: KPS, FACT scores, and PSD all are correlated with actual survival. Physicians on this study were able to predict which patients would have longer survival times, although prediction of survival was optimistic compared to actual survival by an average of 3 months.

Phase 2 trial of radiation plus high-dose tamoxifen for glioblastoma multiforme: RTOG protocol BR-0021.

Preclinical studies support the concept that inhibition of protein kinase C (PKC) by tamoxifen (TAM) should provide both antineoplastic effects and radiosensitization. High-dose TAM (80 mg/m2 p.o. daily in divided doses) was given with and after conventional radiotherapy (XRT) to inhibit PKC-mediated signaling, which is known to be enhanced in glioblastoma (GBM). Seventy-seven patients were accrued between December 2000 and December 2001; two were ineligible and not included in the efficacy results. Pretreatment characteristics of the patients included the following: 52% were less than 60 years of age, 39% had a Zubrod score of 0, 70% had minor or no neurological symptoms, and 65% were Radiation Therapy Oncology Group-recursive partition analysis (RPA) class III and IV. Eighty-six percent of patients achieved acceptable dosing of TAM. Notable toxicity included late radiation grade 3 in two patients and thromboembolic events in 16 patients (two grade 2, 10 grade 3, three grade 4, and one grade 5), for an incidence of 20.8% (which is lower than expected, based on the literature for deep vein thrombophlebitis in GBM patients not receiving TAM). Median survival time (MST) was 9.7 months as compared (by three different statistical methodologies) to the historical GBM control database of 1457 RPA class III, IV, and V drug/XRT-treated patients. After controlling for RPA class IV, the MST was 11.3 months, which compares to the historical RPA control of 11.3 months (P = 0.37). The results obtained do not exhibit a substantial advance over those of previous studies with various XRT/drug doublets, including BCNU. However, as TAM does not have significant overlapping toxicities with most other drugs, its testing in a combined modality approach with other medications may be justified in future clinical trials. Historically, the incidence of thromboembolic events in GBM patients is approximately 30%. The lower-than-expected incidence seen here has also been observed in other high-dose TAM GBM studies. We speculate that TAM inhibited the PKC-mediated phosphorylation of coagulation factors.

Randomized trial of short- versus long-course radiotherapy for palliation of painful bone metastases.

BACKGROUND: Radiation therapy is effective in palliating pain from bone metastases. We investigated whether 8 Gy delivered in a single treatment fraction provides pain and narcotic relief that is equivalent to that of the standard treatment course of 30 Gy delivered in 10 treatment fractions over 2 weeks. METHODS: A prospective, phase III randomized study of palliative radiation therapy was conducted for patients with breast or prostate cancer who had one to three sites of painful bone metastases and moderate to severe pain. Patients were randomly assigned to 8 Gy in one treatment fraction (8-Gy arm) or to 30 Gy in 10 treatment fractions (30-Gy arm). Pain relief at 3 months after randomization was evaluated with the Brief Pain Inventory. The Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test was used to compare response to treatment in terms of pain and narcotic relief between the two arms and for each stratification variable. All statistical comparisons were two-sided. RESULTS: There were 455 patients in the 8-Gy arm and 443 in the 30-Gy arm; pretreatment characteristics were equally balanced between arms. Grade 2-4 acute toxicity was more frequent in the 30-Gy arm (17%) than in the 8-Gy arm (10%) (difference = 7%, 95% CI = 3% to 12%; P = .002). Late toxicity was rare (4%) in both arms. The overall response rate was 66%. Complete and partial response rates were 15% and 50%, respectively, in the 8-Gy arm compared with 18% and 48% in the 30-Gy arm (P = .6). At 3 months, 33% of all patients no longer required narcotic medications. The incidence of subsequent pathologic fracture was 5% for the 8-Gy arm and 4% for the 30-Gy arm. The retreatment rate was statistically significantly higher in the 8-Gy arm (18%) than in the 30-Gy arm (9%) (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Both regimens were equivalent in terms of pain and narcotic relief at 3 months and were well tolerated with few adverse effects. The 8-Gy arm had a higher rate of re-treatment but had less acute toxicity than the 30-Gy arm.

A phase III comparison of radiation therapy with or without recombinant beta-interferon for poor-risk patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (RTOG 93-04).

PURPOSE: The results of Phase I/II data testing beta-interferon with radiation therapy in a non-small-cell lung cancer population were promising. Based on these data, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) initiated a Phase III trial to test the efficacy of beta-interferon in poor-risk patients with Stages IIIA and IIIB non-small-cell lung carcinoma. METHODS: Between September 1994 and March 1998, 123 patients were accrued to this trial. Enrolled patients were not eligible for other chemoradiation studies within the RTOG. Eligibility criteria included histologically confirmed Stage IIIA or IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer (according to American Joint Committee on Cancer) considered clinically inoperable or unresectable at the time of surgery. Patients were required to have a Karnofsky performance status 50-70 or >70 and at least 5% weight loss over the preceding 3 months. Betaseron (recombinant human interferon beta(ser), rHuIFN-beta(ser),) was the chosen preparation of beta-interferon. The patients randomized to the investigational arm received 16 x 10(6) IU of Betaseron by i.v. bolus given 3 days a week (Monday-Wednesday) on Weeks 1, 3, and 5. The Betaseron was given 30 minutes before radiation therapy for a total of nine doses. Irradiation was delivered at 2 Gy per fraction, 5 days a week, for a total of 60 Gy over 6 weeks and was identical for both arms. The primary end point of the trial was overall survival with local control as a secondary end point. Toxicities occurring within 90 days of therapy completion were defined as acute. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 4 years (range: 2.5-6 years) for surviving patients. Seventy-six percent of all patients completed beta-interferon. Toxicity was the primary reason for noncompliance. Radiotherapy (RT) compliance was excellent in the RT-alone arm, with 94% completing therapy, compared to 82% in the beta-interferon arm (p = 0.0475). Grade 3 and 4 acute toxicities were higher on the beta-interferon arm (p = 0.0249). Grade 3 and 4 acute toxicities were primarily related to lung (n = 8) and esophagus (n = 7). No Grade 4 or 5 late toxicities were seen for patients in the radiation-alone arm. However, three patients on the beta-interferon arm experienced Grade 4 toxicity, and one patient died. The 1-year survival rate for the RT-alone arm was 44% with a median survival time of 9.5 months. The 1-year survival on the beta-interferon arm was 42% with a median survival of 10.3 months. There was no statistical difference in survival times (p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter, controlled Phase III trial failed to confirm the efficacy of Betaseron in patients receiving definitive radiotherapy for locally advanced, nonmetastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. The use of beta-interferon led to greater rates of both acute and late treatment-related toxicity. The RTOG continues to investigate other biologic modifiers that may provide a nontoxic alternative for this poor-risk population.