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.

Assessing the effectiveness of palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastases in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.

Palliative radiotherapy (RT) effectively relieves pain in patients with bone metastases (BMs). Furthermore, several clinical trials, in most cases conducted in high-income countries (HICs), proved that single-fraction RT is equally effective compared to multi-fractionated RT. However, the evidence is scarce regarding low/middle-income countries (LMICs), where the diagnosis of BMs could be later and RT techniques less advanced. Therefore, we conducted a systematic literature review to evaluate the efficacy of palliative RT of BMs in the LMIC setting. A literature search was performed independently by two authors on the PubMed, Cochrane and Scopus databases. Overall, 333 records were screened and after the selection process, 11 papers were included in the analysis. Complete pain response rates ranged from 11.5% to 37.1% (median: 22%) for single-fraction RT and from 0% to 35.1% (median: 19%) for multi-fractionated RT. Partial pain response rates ranged from 23.1% to 76.9% (median: 53.8%) for single fraction RT and from 23.8% to 84.6% (median: 65%) for multi-fractionated RT. Four randomized trials compared single-fraction RT with multiple-fraction RT and none of them showed significant differences in terms of pain relief. Our analysis showed that pain response rates after palliative RT recorded in LMIC are like those reported in studies performed in HIC. Even in this setting, RT in single fraction shows comparable pain response rates to multifractional RT.

Further Clarification of Pain Management Complexity in Radiotherapy: Insights from Modern Statistical Approaches.

BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this study was to assess the adequacy of analgesic care in radiotherapy (RT) patients, with a secondary objective to identify predictive variables associated with pain management adequacy using a modern statistical approach, integrating the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) algorithm and the Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analysis. METHODS: This observational, multicenter cohort study involved 1387 patients reporting pain or taking analgesic drugs from 13 RT departments in Italy. The Pain Management Index (PMI) served as the measure for pain control adequacy, with a PMI score < 0 indicating suboptimal management. Patient demographics, clinical status, and treatment-related factors were examined to discern the predictors of pain management adequacy. RESULTS: Among the analyzed cohort, 46.1% reported inadequately managed pain. Non-cancer pain origin, breast cancer diagnosis, higher ECOG Performance Status scores, younger patient age, early assessment phase, and curative treatment intent emerged as significant determinants of negative PMI from the LASSO analysis. Notably, pain management was observed to improve as RT progressed, with a greater discrepancy between cancer (33.2% with PMI < 0) and non-cancer pain (73.1% with PMI < 0). Breast cancer patients under 70 years of age with non-cancer pain had the highest rate of negative PMI at 86.5%, highlighting a potential deficiency in managing benign pain in younger patients. CONCLUSIONS: The study underscores the dynamic nature of pain management during RT, suggesting improvements over the treatment course yet revealing specific challenges in non-cancer pain management, particularly among younger breast cancer patients. The use of advanced statistical techniques for analysis stresses the importance of a multifaceted approach to pain management, one that incorporates both cancer and non-cancer pain considerations to ensure a holistic and improved quality of oncological care.

Appropriateness of Mini-Invasive Approaches for Nausea and Vomiting Refractory to Medical Therapy in Palliative Care Setting: A Case Report.

Introduction: Nausea and vomiting are frequent multifactorial symptoms in oncological patients. These manifestations, mainly affecting the advanced disease stages, may lead to existential, psychological, and physical suffering, with a negative impact on the quality of life (QoL) of the individual and his family. The medical approach makes use of a wide range of drugs, with different antiemetic potency and various mechanisms of action, taking into account the etiology and the patient's response to the different therapeutic strategies. In recent years, in addition to pharmacological treatments, some endoscopic procedures have been integrated into clinical practice as promising palliative approaches. Case Presentation: Herein, we describe and discuss a case of a 64-year-old female affected by advanced stage pancreatic adenocarcinoma, in which different techniques - both medical and endoscopic - have been used to approach a refractory symptomatology with a negative impact on the patient's QoL. In the context of a multidisciplinary approach in primary palliative care, a tailored intervention encompassing invasive methods for palliative purposes, may be considered adequate and appropriate when the prognostic expectation and the physical functionality indices allow it. Conclusion: Minimally invasive palliative interventions should be offered to patients with advanced cancer when symptoms become refractory to standard medical therapies, as part of the holistic approach in modern treatments. Therefore, the integration of an early palliative approach into the patient's therapeutic path becomes essential for the management of all the individual's needs.

Timely Palliative Care Could Be Another Benefit for Cancer Patients with Non-Malignant Pain.

Cancer patients, as well as individuals in the general population, suffer from non-malignant pain (NMP), although with variable prevalence in the few studies dealing with this topic [...].

Identification of palliative care needs and prognostic factors of survival in tailoring appropriate interventions in advanced oncological, renal and pulmonary diseases: a prospective observational protocol.

INTRODUCTION: It is estimated that of those who die in high-income countries, 69%-82% would benefit from palliative care with a high prevalence of advanced chronic conditions and limited life prognosis. A positive response to these challenges would consist of integrating the palliative approach into all healthcare settings, for patients with all types of advanced medical conditions, although poor clinician awareness and the difficulty of applying criteria to identify patients in need still pose significant barriers. The aim of this project is to investigate whether the combined use of the NECPAL CCOMS-ICO and Palliative Prognostic (PaP) Score tools offers valuable screening methods to identify patients suffering from advanced chronic disease with limited life prognosis and likely to need palliative care, such as cancer, chronic renal or chronic respiratory failure. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multicentre prospective observational study includes three patient populations: 100 patients with cancer, 50 patients with chronic renal failure and 50 patients with chronic pulmonary failure. All patients will be treated and monitored according to local clinical practice, with no additional procedures/patient visits compared with routine clinical practice. The following data will be collected for each patient: demographic variables, NECPAL CCOMS-ICO questionnaire, PaP Score evaluation, Palliative Performance Scale, Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status and data concerning the underlying disease, in order to verify the correlation of the two tools (PaP and NECPAL CCOMS-ICO) with patient status and statistical analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by local ethics committees and written informed consent was obtained from the patient. Findings will be disseminated through typical academic routes including poster/paper presentations at national and international conferences and academic institutes, and through publication in peer-reviewed journals.

Radiotherapy and palliative care outpatient clinic: a new healthcare integrated model in Italy.

BACKGROUND: On the basis of substantial evidence demonstrate that palliative care combined with standard care improves patient, caregiver, and society outcomes, we have developed a new healthcare model called radiotherapy and palliative care (RaP) outpatient clinic were a radiation oncologist and a palliative care physician make a joint evaluation of advanced cancer patients. METHODS: We performed a monocentric observational cohort study on advanced cancer patients referred for evaluation at the RaP outpatient clinic. Measures of quality of care were carried out. RESULTS: Between April 2016 and April 2018, 287 joint evaluations were performed and 260 patients were evaluated. The primary tumor was lung in 31.9% of cases. One hundred fifty (52.3%) evaluations resulted in an indication for palliative radiotherapy treatment. In 57.6% of cases was used a single dose fraction of radiotherapy (8 Gy). All the irradiated cohort completed the palliative radiotherapy treatment. An 8% of irradiated patients received the palliative radiotherapy treatment in the last 30 days of life. A total of 80% of RaP patients received palliative care assistance until the end of life. CONCLUSION: At the first descriptive analysis, the radiotherapy and palliative care model seem to respond to the need of multidisciplinary approach in order to obtain an improvement on quality of care for advanced cancer patients.

Nurse-led telephone follow-up for early palliative care patients with advanced cancer.

AIM AND OBJECTIVES: To present our experience of a nursing telephone consultation service, describing patient and caregiver requests, and outlining ensuing nursing or medical interventions. BACKGROUND: Recently, there has been an increase in the use of telephone consultation for cancer patients. However, there is still limited data on the characteristics of this type of service and on the nature of the interventions carried out. DESIGN AND METHODS: In this observational retrospective study, we evaluated the phone calls made over a 6-month period by patients or caregivers to the early palliative care team of a cancer institute. Information regarding telephone calls (frequency, reason and management) was systematically collected by a nursing case manager. The study complies with the STROBE checklist File S1. RESULTS: 171 patients used the service, for a total of 323 phone calls. The majority (80.8%) were from patients followed at the outpatient clinic and the most common requests were for pain management (38.4%) and for updates on the clinical situation (23.8%). Other frequent requests were for medication management (18.9%) and scheduling (18.3%). 210 of the 323 phone calls were handled by the nurse, while 22 were managed in collaboration with a physician. An 87.6% effectiveness in telephone management was observed. CONCLUSION: The overall use of the phone service was higher for early palliative care patients. The majority of phone calls were effectively handled by the nursing case manager. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: An effective and feasible nurse-led telephone follow-up of early palliative care patients with advanced cancer could improve their care experience. Specifically, it could impact on patients and families improving quality of life and symptom control securing access to timely care without travel or additional cost.It can also improve continuity of care, adherence to oncological treatments and minimise acute care visits.

Adequacy of Pain Management in Patients Referred for Radiation Therapy: A Subanalysis of the Multicenter ARISE-1 Study.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a prevalent symptom among cancer patients, and its management is crucial for improving their quality of life. However, pain management in cancer patients referred to radiotherapy (RT) departments is often inadequate, and limited research has been conducted on this specific population. This study aimed to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of pain management when patients are referred for RT. Moreover, we explored potential predictors of adequate pain management. METHODS: This observational, prospective, multicenter cohort study included cancer patients aged 18 years or older who were referred to RT departments. A pain management assessment was conducted using the Pain Management Index (PMI), calculated by subtracting the pain score from the analgesic score (PMI < 0 indicated inadequate pain management). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictors of adequate pain management. RESULTS: A total of 1042 cancer outpatients were included in the study. The analysis revealed that 42.9% of patients with pain did not receive adequate pain management based on PMI values. Among patients with pain or taking analgesics and referred to palliative or curative RT, 72% and 75% had inadequate or ineffective analgesic therapy, respectively. The odds of receiving adequate pain management (PMI ≥ 0) were higher in patients undergoing palliative RT (OR 2.52; p < 0.001), with worse ECOG-PS scores of 2, 3 and 4 (OR 1.63, 2.23, 5.31, respectively; p: 0.017, 0.002, 0.009, respectively) compared to a score of 1 for those with cancer-related pain (OR 0.38; p < 0.001), and treated in northern Italy compared to central and southern of Italy (OR 0.25, 0.42, respectively; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, a substantial proportion of cancer patients referred to RT departments did not receive adequate pain management. Educational and organizational strategies are necessary to address the inadequate pain management observed in this population. Moreover, increasing the attention paid to non-cancer pain and an earlier referral of patients for palliative RT in the course of the disease may improve pain response and treatment outcomes.

Improving the Integration between Palliative Radiotherapy and Supportive Care: A Narrative Review.

Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) is known to be effective in relieving cancer related symptoms. However, many studies and clinical practice show several barriers hindering its use and worsening the quality of patient support during PRT. Various solutions were proposed to overcome these barriers: training on PRT for supportive and palliative care specialists and training on palliative care for radiation oncologists, and introduction of pathways and organizational models specifically dedicated to PRT. Evidence on innovative organizational models and mutual training experiences is few and sparse. Therefore, the aim of this literature review is to present a quick summary of the information available on improving the PRT quality through training, new pathways, and innovative organizational models. The majority of studies on the integration of PRT with other palliative and supportive therapies present low levels of evidence being mostly retrospective analyses. However, it should be emphasized that all reports uniformly showed advantages coming from the integration of PRT with supportive therapies. To actively participate in the integration of PRT and palliative care, providing comprehensive support to the needs of patients with advanced cancer, radiation oncologists should not only plan PRT but also: (i) assess and manage symptoms and stress, (ii) rapidly refer patients to specialists in management of more complex symptoms, and (iii) participate in multidisciplinary palliative care teams. To this end, improved education in palliative care both in residency schools and during professional life through continuous medical education is clearly needed. In particular, effective training is needed for radiotherapy residents to enable them to provide patients with comprehensive palliative care. Therefore, formal teaching of adequate duration, interactive teaching methods, attendance in palliative care services, and education in advanced palliative care should be planned in post-graduated schools of radiotherapy.

Adequacy of Pain Treatment in Radiotherapy Departments: Results of a Multicenter Study on 2104 Patients (Arise).

Aim: The frequent inadequacy of pain management in cancer patients is well known. Moreover, the quality of analgesic treatment in patients treated with radiotherapy (RT) has only been rarely assessed. In order to study the latter topic, we conducted a multicenter, observational and prospective study based on the Pain Management Index (PMI) in RT Italian departments. Methods: We collected data on age, gender, tumor site and stage, performance status, treatment aim, and pain (type: CP­cancer pain, NCP­non-cancer pain, MP­mixed pain; intensity: NRS: Numeric Rating Scale). Furthermore, we analyzed the impact on PMI on these parameters, and we defined a pain score with values from 0 (NRS: 0, no pain) to 3 (NRS: 7−10: intense pain) and an analgesic score from 0 (pain medication not taken) to 3 (strong opioids). By subtracting the pain score from the analgesic score, we obtained the PMI value, considering cases with values < 0 as inadequate analgesic prescriptions. The Ethics Committees of the participating centers approved the study (ARISE-1 study). Results: Two thousand one hundred four non-selected outpatients with cancer and aged 18 years or older were enrolled in 13 RT departments. RT had curative and palliative intent in 62.4% and 37.6% patients, respectively. Tumor stage was non-metastatic in 57.3% and metastatic in 42.7% of subjects, respectively. Pain affected 1417 patients (CP: 49.5%, NCP: 32.0%; MP: 18.5%). PMI was < 0 in 45.0% of patients with pain. At multivariable analysis, inadequate pain management was significantly correlated with curative RT aim, ECOG performance status = 1 (versus both ECOG-PS3 and ECOG- PS4), breast cancer, non-cancer pain, and Central and South Italy RT Departments (versus Northern Italy).Conclusions: Pain management was less adequate in patients with more favorable clinical condition and stage. Educational and organizational strategies are needed in RT departments to reduce the non-negligible percentage of patients with inadequate analgesic therapy.

Prognostication in palliative radiotherapy-ProPaRT: Accuracy of prognostic scores.

Background: Prognostication can be used within a tailored decision-making process to achieve a more personalized approach to the care of patients with cancer. This prospective observational study evaluated the accuracy of the Palliative Prognostic score (PaP score) to predict survival in patients identified by oncologists as candidates for palliative radiotherapy (PRT). We also studied interrater variability for the clinical prediction of survival and PaP scores and assessed the accuracy of the Survival Prediction Score (SPS) and TEACHH score. Materials and methods: Consecutive patients were enrolled at first access to our Radiotherapy and Palliative Care Outpatient Clinic. The discriminating ability of the prognostic models was assessed using Harrell's C index, and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were obtained by bootstrapping. Results: In total, 255 patients with metastatic cancer were evaluated, and 123 (48.2%) were selected for PRT, all of whom completed treatment without interruption. Then, 10.6% of the irradiated patients who died underwent treatment within the last 30 days of life. The PaP score showed an accuracy of 74.8 (95% CI, 69.5-80.1) for radiation oncologist (RO) and 80.7 (95% CI, 75.9-85.5) for palliative care physician (PCP) in predicting 30-day survival. The accuracy of TEACHH was 76.1 (95% CI, 70.9-81.3) and 64.7 (95% CI, 58.8-70.6) for RO and PCP, respectively, and the accuracy of SPS was 70 (95% CI, 64.4-75.6) and 72.8 (95% CI, 67.3-78.3). Conclusion: Accurate prognostication can identify candidates for low-fraction PRT during the last days of life who are more likely to complete the planned treatment without interruption.All the scores showed good discriminating capacity; the PaP had the higher accuracy, especially when used in a multidisciplinary way.

Inflammatory Markers and Radiotherapy Response in Patients With Painful Bone Metastases.

CONTEXT: Inflammation is proposed to influence tumor response in radiotherapy (RT). Clinical studies to investigate the relationship between inflammatory markers and RT response is warranted to understand the variable RT efficacy in patients with painful bone metastases. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association between inflammatory markers and analgesic response to RT in patients with painful bone metastases. METHODS: Adult patients from 7 European study sites undergoing RT for painful bone metastases were included in this prospective and longitudinal analysis. The association between RT response and 17 inflammatory markers at baseline, as well as the association between RT response and the changes observed in inflammatory markers between baseline and three and eight weeks after RT, was analyzed with univariate regression analyses. Baseline analyses were adjusted for potential clinical predictors of RT response. RESULTS: None of the inflammatory markers were significantly associated with an upcoming RT response in the analysis of 448 patients with complete baseline data. In patients available for follow-up, the three-week change in TNF (P 0.017), IL-8 (P 0.028), IP-10 (P 0.032), eotaxin (P 0.043), G-CSF (P 0.033) and MCP-1 (P 0.002) were positively associated with RT response, while the three-week change in CRP (P 0.006) was negatively associated. CONCLUSION: Results from this study show an association between RT response and change in pro-inflammatory mediators and indicate that inflammation may be important to achieve an analgesic RT response in patients with painful bone metastases. None of the investigated inflammatory markers were found to be pre-treatment predictors of RT response.

Patients with multiple myeloma referred for palliative care consultation: from retrospective analysis to future directions to improve clinical outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: New treatments have improved the overall survival of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). At diagnosis and during the course of the disease, patients often report pain and other symptoms. Given the long disease trajectory, psychological and social issues are also frequent. Recently, the potential usefulness of early palliative care (EPC) was hypothesized in the area of hematology. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with MM referred to our institute for a palliative care (PC) consultation between January 2017 and June 2020. Our aim was to evaluate the main reasons (pain or other clinical symptoms) for the referral for a first PC consultation. METHODS: We examined the main reasons for the first PC consultation, the number of PC consultations carried out, and the period of time between diagnosis, first and subsequent PC visits, and death. We also recorded information on the type of pain experienced and the treatments administered. RESULTS: Of the 325 patients with MM followed at our hematology unit during the study period, 43 were referred for a PC consultation (39 for pain management and 4 to determine the most appropriate care setting (hospice or palliative homecare service)). Nineteen (44.2%) of the 43 patients reported other symptoms in addition to pain. The median time between MM diagnosis and the first PC consultation was 473 days. Fifteen patients died, with a median 332 days between the first PC visit and death. CONCLUSION: Randomized studies on MM involving larger patient populations with access to EPC are needed to identify an effective clinical model to improve the management of patients with MM.

Palliative radiotherapy indications during the COVID-19 pandemic and in future complex logistic settings: the NORMALITY model.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged healthcare systems worldwide over the last few months, and it continues to do so. Although some restrictions are being removed, it is not certain when the pandemic is going to be definitively over. Pandemics can be seen as a highly complex logistic scenario. From this perspective, some of the indications provided for palliative radiotherapy (PRT) during the COVID-19 pandemic could be maintained in the future in settings that limit the possibility of patients achieving symptom relief by radiotherapy. This paper has two aims: (1) to provide a summary of the indications for PRT during the COVID-19 pandemic; since some indications can differ slightly, and to avoid any possible contradictions, an expert panel composed of the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) and the Palliative Care and Supportive Therapies Working Group (AIRO-palliative) voted by consensus on the summary; (2) to introduce a clinical care model for PRT [endorsed by AIRO and by a spontaneous Italian collaborative network for PRT named "La Rete del Sollievo" ("The Net of Relief")]. The proposed model, denoted "No cOmpRoMise on quality of life by pALliative radiotherapy" (NORMALITY), is based on an AIRO-palliative consensus-based list of clinical indications for PRT and on practical suggestions regarding the management of patients potentially suitable for PRT but dealing with highly complex logistics scenarios (similar to the ongoing logistics limits due to COVID-19). MATERIAL AND METHODS: First, a summary of the available literature guidelines for PRT published during the COVID-19 pandemic was prepared. A systematic literature search based on the PRISMA approach was performed to retrieve the available literature reporting guideline indications fully or partially focused on PRT. Tables reporting each addressed clinical presentation and respective literature indications were prepared and distributed into two main groups: palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies. These summaries were voted in by consensus by selected members of the AIRO and AIRO-palliative panels. Second, based on the summary for palliative indications during the COVID-19 pandemic, a clinical care model to facilitate recruitment and delivery of PRT to patients in complex logistic scenarios was proposed. The summary tables were critically integrated and shuffled according to clinical presentations and then voted on in a second consensus round. Along with the adapted guideline indications, some methods of performing the first triage of patients and facilitating a teleconsultation preliminary to the first in-person visit were developed. RESULTS: After the revision of 161 documents, 13 papers were selected for analysis. From the papers, 19 clinical presentation items were collected; in total, 61 question items were extracted and voted on (i.e., for each presentation, more than one indication was provided from the literature). Two tables summarizing the PRT indications during the COVID-19 pandemic available from the literature (PRT COVID-19 summary tables) were developed: palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies. The consensus of the vote by the AIRO panel for the PRT COVID-19 summary was reached. The PRT COVID-19 summary tables for palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies were adapted for clinical presentations possibly associated with patients in complex clinical scenarios other than the COVID-19 pandemic. The two new indication tables (i.e., "Normality model of PRT indications") for both palliative emergencies and palliative non-emergencies were voted on in a second consensus round. The consensus rate was reached and strong. Written forms facilitating two levels of teleconsultation (triage and remote visits) were also developed, both in English and in Italian, to evaluate the patients for possible indications for PRT before scheduling clinical visits. CONCLUSION: We provide a comprehensive summary of the literature guideline indications for PRT during COVID-19 pandemic. We also propose a clinical care model including clinical indications and written forms facilitating two levels of teleconsultation (triage and remote visits) to evaluate the patients for indications of PRT before scheduling clinical visits. The normality model could facilitate the provision of PRT to patients in future complex logistic scenarios.

Clinical Predictors for Analgesic Response to Radiotherapy in Patients with Painful Bone Metastases.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy (RT) reduces pain in about 60% of patients with painful bone metastases, leaving many patients without clinical benefit. This study assesses predictors for RT effectiveness in patients with painful bone metastases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included adult patients receiving RT for painful bone metastases in a multicenter, multinational longitudinal observational study. Pain response within 8 weeks was defined as ≥2-point decrease on a 0-10 pain score scale, without increase in analgesics; or a decrease in analgesics of ≥25% without increase in pain score. Potential predictors were related to patient demographics, RT administration, pain characteristics, tumor characteristics, depression and inflammation (C-reactive protein [CRP]). Multivariate logistic regression analysis with multiple imputation of missing data were applied to identify predictors of RT response. RESULTS: Of 513 eligible patients, 460 patients (90 %) were included in the regression model. 224 patients (44%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 39%-48%) responded to RT. Better Karnofsky performance status (Odds ratio (OR) 1.39, CI 1.15-1.68), breast cancer (OR 2.54, CI 1.12-5.73), prostate cancer (OR 2.83, CI 1.27-6.33) and soft tissue expansion (OR 2.00, CI 1.23-3.25) predicted RT response. Corticosteroids were a negative predictor (OR 0.57, CI 0.37-0.88). Single and multiple fraction RT had similar response. The discriminative ability of the model was moderate; C-statistic 0.69. CONCLUSION: This study supports previous findings that better performance status and type of cancer diagnosis predicts analgesic RT response, and new data showing that soft tissue expansion predicts RT response and that corticosteroids is a negative predictor for RT response in patients with painful bone metastases.

The Prevalence and Characteristics of Breakthrough Cancer Pain in Patients Receiving Low Doses of Opioids for Background Pain.

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and characteristics of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) in patients receiving low doses of opioids for background pain. A consecutive sample of advanced cancer patients receiving less than 60 mg/day of oral morphine equivalent (OME) was selected. Epidemiological data, background pain intensity, and current analgesic therapy were recorded. The presence of BTcP was diagnosed according to a standard algorithm. The number of BTcP episodes, intensity of BTcP, its predictability and triggers, onset duration, interference with daily activities, BTcP medications, satisfaction with BTcP medication, and time to meaningful pain relief were collected. A total of 126 patients were screened. The mean intensity of background pain was 2.71 (1.57), and the mean OME was 28.5 mg/day (SD15.8). BTP episodes were recorded in 88 patients (69.8%). The mean number/day of BTP episodes was 4.1 (SD 7.1, range 1-30). In a significant percentage of patients, BTcP was both predictable and unpredictable (23%). The BTcP onset was less than 20 min in the majority of patients. The mean duration of untreated episodes was 47.5 (SD 47.6) minutes. The mean time to meaningful pain relief after taking a BTcP medication was >20 min in 44.5% of patients. The efficacy of BTcP medication was not considered good in more than 63% of patients. Gender (females) (OR = 4.16) and lower Karnofsky (OR = 0.92) were independently associated with BTcP. A higher number of BTcP episodes/day was associated with gender (females) (p = 0.036), short duration of BTcP (p = 0.005), poorer efficacy of BTcP medication (none or mild) (p = 0.001), and late meaningful pain relief (p = 0.024). The poor efficacy of BTcP medication was independently associated with a higher number of episodes/day (OR = 0.22). In patients who were receiving low doses of opioids, BTcP prevalence was 69.8%. Many patients did not achieve a sufficient level of satisfaction with BTcP medications, particularly with oral morphine. Data also suggest that better optimization of background analgesia, though apparently acceptable, may limit the number of BTcP episodes.