Rades, Dirk

An easy-to-use survival score was developed specifically for older patients with cerebral metastases from colorectal cancer, and was compared to existing tools regarding the accuracy of identifying patients who die in ≤6 months and those who survive for ≥6 months. The new score was built from 57 patients receiving whole-brain irradiation. It included three groups identified from 6-month survival rates based on two independent predictors (performance status and absence/presence of non-cerebral metastases), with 6-month survival rates of 0% (0 points), 26% (1 point), and 75% (2 points), respectively. This score was compared to diagnosis-specific scores, namely the diagnosis-specific graded prognostic assessment (DS-GPA), the Dziggel-Score and the WBRT-30-CRC (whole-brain radiotherapy with 30 Gy in 10 fractions for cerebral metastases from colorectal cancer) score and to a non-diagnosis-specific score for older persons (Evers-Score). Positive predictive values were 100% (new score), 87% (DS-GPA), 86% (Dziggel-Score), 91% (WBRT-30-CRC), and 100% (Evers-Score), respectively, for patients dying ≤6 months, and 75%, 33%, 75%, 60%, and 45%, respectively, for survivors ≥6 months. Of the five tools, the new score and the Evers-Score were most precise in identifying patients dying ≤6 months. The new score and the Dziggel-Scores were best at identifying patients surviving ≥6 months. When combining the results, the new score appeared preferable to the existing tools. The score appears not necessary for patients with additional liver metastases, since their 6-month survival rate was 0%.

Abstract Background: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) reduce anemia in cancer patients; however, there are concerns that ESAs increase mortality in some patients. Within the framework of an international collaboration we thus conducted a patient-level meta-analysis to assess the effects of ESAs on mortality in cancer patients. Methods: We performed a meta-analysis, based on the intention-to-treat principle, of cancer patients enrolled in randomized controlled trials comparing epoetin alfa, epoetin beta or darbepoetin alfa plus red blood cell transfusions as needed versus transfusion alone, for prophylaxis or treatment of anemia while or after receiving anticancer therapy. Patient-level data were obtained and analyzed by independent statisticians at two academic departments. Primary endpoints were on-study mortality and overall survival in patients receiving chemotherapy, defined as all patients from studies in which =/> 70% of study population received chemotherapy, and in all cancer patients regardless of anticancer therapy. On-study mortality was defined as death from any cause between date of randomization and 28 days after end of active study phase. Overall survival was defined as death from any cause between date of randomization and longest follow up available. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated per study and meta-analyzed with fixed-effects and random-effects models. Stratified multivariable Cox-regression analyses were conducted to assess the impact of baseline imbalances. Tests for interactions were used to identify differences in effect across pre-specified subgroups. All analyses were pre-specified in a peer-reviewed protocol (Bohlius et al. 2008). An independent steering committee consisting of clinicians and methodologists agreed on all analyses and interpretations. Independent investigators and representatives from manufacturers contributing data offered advice, but had no decision-making authority. Results: Data from 13,933 cancer patients enrolled in 53 studies were included in the analysis; 38 trials including 10,441 patients used mainly chemotherapy. Including all cancer patients ESAs increased on-study mortality by 17% (HR 1.17; 95% CI 1.06–1.30), with little evidence for a difference between chemotherapy and other trials (p for interaction=0.42), and worsened overall survival by 6% (HR 1.06; 95% CI 1.00–1.12). In the chemotherapy population on-study mortality was increased by 10% (HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.98–1.24) and overall survival was worsened by 4% (HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.97–1.11). Adjusting for known prognostic factors had little effect on the overall estimates. There was no conclusive evidence for effect modification by patient level characteristics such as age, sex, Hb and Hct at baseline, Hb ceiling, type and stage of tumor or study level characteristics (anticancer treatment, ESA treatment schedules, study design and quality) for the outcomes tested. Conclusion: ESA treatment in cancer patients increased on-study mortality by 17% and worsened overall survival by 6%. For patients undergoing chemotherapy the increase was less pronounced, but could not be excluded. In clinical practice, risks of ESAs must be balanced against benefits of ESAs depending on the clinical circumstances of the individual patient.

Abstract Background Previous survival scores for breast cancer patients with cerebral metastases were developed in cohorts receiving heterogeneous treatments, which could have introduced selection biases. A new instrument (WBRT-30-BC) was created from 170 patients receiving whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) alone with 30 Gy in 10 fractions. Methods Characteristics showing significant associations (p < 0.05) with overall survival (OS) or a trend (p < 0.08) on multivariate analysis were used for the WBRT-30-BC. For each characteristic, 6-month OS rates were divided by 10. These scoring points were added for each patient (patient scores). The WBRT-30-BC was compared to the diagnosis- specific graded prognostic assessment (DS-GPA) classification and Rades-Score for breast cancer regarding positive predictive values (PPVs) to identify patients dying within 6 months and patients surviving at least 6 months following WBRT. Results On multivariate analysis, Karnofsky performance score (KPS) was significant (risk ratio [RR]: 2.45, p < 0.001). In addition, extra-cerebral metastatic disease (RR: 1.52, p = 0.071) and time between breast cancer diagnosis and WBRT (RR: 1.37, p = 0.070) showed a trend. Based on these three characteristics, four predictive groups were designed: 7–9, 10–12, 13–15 and 16 points. Six-month OS rates were 8%, 41%, 68% and 100% (p < 0.001). PPVs to identify patients dying within 6 months were 92% (WBRT-30-BC), 84% (DS-GPA) and 92% (Rades-Score). PPVs to identify patients surviving for at least 6 months were 100% (WBRT-30-BC), 74% (DS-GPA) and 68% (Rades-Score). Conclusions The WBRT-30-BC appeared very accurate in predicting death ≤ 6 months and survival ≥ 6 months of breast cancer patients receiving WBRT. It was superior to previous instruments in predicting survival ≥ 6 months.

Diagnosis-specific survival scores including a new score developed in 157 patients with brain metastases from small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) receiving whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with 30 Gy in 10 fractions (WBRT-30-SCLC) were compared. Three prognostic groups were designed based on the 6-month survival probabilities of significant or almost significant factors, (age, performance score, number of brain metastases, extra-cerebral metastasis). Six-month survival rates were 6% (6–11 points), 44% (12–14 points) and 86% (16–19 points). The WBRT-30-SCLC was compared to three disease-specific scores for brain metastasis from SCLC, the original and updated diagnosis-specific graded prognostic assessment DS-GPA classifications and the Rades-SCLC. Positive predictive values (PPVs) used to correctly predict death ≤6 months were 94% (WBRT-30-SCLC), 88% (original DS-GPA), 88% (updated DS-GPA) and 100% (Rades-SCLC). PPVs to predict survival ≥6 months were 86%, 75%, 76% and 100%. For WBRT-30-SCLC and Rades-SCLC, differences between poor and intermediate prognoses groups and between intermediate and favorable prognoses groups were significant. For both DS-GPA classifications, only the difference between poor and intermediate prognoses groups was significant. Of these disease-specific tools, Rades-SCLC appeared to be the most accurate in identifying patients dying ≤6 months and patients surviving ≥6 months after irradiation, followed by the new WBRT-30-SCLC and the DS-GPA classifications.

PurposeMetastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) can be a catastrophic manifestation of advanced cancer that causes immobilizing pain and significant neurologic impairment. Oncologists can protect their patients by having a high index of suspicion for MSCC when patients present with new or worsening back pain before motor, sensory, bowel, or bladder deficits develop. We provide an updated, evidence-based narrative review of the presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of MSCC.MethodsThis narrative review was conducted by searching MEDLINE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for relevant literature on the presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of patients with MSCC. The article addresses the key elements of MSCC management germane to the medical oncologist, with special attention given to pain and symptom management, decision making with regard to surgery and radiation therapy, the importance of rehabilitative care, and the value of a multidisciplinary approach.ResultsMagnetic resonance imaging of the entire spine is recommended for the diagnosis of MSCC. Treatment includes glucocorticoid therapy, pain management, radiation therapy with or without surgery, and specialized rehabilitation. When formulating a treatment plan, clinicians should consider the patient’s care goals and psychosocial needs.ConclusionPrompt diagnosis and treatment of MSCC can reduce pain and prevent irreversible functional loss. Regular collaboration among multidisciplinary providers may streamline care and enhance achievement of treatment goals.

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) has a high predilection for metastasizing to the brain after chemotherapy. This has been blamed on the blood-brain barrier, which prevents chemotherapy from penetrating into the brain, thus creating a sanctuary site. It has been estimated that up to three quarters of patients with SCLC will eventually develop brain metastases. This led investigators to administer prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) to decrease this risk. Several trials were performed in patients with SCLC after initial therapy (chemotherapy with or without thoracic radiotherapy) that compared the outcomes of PCI versus no PCI. Early trials generally found that PCI significantly decreased the risk of brain metastases but did not significantly improve survival. These trials were re-evaluated in two larger meta-analyses that included patients with either limited-stage SCLC or extensive-stage SCLC (ESCLC). Both meta-analyses reported that PCI significantly decreased brain metastases and improved survival in patients who had a complete response following initial therapy. These studies were performed before the advent of modern imaging with computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). There have been two modern trials of PCI versus no PCI in patients with ESCLC and both found that PCI decreases brain metastases. The first did not include brain MRI before registration and found that PCI improved survival, whereas the second study did include MRI before registration and at frequent intervals thereafter. That trial found that PCI did not confer a survival advantage. This review will examine the evidence and provide recommendations regarding the role of PCI for patients with ESCLC.

AbstractIntroductionRadiotherapy alone still is the most commonly delivered treatment modality for metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC). MSCC is an emergency situation, which requires treatment as soon as possible. When radiotherapy is performed with the most commonly used approach 10 × 3 Gy (30 Gy in 10 fractions) over 2 weeks, the question has been asked whether an overall treatment time (OTT) of 14–15 days including two weekends without irradiation leads to worse outcomes than OTT of 12 days (beginning of radiotherapy on a Monday resulting in only one weekend break)?MethodsA total of 412 patients with MSCC were included in this retrospective study. Ninety‐two patients receiving 10 × 3 Gy over 12 days were compared to 320 patients with an OTT of 14–15 days. Ten additional factors were investigated.ResultsOn multivariate analysis, functional outcome was associated with tumour type (P < 0.001), time developing motor deficits (P < 0.001), ambulatory status (P = 0.018) and performance score (P < 0.001); OTT had no significant impact (P = 0.40). On univariate analysis of local control of MSCC (freedom from recurrence in irradiated spinal parts), no factor was significant including OTT (P = 0.66). On multivariate analysis, visceral metastases (P < 0.001), tumour type (P < 0.001), time developing motor deficits (P < 0.001), ambulatory status (P < 0.001) and performance score (P < 0.001) were associated with survival, OTT not even on univariate analysis (P = 0.55).ConclusionsSince an OTT of 14–15 days had no negative impact on outcomes compared to 12 days, compensation in form of an additional radiation fraction or continuation of radiotherapy during weekends is not required, if radiotherapy cannot be started on a Monday.

Abstract Background Uncertainty exists whether patients with spinal cord compression (SCC) from a highly radiosensitive tumor require decompressive spinal surgery in addition to radiotherapy (RT). This study addressed the question by evaluating patients receiving RT alone for SCC from myeloma. Patients and methods Data of 238 patients were retrospectively analyzed for response to RT and local control of SCC. In addition, the effect of RT on motor function (improvement, no further progression, deterioration) was evaluated. Overall response was defined as improvement or no further progression of motor dysfunction. Prior to RT, patients were presented to a neurosurgeon for evaluation whether upfront decompressive surgery was indicated (e.g. vertebral fracture or unstable spine). Results In the entire cohort, the overall response rate was 97% (53% improvement plus 44% no further progression). Following RT, 88% of the patients were able to walk. Of the 69 non-ambulatory patients 44 patients (64%) regained the ability to walk. Local control rates at 1, 2 and 3 years were 93%, 82% and 82%, respectively. A trend towards better local control was observed for patients who were ambulatory before starting RT (p = 0.08) and those with a more favorable performance status (p = 0.07). Conclusions RT alone provided excellent response rates, functional outcomes and local control in patients with SCC from myeloma. These results should be confirmed in a prospective randomized trial.

AbstractThis study aimed to identify clinical factors associated with survival and to develop a prognostic tool in patients receiving radiosurgery alone for very few cerebral metastases from melanoma. Ten characteristics of 69 patients treated with radiosurgery alone for 1–3 cerebral metastases from melanoma were retrospectively analyzed for survival. Serum lactate dehydrogenase levels before radiosurgery, Karnofsky performance score, maximum diameter of all irradiated cerebral lesions, and extracranial lesions were significantly associated with survival and included in the tool. Twelve‐month survival rate (in %) divided by 10 was calculated for each of these four factors. The four scores were summed resulting in total scores ranging 9–22 points. Based on the 12‐month survival rates, three groups were formed: less than 15 points (group I, n = 25); 15–20 points (group II, n = 34); and more than 20 points (group III, n = 10). Corresponding 12‐month survival rates were 10 ± 6%, 51 ± 9% and 90 ± 9%, respectively (P < 0.001). In group I, death within 12 months following radiosurgery occurred mostly due to extracranial progression, whereas cerebral progression was the major cause of death in group II. In group III, only one of 10 patients died within 1 year. This new prognostic tool helps predict the survival time following radiosurgery of very few cerebral metastases from melanoma. An individual treatment approach should consider a patient's survival time and the most likely cause of death (cerebral or extracranial progression).