Citations

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]

Abstract Background: There have been few studies of sufficient size to address the relationship between glioma risk and the use of aspirin or NSAIDs, and results have been conflicting. The purpose of this study was to examine the associations between glioma and aspirin/NSAID use, and to aggregate these findings with prior published studies using meta-analysis. Methods: The Glioma International Case-Control Study (GICC) consists of 4,533 glioma cases and 4,171 controls recruited from 2010 to 2013. Interviews were conducted using a standardized questionnaire to obtain information on aspirin/NSAID use. We examined history of regular use for ≥6 months and duration-response. Restricted maximum likelihood meta-regression models were used to aggregate site-specific estimates, and to combine GICC estimates with previously published studies. Results: A history of daily aspirin use for ≥6 months was associated with a 38% lower glioma risk, compared with not having a history of daily use [adjusted meta-OR = 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.54–0.70]. There was a significant duration-response trend (P = 1.67 × 10−17), with lower ORs for increasing duration of aspirin use. Duration-response trends were not observed for NSAID use. In the meta-analysis aggregating GICC data with five previous studies, there was a marginally significant association between use of aspirin and glioma (mOR = 0.84; 95% CI, 0.70–1.02), but no association for NSAID use. Conclusions: Our study suggests that aspirin may be associated with a reduced risk of glioma. Impact: These results imply that aspirin use may be associated with decreased glioma risk. Further research examining the association between aspirin use and glioma risk is warranted.