A Systematic Review of Prognostic Factors in Patients with Cancer Receiving Palliative Radiotherapy: Evidence-Based Recommendations.

(1) Background: Prognostication in patients with cancer receiving palliative radiotherapy remains a challenge. To improve the process, we aim to identify prognostic factors in this population from the literature and offer evidence-based recommendations on prognostication in patients undergoing palliative radiotherapy for non-curable or advanced cancers. (2) Methods: A systematic review was performed on the medical literature from 2005 to 2023 to extract papers on the prognosis of palliative radiotherapy patients with advanced cancer. The initial selection was performed by at least two authors to determine study relevance to the target area. Studies were then classified based on type and evidence quality to determine final recommendations. (3) Results: The literature search returned 57 papers to be evaluated. Clinical and biological prognostic factors were identified from these papers to improve clinical decision making or construct prognostic models. Twenty prognostic models were identified for clinical use. There is moderate evidence supporting (i) evidence-based factors (patient, clinical, disease, and lab) in guiding decision making around palliative radiation; (ii) that certain biological factors are of importance; (iii) prognostication models in patients with advanced cancer; and that (iv) SBRT or re-irradiation use can be guided by predictions of survival by prognostic scores or clinicians. Patients with more favorable prognoses are generally better suited to SBRT or re-irradiation, and the use of prognostic models can aid in this decision making. (4) Conclusions: This evaluation has identified several factors or tools to aid in prognosis and clinical decision making. Future studies should aim to further validate these tools and factors in a clinical setting, including the leveraging of electronic medical records for data availability. To increase our understanding of how causal factors interact with palliative radiotherapy, future studies should also examine and include prediction of response to radiation as an outcome.

An Economic Analysis of SC24 in Canada: A Randomized Study of SBRT Compared With Conventional Palliative RT for Spinal Metastases.

PURPOSE: The Canadian Cancer Trials Group (CCTG) Symptom Control 24 protocol (SC.24) was a multicenter randomized controlled phase 2/3 trial conducted in Canada and Australia. Patients with painful spinal metastases were randomized to either 24 Gy/2 stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) or 20 Gy/5 conventional external beam radiation therapy (CRT). The study met its primary endpoint and demonstrated superior complete pain response rates at 3 months following SBRT (35%) versus CRT (14%). SBRT planning and delivery is resource intensive. Given its benefits in SC.24, we performed an economic analysis to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of SBRT compared with CRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The trial recruited 229 patients. Cost-effectiveness was assessed using a Markov model taking into account observed survival, treatments costs, retreatment, and quality of life over the lifetime of the patient. The EORTC-QLU-C10D was used to determine quality of life values. Transition probabilities for outcomes were from available patient data. Health system costs were from the Canadian health care perspective and were based on 2021 Canadian dollars (CAD). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was expressed as the ratio of incremental cost to quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The impact of parameter uncertainty was investigated using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The base case for SBRT compared with CRT had an ICER of $9,040CAD per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the ICER was most sensitive to variations in the utility assigned to "No local failure" ($5,457CAD to $241,051CAD per QALY), adopting low and high estimates of utility and the cost of the SBRT (ICERs ranging from $7345-$123,361CAD per QALY). It was more robust to variations in assumptions around survival and response rate. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT is associated with higher upfront costs than CRT. The ICER shows that, within the Canadian health care system, SBRT with 2 fractions is likely to be more cost-effective than CRT.

An Analysis of Clinical and Systemic Factors Associated with Palliative Radiotherapy Delivery and Completion at the End of Life in Alberta, Canada.

Radiotherapy (RT) is often utilized for symptom control at the end of life. Palliative RT (pRT) may not be taken to completion by patients, thus decreasing clinical benefits and adversely impacting resource allocation. We determined rates of incomplete pRT and examined predictors of non-completion using an electronic questionnaire. Methods: A questionnaire was embedded within the RT electronic prescribing system for all five cancer centers of Alberta, Canada, between 2017 and 2020. Prescribing radiation oncologists (ROs) were tasked with completing the questionnaire. Treatment variables were collected for 2040 patients prescribed pRT. Details on pRT courses delivered and completed were used to determine rates of incomplete RT. Electronic medical records of a subset of 367 patients randomly selected from the 2040 patients were then analyzed to examine for association of non-completion of RT with patient, disease, and therapy-related factors. Results: Overall, 10% of patients did not complete pRT. The rate of single fractions prescribed as a proportion of all RT fractions increased from 18% (pre-2017: pre-study era) to 29% (2017-2020: study era) (p < 0.0001). After conducting multivariate analysis on the overall group, multiple lifetime malignancies (OR:0.64) or increasing the number of pRT fractions (OR:0.08-0.17) were associated with non-completion. Being selected for stereotactic RT (OR:3.75) or survival > 30 days post-RT prescription (OR:2.20-5.02) were associated with greater rates of RT completion. The ROs' estimates of life expectancy at the time of RT prescription were not predictive of RT completion. In the multivariate analysis of the 367-patient subset, the presence of hepatic metastases (OR 2.59), survival 30-59 days (OR 6.61) and survival 90+ days (OR 8.18) post-RT prescription were associated with pRT completion. Only increasing pRT fractionation (OR:0.05-0.2) was associated with non-completion. Conclusion: One in ten patients prescribed pRT did not complete their treatment course. Decreasing pRT fractionation and improving prognostication in patients near the end of life may decrease rates of incomplete RT courses.

Durvalumab-Associated Pneumonitis in Patients with Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Real-World Population Study.

The PACIFIC trial led to a new standard of care for patients with locally advanced lung cancer, but real-world practice has demonstrated that immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) pneumonitis can lead to significant clinical complications. This study aimed to examine the clinical predictors, outcomes, and healthcare utilization data in patients who received consolidation durvalumab. Using the Alberta Immunotherapy Database, NSCLC patients who received durvalumab in Alberta, Canada, from January 2018 to December 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. We examined incidence and predictive values of severe pneumonitis, with overall survival (OS) and time-to-treatment failure (TTF) using exploratory multivariate analyses. Of 189 patients, 91% were ECOG 0-1 and 85% had a partial response from chemoradiation prior to durvalumab. Median TTF and OS were not reached; 1-year OS was 82%. An amount of 26% developed any grade of pneumonitis; 9% had ≥grade 3 pneumonitis. Male gender and a pre-existing autoimmune condition were associated with severe pneumonitis. V20 was associated with any grade of pneumonitis. Pneumonitis development was found to be an independent risk factor for worse OS (p = 0.038) and TTF (p = 0.007). Our results suggest clinical and dosimetric predictive factors of durvalumab-associated pneumonitis. These results affirm the importance of careful patient selection for safe completion of consolidation durvalumab in real-world LA-NSCLC population.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional external beam radiotherapy in patients with painful spinal metastases: an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2/3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Conventional external beam radiotherapy is the standard palliative treatment for spinal metastases; however, complete response rates for pain are as low as 10-20%. Stereotactic body radiotherapy delivers high-dose, ablative radiotherapy. We aimed to compare complete response rates for pain after stereotactic body radiotherapy or conventional external beam radiotherapy in patients with painful spinal metastasis. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2/3 trial was done at 13 hospitals in Canada and five hospitals in Australia. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years and older, and had painful (defined as ≥2 points with the Brief Pain Inventory) MRI-confirmed spinal metastasis, no more than three consecutive vertebral segments to be included in the treatment volume, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, a Spinal Instability Neoplasia Score of less than 12, and no neurologically symptomatic spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a web-based, computer-generated allocation sequence to receive either stereotactic body radiotherapy at a dose of 24 Gy in two daily fractions or conventional external beam radiotherapy at a dose of 20 Gy in five daily fractions using standard techniques. Treatment assignment was done centrally by use of a minimisation method to achieve balance for the stratification factors of radiosensitivity, the presence or absence of mass-type tumour (extraosseous or epidural disease extension, or both) on imaging, and centre. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a complete response for pain at 3 months after radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and all safety and quality assurance analyses were done in the as-treated population (ie, all patients who received at least one fraction of radiotherapy). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02512965. FINDINGS: Between Jan 4, 2016, and Sept 27, 2019, 229 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive conventional external beam radiotherapy (n=115) or stereotactic body radiotherapy (n=114). All 229 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The median follow-up was 6·7 months (IQR 6·3-6·9). At 3 months, 40 (35%) of 114 patients in the stereotactic body radiotherapy group, and 16 (14%) of 115 patients in the conventional external beam radiotherapy group had a complete response for pain (risk ratio 1·33, 95% CI 1·14-1·55; p=0·0002). This significant difference was maintained in multivariable-adjusted analyses (odds ratio 3·47, 95% CI 1·77-6·80; p=0·0003). The most common grade 3-4 adverse event was grade 3 pain (five [4%] of 115 patients in the conventional external beam radiotherapy group vs five (5%) of 110 patients in the stereotactic body radiotherapy group). No treatment-related deaths were observed. INTERPRETATION: Stereotactic body radiotherapy at a dose of 24 Gy in two daily fractions was superior to conventional external beam radiotherapy at a dose of 20 Gy in five daily fractions in improving the complete response rate for pain. These results suggest that use of conformal, image-guided, stereotactically dose-escalated radiotherapy is appropriate in the palliative setting for symptom control for selected patients with painful spinal metastases, and an increased awareness of the need for specialised and multidisciplinary involvement in the delivery of end-of-life care is needed. FUNDING: Canadian Cancer Society and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Oncology Clinicians' Challenges to Providing Palliative Cancer Care-A Theoretical Domains Framework, Pan-Cancer System Survey.

Despite the known benefits, healthcare systems struggle to provide early, integrated palliative care (PC) for advanced cancer patients. Understanding the barriers to providing PC from the perspective of oncology clinicians is an important first step in improving care. A 33-item online survey was emailed to all oncology clinicians working with all cancer types in Alberta, Canada, from November 2017 to January 2018. Questions were informed by Michie's Theoretical Domains Framework and Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) and queried (a) PC provision in oncology clinics, (b) specialist PC consultation referrals, and (c) working with PC consultants and home care. Respondents (n = 263) were nurses (41%), physicians (25%), and allied healthcare professionals (18%). Barriers most frequently identified were "clinicians' limited time/competing priorities" (64%), "patients' negative perceptions of PC" (63%), and clinicians' capability to manage patients' social issues (63%). These factors mapped to all three BCW domains: motivation, opportunity, and capability. In contrast, the least frequently identified barriers were clinician motivation and perceived PC benefits. Oncology clinicians' perceptions of barriers to early PC were comparable across tumour types and specialties but varied by professional role. The main challenges to early integrated PC include all three BCW domains. Notably, motivation is not a barrier for oncology clinicians; however, opportunity and capability barriers were identified. Multifaceted interventions using these findings have been developed, such as tip sheets to enhance capability, reframing PC with patients, and earlier specialist PC nursing access, to enhance clinicians' use of and patients' benefits from an early PC approach.

Medical Cannabis Authorization in Patients With Cancer in the Prelegalization Era: A Population-Based Study.

CONTEXT: Studies show that patients with cancer use cannabis to manage symptoms and side effects. Medical cannabis is regulated by Health Canada; authorization patterns among cancer patients have not been well described. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study is to describe medical cannabis authorization in Alberta, Canada. METHODS: The Alberta Cancer Registry was used to identify all patients aged 18 years and older diagnosed with invasive cancer from April 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016. These cases were linked to records from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were constructed to determine factors associated with medical cannabis authorization. RESULTS: We identified 41,889 patients with cancer between April 1, 2014 and December 31, 2016. Of these patients, 1070 (2.6%) had a medical cannabis authorization. Fifty-one percent (541 of 1070) were authorized to use medical cannabis within one year of diagnosis, 52% (248 of 549) within one year of the start of systemic therapy, and 41% (128 of 312) within one year of the start of radiation therapy. Patients aged 18-29 (odds ratio [OR] 12.4; 95% CI 7.8-19.8), patients living in the Calgary zone (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.6-2.1), those with advanced disease (Stage III/IV: OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.0-1.4), and those receiving systemic therapy (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.7-2.4) were more likely to have an authorization for medical cannabis (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A small proportion of patients with cancer were authorized to use medical cannabis between 2014 and 2016 in Alberta. Authorization was associated with a cancer diagnosis and receiving treatment. Younger patients, those with advanced stage disease, and those undergoing systemic treatment were predictors of medical cannabis authorization.

Temporal order of cancers and mental disorders in an adult population.

BACKGROUND: Population-based examination of comorbidity is an emerging field of study. AIMS: The purpose of the present population level study is to expand our understanding of how cancer and mental illness are temporally associated. METHOD: A sample of 83 648 056 physician billing records for 664 838 (56% female) unique individuals over the age of 18 was stratified on ages 19-49 years and 50+ years, with temporal order of mental disorder and cancer forming the basis of comparison. RESULTS: Mental disorders preceded cancers for both genders within each age strata. The full range of cancers and mental disorders preceding or following each pivot ICD class are described in terms of frequency of diagnosis and duration in days, with specific examples illustrated. CONCLUSIONS: The temporal comorbidity between specific cancers and mental disorders may be useful in screening or clinical planning and may represent indicators of disease mechanism that warrant further screening or investigation. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: None.

A population-based study examining the influence of a specialized rapid-access cancer clinic on initial treatment choice in localized prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment decisions in localized prostate cancer are complicated by the available choices. A rapid-access cancer clinic (RAC) has been unique to Calgary, AB, since 2007. This RAC offers multidisciplinary prostate cancer education by a urologist, medical oncologist, and radiation oncologist. It is hypothesized that treatment utilization data from decisions taken at RAC may serve to benchmark the appropriateness of treatment decisions on a population level. METHODS: Records of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer in Alberta between October 1, 2007 and September 30, 2009 were reviewed with ethics approval. Records were linked to the Alberta Cancer Registry database. Clinical, treatment, and health services characteristics pertaining to patients attending RAC were compared to the general population. The primary endpoint was utilization rates of each initial treatment. RESULTS: During this two-year period, 2838 patients were diagnosed with localized prostate cancer; 375 attended RAC. The utilization rates among RAC patients vs. the whole Alberta population were: prostatectomy 60.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 55.3-65.2) vs. 48.0% (95% CI 47.1-50.7; χ2 p<0.001); active surveillance 16.0% (95% CI 12.3-19.7%) vs. 13.5% (95% CI 12.2-15.8; χ2 p=0.214); radiotherapy 11.7% (95% CI 8.5-15.0) vs. 18.0% (95% CI 16.9-20.5; χ2 p=0.002); and hormone therapy 8.0% (95% CI 5.2-10.8) vs. 17.4% (95% CI 16.1-18.9; χ2 p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A specialized clinic for localized prostate cancer may be associated with a higher likelihood of receiving surgery or active surveillance as initial treatment compared to the prostate cancer population in Alberta.

Determining the need and utilization of radiotherapy in cancers of the breast, cervix, lung, prostate and rectum: A population level study.

PURPOSE: Determining the appropriate rate of radiotherapy (RT) utilization is important for health care planning and resource allocation. The difference between the observed and the appropriate RT rate is influenced by the choice of a criterion based benchmarking (CBB) or evidence-based estimates (EBEST) measure. Our primary objective was to determine the utilization of radiotherapy for cancers of the breast (B), cervix (C), lung (L), prostate (P) and rectum (R) in Alberta (AB) Canada and to compare the observed RT rates to estimates of need derived from the criterion based benchmarking (CBB) and evidence-based estimates (EBEST). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All incident cases of B,C,L,P and R cancers diagnosed in AB during 2004-8 (prior to the decentralization of provincial RT capacity) were identified from the Alberta Cancer Registry. Patients receiving RT within one year (RT-1y) of diagnosis were identified and the proportion receiving RT-1y was then calculated. Factors associated with RT utilization were analysed by region. Estimates of the need for RT were derived from CBB and EBEST methods in the literature. RESULTS: A total of n=68,164 cancer cases were identified from the ACR. RT-1y rates (95% C.I.) were B: 51.5% (50.1-52.9), C: 48.9% (43.8-54.0), L: 37.1% (35.4-38.8), P: 26.9% (25.1-28.7) and R: 39.3% (36.5-42.1). Observed rates of RT in AB were lower than estimates derived using the CBB and EBEST estimates. Shortfalls varied across cancer sites according to whether a CBB or EBEST estimate was used ranging from a low of -0.3% in cancer of the cervix to a high of 30.3% in rectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: RT shortfalls exist in the utilization of RT in AB, Canada despite centralized cancer care and a publically funded health care system. Decisions to address shortfalls need to be mindful of how model selection can impact on findings.

Factors Associated With the Use of Radiation Therapy in Patients With Stage III Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in Alberta, Canada: A Population-based Study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer care in Alberta, Canada is publicly funded and provides patients with access to health care facilities and providers. The distribution of patients and health services across Alberta presents challenges to the delivery of cancer care, especially radiation therapy. In this study, we examined the association between patient and health system factors, the use of radiation therapy and survival outcomes in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The provincial cancer registry was used to identify all patients who presented with clinical stage III NSCLC, diagnosed from 2005 to 2007, in Alberta. Patient characteristics, diagnostic method, treatment modality and treatment outcomes were collected from provincial health information systems for analyses. Factors influencing overall survival (OS) were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Nine hundred twenty-nine patients were identified. Sixty-two percent of patients received radiation therapy (RT) as part of their initial cancer treatment and had a median OS of 1.04 vs. 0.34 years with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.54. On multivariable analysis, patients who were less likely to receive any therapy were older, had higher comorbidity scores and were registered in community cancer centers without radiation therapy infrastructure. Patients registered in tertiary cancer centers had a higher likelihood of accessing multimodality treatment than patients in community centers, with a statistical significance of P<0.001 after correcting for age, gender, histology, substage, and comorbidity. INTERPRETATION: Improving access to radiotherapy treatment for patients presenting to non-radiation therapy centers at diagnosis has the potential to decrease variations in cancer care and improve cancer control outcomes in clinical stage III NSCLC.

Assessing guideline impact on referral patterns of post-prostatectomy patients to radiation oncologists.

INTRODUCTION: Adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) can improve biochemical progression-free survival in patients with high-risk features (HRF) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Guidelines from Alberta and the Genitourinary Radiation Oncologists of Canada (GUROC) recommend that patients with HRF be referred to radiation oncologists (RO) based on the findings from three randomized, controlled trials (RCT). Our study examines the impact of these recommendations both pre- (2005) and post- (2012) publication of RCT and GUROC guideline establishment. METHODS: Patients undergoing RP during 2005 and 2012 were identified from the provincial cancer registry. Charts were retrospectively reviewed and variables of interest were linked to the registry data. RO referral patterns for each year were determined and variables influencing referral (extracapsular extension, positive margin, seminal vesicle invasion, and post-RP prostate-specific antigen [PSA]) were compared. RESULTS: Median time to referral was 26.4 months in 2005 compared to 3.7 months 2012 (p<0.001). Among patients referred post-RP, a higher proportion was referred within six months in 2012 (21%) as compared to 2005 (13%) (p=0.003). Among eligible patients in 2012, 30% were referred for discussion of aRT compared to 24% in 2005 (p=0.003). There was a marked drop in patients referred for salvage radiation therapy beyond six months and a rise in the number of patients who are never referred. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an increase in referral rates to RO post-RP from 2005-2012, more than 50% of those patients with HRF did not receive a referral. Initiatives aimed at improving multidisciplinary care and guideline adherence should be undertaken.

An audit of referral and treatment patterns of high-risk prostate cancer patients in Alberta.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to determine the impact of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) on rates of radiation oncologist (RO) referral, androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), radiation therapy (RT), and radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa). METHODS: All men >18 years, diagnosed with PCa in 2005 and 2012 were identified from the Alberta Cancer Registry. Patient age, aggregated clinical risk group (ACRG) score, Gleason score (GS), pre-treatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA), RO referral, and treatment received were extracted from electronic medical records. Logistic regression modelling was used to examine associations between RO referral rates and relevant factors. RESULTS: HR-PCa was diagnosed in 261 of 1792 patients in 2005 and 435 of 2148 in 2012. Median age and ACRG scores were similar in both years (p>0.05). The rate of patients with PSA >20 were 67% and 57% in 2005 and 2012, respectively (p=0.004). GS ≤6 was found in 13% vs. 5% of patients, GS 7 in 27% vs. 24%, and GS ≥8 in 59% vs. 71% in 2005 and 2012, respectively (p<0.001). In 2005, RO referral rate was 68% compared to 56% in 2012 (p=0.001), use of RT + ADT was 53% compared to 32% (p<0.001), and RP rate was 9% vs. 17% (p=0.002). On regression analysis, older age, 2012 year of diagnosis and higher PSA were associated with decreased RO referral rates (odds ratios [OR] 0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.61; OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34-0.76; and OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.39-0.61), respectively [p<0.001]). CONCLUSIONS: Since CPG creation in 2005, RO referral rates and ADT + RT use declined and RP rates increased, which demonstrates a need to improve adherence to CPG in the HR-PCa population.

Outcomes in stage I non-small cell lung cancer following the introduction of stereotactic body radiotherapy in Alberta - A population-based study.

PURPOSE: To review outcomes of patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) following the introduction of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). METHODS: SBRT cases were linked to the cancer registry database along with clinical, treatment and health service parameters for n=2146 cases of stage I NSCLC diagnosed between 2005 and 2011. The pre-diagnosis Aggregated Clinical Risk Grouping score (ACRG3) was used as a proxy for pre-treatment patient comorbidity. A Cox regression model and the concordance statistic (C-statistic) were used to examine variables predicted for overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The SBRT utilization rate increased annually with superior OS to conventional RT (median survival [MS] of 39.4 VS. 23.5months, P<0.001) despite higher ACRG3 scores. Surgical patients were younger, had lower ACRG3, achieving MS of 69.6months. Regression analysis indicated both Surgery (hazard ratio [HR]=0.23, 95% CI: 0.18-0.28) and SBRT (HR=0.33, 95% CI: 0.21-0.51) remained most strongly associated with OS. ACRG3 (HR=0.79, P<0.001) and age (HR=0.83, P=0.03) were independently associated with OS. The OS model was associated with the C-statistic at 0.86, 95% CI: 0.81-0.90. CONCLUSION: In stage I NSCLC patients treated with surgery have the best survival. SBRT demonstrates improved OS compared to conventional RT. C-statistic result demonstrates discrimination of treatment selection factors on OS.

Effect of re-irradiation for painful bone metastases on urinary markers of osteoclast activity (NCIC CTG SC.20U).

PURPOSE: The NCIC CTG Symptom Control.20 randomized trial (SC.20) confirmed the effectiveness of re-irradiation to painful bone metastases. This companion study correlates urinary markers of osteoclast activity with response to re-irradiation, survival and skeletal related events (SREs). METHODS: Pain response was assessed using the International Consensus Endpoints. Urinary markers of bone turnover-pyridinoline (PYD), deoxypyridinoline (DPD), N-telopeptide (NTX), Alpha and Beta cross-laps of C-telopeptide (CTX)-before and 1month after re-irradiation were correlated to response to re-irradiation and then to both, either or none of the initial and re-irradiation: frequent responders (response to both); eventual responders (response to re-irradiation only); eventual non-responders (response to initial radiation only), and absolute non-responders (no response to both). RESULTS: Significant differences between 40 responders and 69 non-responders to re-irradiation existed for PYD (p=0.03) and DPD (p=0.04) at baseline. When patients were categorized as frequent responders (N=34), eventual responders (6), eventual non-responders (59) and absolute non-responders (10), the mean values of all markers in the absolute non-responders at baseline and the follow-up were about double those for the other three groups with statistically significant difference for DPD (p=0.03) at baseline. Absolute non-responders had the worst survival. The few occurrences of the SREs did not allow meaningful comparisons among the groups. CONCLUSION: There were significant differences between responders and non-responders to re-irradiation for PYD and DPD at baseline. The urinary markers in the absolute non-responders were markedly elevated at both baseline and follow-up with a statistically significant difference for DPD at baseline.

Minimal clinically important differences in the EORTC QLQ-BN20 in patients with brain metastases.

INTRODUCTION: Quality of life (QOL) is an important treatment endpoint in advanced cancer patients with brain metastases. In clinical trials, statistically significant changes can be reached in a large enough population; however, these changes may not be clinically relevant. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire brain module (EORTC QLQ-BN20) in patients with brain metastases. METHODS: Patients undergoing radiotherapy for brain metastases completed the EORTC QLQ-BN20 and QLQ-C30/C15-PAL at baseline and 1-month follow-up. MCIDs were calculated for both improvement and deterioration using anchor- and distribution-based approaches. The anchor of overall QOL (as assessed by question 30 or question 15 on the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-C15-PAL, respectively) was used to determine meaningful change. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients were included. The average age was 61 years, and the most common primary cancer sites were the lung and breast. Statistically significant meaningful differences were seen on two scales. A decrease of 6.1 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.8 to 11.4) units and 13.8 (0.2 to 27.4) units was required to represent clinically relevant deterioration of seizures and weakness of legs, respectively. Distribution-based MCID estimates tended to be closer to 0.5 SD on the EORTC QLQ-BN20. CONCLUSION: Understanding MCIDs allows physicians to determine the impact of treatment on patients' QOL and allows for determination of sample sizes for clinical trials. Future studies should be conducted to validate our findings in a larger population of patients with brain metastases.

Quality of life in patients with brain metastases using the EORTC QLQ-BN20+2 and QLQ-C15-PAL.

PURPOSE: The 20-item European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Brain Neoplasm (QLQ-BN20) is a validated quality-of-life (QOL) questionnaire for patients with primary brain tumors. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 15 Palliative (QLQ-C15-PAL) core palliative questionnaire is a 15-item version of the core 30-item QLQ-C30 and was developed to decrease the burden on patients with advanced cancer. The combination of the QLQ-BN20 and QLQ-C30 to assess QOL may be too burdensome for patients. The primary aim of this study was to assess QOL in patients before and after treatment for brain metastases using the QLQ-BN20+2 and QLQ-C15-PAL, a version of the QLQ-BN20 questionnaire with 2 additional questions assessing cognitive functioning that were not addressed in the QLQ-C15-PAL. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with brain metastases completed the QLQ-C15-PAL and QLQ-BN20+2 questionnaires to assess QOL before and 1 month after radiation. Linear regression analysis was used to assess changes in QOL scores over time, as well as to explore associations between the QLQ-BN20+2 and QLQ-C15-PAL scales, patient demographics, and clinical variables. Spearman correlation assessed associations between the QLQ-BN20+2 and QLQ-C15-PAL scales. RESULTS: Among 108 patients, the majority (55%) received whole-brain radiotherapy only, with 65% of patients completing follow-up at 1 month after treatment. The most prominent symptoms at baseline were future uncertainty (QLQ-BN20+2) and fatigue (QLQ-C15-PAL). After treatment, significant improvement was seen for the QLQ-C15-PAL insomnia scale, as well as the QLQ-BN20+2 scales of future uncertainty, visual disorder, and concentration difficulty. Baseline Karnofsky Performance Status was negatively correlated to QLQ-BN20+2 motor dysfunction but positively related to QLQ-C15-PAL physical functioning and QLQ-BN20+2 cognitive functioning at baseline and follow-up. QLQ-BN20+2 scales of future uncertainty and motor dysfunction correlated with the most QLQ-C15-PAL scales, including overall QOL (negative association) at baseline and follow-up. CONCLUSION: After radiation, the questionnaires showed maintenance of QOL and improvement of QOL scores such as future uncertainty, which featured prominently in this patient population. It is proposed that the 37-item QLQ-BN20+2 and QLQ-C15-PAL, as opposed to the 50-item QLQ-BN20 and QLQ-C30, may be used together as a universal QOL assessment tool in this setting.

Estimating the need for radiotherapy for patients with prostate, breast, and lung cancers: verification of model estimates of need with radiotherapy utilization data from British Columbia.

PURPOSE: Estimates of the need for radiotherapy (RT) using different methods (criterion based benchmarking [CBB] and the Canadian [C-EBEST] and Australian [A-EBEST] epidemiologically based estimates) exist for various cancer sites. We compared these model estimates to actual RT rates for lung, breast, and prostate cancers in British Columbia (BC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: All cases of lung, breast, and prostate cancers in BC from 1997 to 2004 and all patients receiving RT within 1 year (RT(1Y)) and within 5 years (RT(5Y)) of diagnosis were identified. The RT(1Y) and RT(5Y) proportions in health regions with a cancer center for the most recent year were then calculated. RT rates were compared with CBB and EBEST estimates of RT needs. Variation was assessed by time and region. RESULTS: The RT(1Y) in regions with a cancer center for lung, breast, and prostate cancers were 51%, 58%, and 33% compared with 45%, 57%, and 32% for C-EBEST and 41%, 61%, and 37% for CBB models. The RT(5Y) rates in regions with a cancer center for lung, breast, and prostate cancers were 59%, 61%, and 40% compared with 61%, 66%, and 61% for C-EBEST and 75%, 83%, and 60% for A-EBEST models. The RT(1Y) rates increased for breast and prostate cancers. CONCLUSIONS: C-EBEST and CBB model estimates are closer to the actual RT rates than the A-EBEST estimates. Application of these model estimates by health care decision makers should be undertaken with an understanding of the methods used and the assumptions on which they were based.

Neuropathic pain features in patients with bone metastases referred for palliative radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: To estimate the prevalence of pain with neuropathic features among patients with metastatic bone pain and to assess differences between patients with and without neuropathic features by pain severity, functional interference, and quality-of-life (QOL) measures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional survey of consecutive patients with symptomatic bone metastases was conducted between December 2006 and March 2008 at a comprehensive cancer center. Patients completed the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the Self-Reported Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S-LANSS), and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). Statistical associations between pain with neuropathic features and other measures were explored. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were enrolled. Seventeen percent of patients (95% CI, 10% to 24%) had positive S-LANSS scores suggesting pain with neuropathic features. Mean worst pain and mean interference scores were 7.2 (standard deviation [SD], 2.0) and 5.8 (SD, 2.5), respectively. EORTC QLQ-C30 global QOL, function, and symptom scores were 42 (SD, 24), 52 (SD, 20), and 46 (SD, 17), respectively. Patients with neuropathic features had a higher BPI worst pain score than patients without neuropathic features (8.3 v 7.0, respectively; P = .016). Corticosteroid use, oral morphine equivalent dosing, and site of bone pain were not associated with neuropathic features. CONCLUSION: Some patients with bone metastases manifest bone pain with distinguishable neuropathic features, and these patients reported greater pain intensity. Additional work is required to validate the S-LANSS against clinical criteria for neuropathic pain in this context and to explore the unmet pain management needs in this population.

Patterns of practice in palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastases: impact of a regional rapid access clinic on access to care.

PURPOSE: External beam radiotherapy (RT) is commonly indicated for the palliation of symptomatic bone metastases, but there is evidence of underutilization of this treatment modality in palliative care for cancer populations. This study was conducted to investigate factors that influenced the use of palliative RT services at a regional comprehensive cancer center. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A cohort of patients with radiographically confirmed bone metastases and first-time users of palliative RT between 2003 and 2005 was retrospectively reviewed from the time of initial diagnosis of bone metastases to death or last follow-up. Type of radiation treatment service provider used (rapid access or routine access) and patient-, tumor-, and treatment-related factors were analyzed for their influences on the number of treatment courses given over the duration of disease. RESULTS: A total of 887 patients received 1,354 courses of palliative RT for bone metastases at a median interval of 4.0 months between courses. Thirty-three percent of patients required more than one RT course. Increased age and travel distance reduced the likelihood and number of treatment courses, while service through a rapid access clinic was independently associated with an increase in subsequent use of palliative RT. CONCLUSIONS: A rapid access service model for palliative RT facilitated access to RT. Travel distance and other factors remained substantial barriers to use of palliative RT services. The pattern of practice suggests an unmet need for symptom control in patients with bone metastases.