Miller, Robert C.

Abstract Background Paraganglioma of the head and neck (HNPGL) are rare often benign tumors. Surgery and radiation therapy (RT) are the main treatment choices. We present an analysis of outcome and toxicity after RT from 13 institutions of the Rare Cancer Network. Methods Data were collected using a questionnaire concerning patients' characteristics, treatment, and outcome. A total of 81 patients with 82 HNPGL were analyzed. Results The median follow‐up was 48 months (1‐456). Sixty‐two lesions were treated with conventional RT and 20 lesions with stereotactic RT. Local control (LC) was achieved in 69 out of 77 lesions. Late toxicity occurred in 17 patients. Patients treated with stereotactic RT experienced neither disease progression nor late toxicity. Four patients with a follow‐up longer than 20 years experienced disease progression. Conclusion RT for HNPGL offered good local control with acceptable toxicity. Stereotactic RT might offer better results. Long‐term follow‐up is required.

145 Background: Palliative radiation treatment (pRT) is used for symptomatic bone metastases (mets). Several fractionation schedules show equal efficacy for pain relief, and ASTRO’s Choosing Wisely recommends 8Gy x1, 4Gy x5, or 3Gy x10. This study aims to investigate the cost implications of pRT for bone mets. Methods: Patients (Pts) treated with pRT for bone mets at Mayo Clinic from 2007 - 2016 were included in this study. Costs for all services were subdivided into RT and total costs at 30 & 90 days (30D & 90D). Standardized costs were obtained from the Mayo Clinic Cost Data Warehouse and Medicare reimbursements were assigned to all services with cost to charge adjustments and 2017 GDP Implicit Price Deflator for inflation. Cost means were compared via the Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: 538 pts were treated with pRT, 124 receiving 8Gy x1, 204 receiving 4Gy x5, and 210 receiving 3Gy x10. Pts with breast and prostate cancer were most likely to be treated with 3Gy x10 and pts with GI and lung cancer were most likely to be treated with 8Gy x1. RT costs at 30D were $1,497, $1,891, and $1,982 (p=0.03) and RT costs at 90D were $2,602, $2,753, and $3,032 (p=0.08) for initial RT regimens of 8Gy x1, 4Gy x5, and 3Gy x10. Total costs of care at 30D were similar from $15,969 - 17,687 (p=0.6) and total costs at 90D were similar from $22,361 - 23,219 (p=0.7) between arms. A total of 23%, 28%, and 39% of pts were alive 2 years following pRT from each arm (p=0.07). Conclusions: This is the first study of its kind to analyze actual treatment costs for the three most common pRT regimens in bone mets. Single fraction RT was most used for pts with poor prognoses and was associated with lower RT costs at 30D, but similar RT costs at 90D, possibly due to retreatment. RT choice had no impact on overall costs of care at 30D or 90D. pRT remains of high value, representing only 11-13% of total costs.[Table: see text]

126 Background: Palliative radiation treatment (pRT) is a common and effective treatment for patients with symptomatic bone metastases. However, patients receiving RT for bone metastases often may have a poor performance status and are more likely to experience toxicity during or after treatment. This study aims to investigate the number and type of toxicity event occurring during or after pRT for bone metastases. Methods: Patients treated with RT for bone metastases at Mayo Clinic from 2007 to 2016 were included in this study. Demographic, disease, treatment, and toxicity information were collected. Specifically, toxicity events were identified as emergency department (ED) visits and inpatient hospitalization (IH) within 90 days, breaks in treatment >4 days, and excessive 30 day financial toxicity defined as standardized Medicare costs >1 standard deviation above the mean. RT treatment was compared by dose and fractionation via descriptive statistics. Results: A total of 538 patients treated with pRT were identified, 124 receiving 8Gy x1, 204 receiving 4Gy x5, and 210 receiving 3Gy x10. Patients with breast and prostate cancer were most likely to be treated with 3Gy x10 and patients with GI and Lung cancer were most likely to be treated with 8Gy x1. A description of the patient characteristics and toxicities are shown in Table 1. For 8Gy x1, 4Gy x5, and 3Gy x10 breaks in treatment were rare (0%, 2%, and 3.3%), ED visits (15%, 24%, & 28%), IH (12%, 23%, & 19%), and financial toxicity (13%, 18%, & 21%) were common. A total of 22.6%, 27.5%, and 38.6% of patients were alive two years following pRT from each group. Conclusions: Toxicity during or shortly after pRT of bone metastases is common. This study confirms that additional steps should be taken to monitor and mitigate toxicity in this vulnerable patient group. [Table: see text]

It is an exciting time for big data efforts in radiation oncology. The use of big data to help aid both outcomes and decision‐making research is becoming a reality. However, there are true challenges that exist in the space of gathering and utilizing performance and outcomes data. Here, we summarize the current state of big data in radiation oncology with respect to outcomes and discuss some of the efforts and challenges in radiation oncology big data.

The term Big Data has come to encompass a number of concepts and uses within medicine. This paper lays out the relevance and application of large collections of data in the radiation oncology community. We describe the potential importance and uses in clinical practice. The important concepts are then described and how they have been or could be implemented are discussed. Impediments to progress in the collection and use of sufficient quantities of data are also described. Finally, recommendations for how the community can move forward to achieve the potential of big data in radiation oncology are provided.

e21567 Background: For patients diagnosed with cancer, depression and anxiety represent a common and significant burden, which has been proposed to not only affect quality of life but to potentially shorten duration of life as well. This study examines the influence of patient reported symptoms of anxiety and depression on overall distress and mortality in patients undergoing radiation therapy. Methods: As part of their intake paperwork, patients undergoing radiation therapy completed distress screening that included 29 questions regarding their level of concern with various factors related to their care as well as their overall distress level. This information and other parameters including demographics, site of primary disease, use of chemotherapy, presence of metastasis, and last known status were recorded for analysis. Answers regarding degree of concern for “feeling down or depressed”, “loss of interest in my usual activities”, and “feeling nervous or anxious” were examined for influence on study endpoints. Results: Results for final analysis were available from 519 patients undergoing therapy from April 2010 to May 2016. The cohort’s average age was 66yrs, 71% were treated curatively, and 29% were treated palliatively. The most common treatment sites were breast (27%), thorax (16%), H&N (12%), GU (12%), GI (10%), and CNS (7%). Significant correlation was found between level of concern with symptoms of anxiety and depression and level of overall distress (P < 0.001, Kruskal-Wallis Rank Sum Test). Significance remained on separate analysis of curative and palliative subgroups. No significant correlation was found for 1 or 2 year survival on either single or multivariate analysis of curative or palliative patients. Conclusions: Depression and anxiety are common conditions among cancer patients, and can contribute significantly to their overall distress. Although no effects on mortality were demonstrated on initial follow-up of this cohort, it remains evident that attention to emotional well-being is critical in the care of such patients. Additional investigations can be pursued regarding ideal interventions for patients identified by such screening.