Shaelyn Culleton

Palliative Response and Functional Interference Outcomes Using the Brief Pain Inventory for Spinal Bony Metastases Treated with Conventional Radiotherapy

AIMS To report pain and functional interference responses in patients radiated for painful spinal metastases, and to determine if location within the vertebral column or dose fractionation are associated with response. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients treated with palliative radiotherapy for symptomatic spinal metastases from May 2003 to June 2005 were analysed. All patients completed the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) assessment tool at 1, 2 and 3 months after radiotherapy. The pain response was determined using the International Bone Metastases Consensus response definitions. Given seven BPI functional interference items, a Bonferroni adjusted P value of less than 0.007 was considered significant. RESULTS One hundred and nine treated patients were assessed. About 50% of patients were treated with a single fraction of 8Gy. All pain scores and functional interference scores significantly decreased over time after radiotherapy. At 3 months, 64% of patients achieved a response. Mood was significantly improved for responders (P=0.003) and a trend in improvement was observed for general activity (P=0.01) and normal work (P=0.04). Breast and prostate primaries were more likely to achieve an early response as compared with a lung primary. Neither location within the vertebral column or radiotherapy dose fractionation independently predicted for pain or functional interference responses. CONCLUSION Conventional radiotherapy with 8Gy in a single fraction for spine metastases resulted in effective palliation of pain at 3 months and had a positive effect on a patients mood. Location within the spine was not a predictive factor.

Palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases in the last 3 months of life: worthwhile or futile?

AIMS To determine the efficacy of radiotherapy for the palliation of pain from bone metastases among patients in their last 3 months of life. MATERIALS AND METHODS Mutually exclusive, prospectively gathered Edmonton Symptom Assessment System and Brief Pain Inventory databases compiled from patients with bone metastases receiving palliative radiotherapy were reviewed. Demographic information and response rates from patients dying within 3 months of beginning radiotherapy were analysed. RESULTS From a total of 918 patients, 232 dying within 3 months of beginning treatment were identified. There were 148 men and 84 women. Their median age was 69 years and their median Karnofsky Performance Status was 60. The three most common primary cancers were lung (34%), prostate (18%) and gastrointestinal (14%). Fifty-eight percent of patients received single fraction treatment. A pain response was evaluable for the 109 (47%) patients with available follow-up information. The overall response rates were 70% at 1 month and 63% at 2 months, which included complete and partial responses in accordance with the International Bone Metastases Consensus definitions. CONCLUSIONS Despite their limited lifespan, patients reported pain relief after palliative radiotherapy. Patients suffering from painful bone metastases with an estimated survival of 3 months should still be considered for palliative radiotherapy.

Palliative Radiotherapy for Non-melanoma Skin Cancer

AIMS The primary objective of this study was to assess the rate of tumour response to the palliative radiotherapy regimen used at our centre (8 Gy/fraction on days 0, 7, 21) for non-melanoma skin cancer. The secondary objective was to evaluate symptom palliation. MATERIALS AND METHODS A retrospective chart review identified patients treated with this palliative radiotherapy regimen from August 2003 to December 2008. Patient age, gender, tumour histology, location, size, presenting symptoms and radiation treatment factors were recorded at baseline. The tumour size and tumour-related symptoms were recorded at each fraction and follow-up visit. The results were analysed on an intent to treat basis. RESULTS Twenty-eight patients received 31 courses of palliative radiation for basal cell (five) or squamous cell (26) carcinoma of the skin. Twenty-one patients with 23 tumours attended at least one follow-up visit, and seven patients had incomplete follow-up data. At the time of last follow-up (median 17 weeks), the response rate was 58.1% (complete response 15/31; partial response 3/31). A complete response to treatment was correlated with a smaller tumour size at day 21 (P=0.0143). Presenting symptoms were alleviated in 61.3% (19/31) of symptomatic sites. No severe late toxicities were seen. CONCLUSIONS This palliative regimen offers impressive response rates and effective symptom palliation for patients with non-melanoma skin cancer.

Assessment of Health-related Quality of Life with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C15-PAL after Palliative Radiotherapy of Bone Metastases

AIMS To assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastases using a palliative questionnaire (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C15-PAL). MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients scheduled to receive palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastases (n=178) completed the QLQ-C15-PAL questionnaire before treatment and at week 1, week 2, month 1 and month 2 after the first day of radiotherapy. A partial response (PR) or a complete response (CR) to radiotherapy was defined according to the International Consensus criteria. General linear regression was used to analyse changes in QOL in the entire cohort and within responders and non-responders to radiotherapy at all follow-up periods. RESULTS The overall radiotherapy response was 45% at week 1 (n=21) (41% PR, 4% CR), 62% at week 2 (n=28) (58% PR, 4% CR), 62% at month 1 (n=58) (60% PR, 2% CR) and 65% at month 2 (n=38) (60% PR, 5% CR). In general, a significant decrease in pain (P<0.0001), insomnia (P<0.0001) and constipation (P=0.004) was seen by month 1 after radiotherapy. In patients who responded to radiotherapy, overall QOL significantly improved by month 2 after radiotherapy (P=0.002). Radiotherapy responders also reported an improvement in emotional functioning together with a decrease in symptoms such as insomnia and constipation at month 1. No improvements were seen in any of the QLQ-C15-PAL scores for patients whose pain did not respond to radiotherapy. CONCLUSION Radiotherapy responders showed not only an improvement in pain, but also in HRQOL as assessed by QLQ-C15-PAL. As early as 1 week after radiotherapy for bone metastases, a pain relief response was reported by patients.

FACT-Br for assessment of quality of life in patients receiving treatment for brain metastases: a literature review

Introduction: Brain metastases are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality for patients with advanced cancers, and quality-of-life (QoL) end points are most appropriate for this population. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) questionnaires are commonly used to assess cancer-related QoL issues. The FACT-Brain (FACT-Br) provides an additional set of disease-specific questions pertaining to brain neoplasms. We aim to provide a comprehensive review to examine the use of the FACT-Br as a QoL assessment for patients with brain metastases. Materials & methods: A review of the literature was conducted and all studies utilizing the FACT-Br for QoL assessment of patients with brain metastases were included. Study information and relevant information regarding the FACT-Br were extracted. Results: A total of 14 studies were identified representing various treatment options (radiation, chemotherapy and surgery) for patients with brain metastases. All studies utilized at least part of the FACT-Br as the main QoL assessment. In addition, neurocognitive and performance status assessments were performed in nine and 12 out of 14 studies, respectively. Issues of poor accrual, compliance and attrition were common and posed problems in reaching statistically significant changes in QoL despite changes in raw QoL scores. Conclusion: Studies involving patients with brain metastases should continue to utilize QoL tools such as the FACT-Br; however, this tool still requires validation for use in this patient population. Additional studies should observe the relationship between neurocognitive function and QoL, and attempt to minimize poor accrual and compliance issues through modifications of trial design and reduction of patient burden.

The palliative performance scale: examining its inter-rater reliability in an outpatient palliative radiation oncology clinic

IntroductionThe Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) was developed by the Victoria Hospice Society in 1996 to modernize the Karnofsky Performance Scale. Currently, it is being used to measure palliative patient performance status in a variety of settings. Despite its widespread use, only one study has examined the inter-rater reliability of the PPS.PurposeTo examine the inter-rater reliability of the PPS in measuring performance status in patients seen in an outpatient palliative radiation oncology clinicMethodsPerformance status for 102 consecutive patients was assessed by an oncologist (MD), a radiation therapist (RT), and a research assistant (RA) in the Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program at the Odette Cancer Centre in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Raters’ scores were analyzed for correlation and compared to evaluate the inter-rater reliability of the PPS tool.ResultsExcellent correlation was found between the scores rated by the MD and RA (r = 0.86); good correlation was observed between scores rated by the MD and RT (r = 0.69) and the RT and RA (r = 0.77). Scores between all three raters, as well as between rater pairs, were also found to have good reliability as measured by the Chronbach’s alpha coefficient. Significant results were obtained for the range of PPS scores in which the majority of our patients fell: 40–80%.ConclusionPPS was shown to have good overall inter-rater reliability in an outpatient palliative setting, but more research is needed to establish the validity and reliability of the tool in a variety of different palliative settings.

Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale as a Prognosticative Indicator in Patients with Advanced Cancer

BACKGROUND Few studies incorporate patient self-assessment scales in prognostic models of survival prediction. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) is commonly used as a symptom screening tool in cancer patients. OBJECTIVE The goal of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of the ESAS for survival prediction in the advanced cancer population. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients completed the ESAS and demographic information prior to palliative radiotherapy consultation and at follow-up at the Odette Cancer Centre between 1999 and 2009. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) methodology was applied to analyze ESAS trends within the last months of life. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measurements was used to characterize trends between time periods. RESULTS ESAS records (2377) from 808 patients (433 male and 375 female) were included in this cohort. Median age was 68 years (range 32-95) with median Karnofsky performance status (KPS) of 60 (range 10-100). Primary cancer sites were of the lung (36%), breast (20%), and prostate (19%). All nine ESAS symptoms significantly deteriorated in the last 4 weeks immediately before death when compared with those scores in the preceding months. At one week prior to death, the worst ESAS symptoms experienced by patients were fatigue, appetite, and well-being with mean scores of 7.4, 6.9, and 6.1, respectively. CONCLUSIONS All ESAS scores significantly worsened in the last 4 weeks prior to death compared with those in the previous months. Sudden deterioration of the global ESAS symptoms may predict impending death. Future studies on a prognostic model should incorporate both ESAS symptom severity and trends.

The EORTC QLQ-BN20 for assessment of quality of life in patients receiving treatment or prophylaxis for brain metastases: a literature review

Introduction: Brain metastases occur in approximately 20–40% of cancer patients during the course of disease. As treatment for brain metastases is palliative over curative, quality of life (QoL) is emphasized over prolonged survival. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-BN20 is a QoL assessment specific to brain neoplasms. We aim to provide a review of the current use of the EORTC QLQ-BN20 for patients with brain metastases. Materials & methods: All studies utilizing the QLQ-BN20 for QoL assessment in patients receiving treatments related to brain metastases were included. Study information including treatment type, assessment periods, patient enrolment and all information pertaining to the QLQ-BN20 were extracted. Results: A total of 13 studies were identified, five of which were randomized trials assessing prophylactic whole brain radiation for patients with small-cell lung cancer. The QLQ-BN20 was used in conjunction with the core QLQ-C30 questionnaire in all but one of the studies and together these comprised the entire QoL assessments for 11 of the 13 studies. Neurocognitive function assessments supplemented QoL in four studies and accompanying performance status indices used with the QLQ-BN20 varied. Compliance issues were commonly cited. QoL changes during study periods varied as improvements, deteriorations and stabilizations were all observed. Conclusion: QoL assessments should be conducted using disease-specific tools. Future studies should minimize patient burden in order to maximize data collection and accrual. A common set of QoL end points for patients with brain metastases should be created.

Correlation of Computed Tomography Imaging Features With Pain Response in Patients With Spine Metastases After Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE To correlate computed tomography (CT) imaging features of spinal metastases with pain relief after radiotherapy (RT). METHODS AND MATERIALS Thirty-three patients receiving computed tomography (CT)-simulated RT for spinal metastases in an outpatient palliative RT clinic from January 2007 to October 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. Forty spinal metastases were evaluated. Pain response was rated using the International Bone Metastases Consensus Working Party endpoints. Three musculoskeletal radiologists and two orthopaedic surgeons evaluated CT features, including osseous and soft tissue tumor extent, presence of a pathologic fracture, severity of vertebral height loss, and presence of kyphosis. RESULTS The mean patient age was 69 years; 24 were men and 9 were women. The mean worst pain score was 7/10, and the mean total daily oral morphine equivalent was 77.3 mg. Treatment doses included 8 Gy in one fraction (22/33), 20 Gy in five fractions (10/33), and 20 Gy in eight fractions (1/33). The CT imaging appearance of spinal metastases included vertebral body involvement (40/40), pedicle involvement (23/40), and lamina involvement (18/40). Soft tissue component (10/40) and nerve root compression (9/40) were less common. Pathologic fractures existed in 11/40 lesions, with resultant vertebral body height loss in 10/40 and kyphosis in 2/40 lesions. At months 1, 2, and 3 after RT, 18%, 69%, and 70% of patients experienced pain relief. Pain response was observed with various CT imaging features. CONCLUSIONS Pain response after RT did not differ in patients with and without pathologic fracture, kyphosis, or any other CT features related to extent of tumor involvement. All patients with painful spinal metastases may benefit from palliative RT.

Comparison of the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL and the FACIT-Pal for assessment of quality of life in patients with advanced cancer

Shorter quality-of-life (QoL) assessments are beneficial for palliative patients as they reduce burden associated with completing personal, and at times stressful, questionnaires. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative (QLQ-C15-PAL) and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy – Palliative Care (FACIT-Pal) are two palliative QoL tools that have been validated for use in this population. The purpose of this article was to conduct a review of studies utilizing these two palliative-specific QoL instruments, their development and their relative strengths for use in advanced cancer patients. Studies detailing the development process for the QLQ-C15-PAL and the FACIT-Pal were identified. A comparison between both questionnaires in terms of development, characteristics, validation and use was conducted. The QLQ-C15-PAL was developed via structured shortening of the longer core instrument, the Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30), whereas the FACIT-Pal includes the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – General tool plus a new 19-item palliative scale created through interviews with patients and healthcare professionals. Although significant overlap exists between both tools, there is a marked difference in the aspects of QoL assessed. Scoring, organization and item format are different; however, response options and recall period are the same. Both tools cover the core items relevant to patients with advanced cancers and can be supplemented with disease-specific tools. Both QLQ-C15-PAL and FACIT-Pal allow for assessment of QoL issues specific to patients with advanced diseases. Each instrument has unique strengths and weaknesses and choice between these tools is dependent on the investigator and study needs. Future studies should directly compare these two tools and validate their use through a number of administration modes.