Search

Background: Hypercalcemia of malignancy (HCM) is the most common metabolic complication of malignancies, but its incidence may be declining due to potent chemotherapeutic agents. The high mortality associated with HCM has declined markedly due to the introduction of increasingly effective chemotherapeutic drugs. Despite the widespread availability of efficacious medications to treat HCM, evidence-based recommendations to manage this debilitating condition are lacking. Objective: To develop guidelines for the treatment of adults with HCM. Methods: A multidisciplinary panel of clinical experts, together with experts in systematic literature review, identified and prioritized 8 clinical questions related to the treatment of HCM in adult patients. The systematic reviews (SRs) queried electronic databases for studies relevant to the selected questions. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. An independent SR was conducted in parallel to assess patients' and physicians' values and preferences, costs, resources needed, acceptability, feasibility, equity, and other domains relevant to the Evidence-to-Decision framework as well as to enable judgements and recommendations. Results: The panel recommends (strong recommendation) in adults with HCM treatment with denosumab (Dmab) or an intravenous (IV) bisphosphonate (BP). The following recommendations were based on low certainty of the evidence. The panel suggests (conditional recommendation) (1) in adults with HCM, the use of Dmab rather than an IV BP; (2) in adults with severe HCM, a combination of calcitonin and an IV BP or Dmab therapy as initial treatment; and (3) in adults with refractory/recurrent HCM despite treatment with BP, the use of Dmab. The panel suggests (conditional recommendation) the addition of an IV BP or Dmab in adult patients with hypercalcemia due to tumors associated with high calcitriol levels who are already receiving glucocorticoid therapy but continue to have severe or symptomatic HCM. The panel suggests (conditional recommendation) in adult patients with hypercalcemia due to parathyroid carcinoma, treatment with either a calcimimetic or an antiresorptive (IV BP or Dmab). The panel judges the treatments as probably accessible and feasible for most recommendations but noted variability in costs, resources required, and their impact on equity. Conclusions: The panel's recommendations are based on currently available evidence considering the most important outcomes in HCM to patients and key stakeholders. Treatment of the primary malignancy is instrumental for controlling hypercalcemia and preventing its recurrence. The recommendations provide a framework for the medical management of adults with HCM and incorporate important decisional and contextual factors. The guidelines underscore current knowledge gaps that can be used to establish future research agendas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Integrating shared decision making between patients and physicians and incorporating their values and preferences in the development of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is of critical importance to optimize CPG implementation and treatment adherence. This applies to many debilitating diseases, including hypercalcemia of malignancy (HCM). Objective: Evaluate patient and physician values, preferences, and attitudes to better inform CPGs to treat HCM in adults. Methods: We followed a mixed-methods approach. We conducted a systematic review using 5 databases to identify studies reporting on patient and physician values, costs and resources, feasibility, acceptability, and equity regarding HCM treatment. We also gathered data from different countries on the cost of multiple treatment modalities. We collected data on outcome prioritization from the CPG Working Group. Similarly, we collected data from patients with HCM regarding outcome prioritization and administered a questionnaire to evaluate their attitudes and perceptions toward treatment as well as treatment acceptability and feasibility. Results: In the systematic review, we included 2 cross-sectional surveys conducted on the same population of physicians who agreed that treating HCM alleviates symptoms and improves quality of life; however, harms and benefits should be thoroughly considered when deciding on the duration of treatment. We also included 2 studies on cost showing that intravenous (IV) bisphosphonate is more cost-effective than a combination of IV bisphosphonate and calcitonin and administration of IV zoledronic acid at home is more cost-effective than other IV bisphosphonates. The cost of zoledronic acid, denosumab, and cinacalcet varied widely among countries and types (brand vs generic). Both the CPG Working Group and patients with HCM agreed that the most important outcomes when deciding on treatment were survival and resolution of HCM, but there was some variability in the ratings for other outcomes. Conclusion: Using mixed methods, CPG developers can obtain meaningful information regarding evidence to decision criteria. In the case of HCM CPGs, this approach has provided the required contextual information and supported the development of evidence-based recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Hypercalcemia is a common complication of malignancy that is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Objective: To support development of the Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline for the treatment of hypercalcemia of malignancy in adults. Methods: We searched multiple databases for studies that addressed 8 clinical questions prioritized by a guideline panel from the Endocrine Society. Quantitative and qualitative synthesis was performed. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess certainty of evidence. Results: We reviewed 1949 citations, from which we included 21 studies. The risk of bias for most of the included studies was moderate. A higher proportion of patients who received bisphosphonate achieved resolution of hypercalcemia when compared to placebo. The incidence rate of adverse events was significantly higher in the bisphosphonate group. Comparing denosumab to bisphosphonate, there was no significant difference in the rate of patients who achieved resolution of hypercalcemia. Two-thirds of patients with refractory/recurrent hypercalcemia of malignancy who received denosumab following bisphosphonate therapy achieved resolution of hypercalcemia. Addition of calcitonin to bisphosphonate therapy did not affect the resolution of hypercalcemia, time to normocalcemia, or hypocalcemia. Only indirect evidence was available to address questions on the management of hypercalcemia in tumors associated with high calcitriol levels, refractory/recurrent hypercalcemia of malignancy following the use of bisphosphonates, and the use of calcimimetics in the treatment of hypercalcemia associated with parathyroid carcinoma. The certainty of the evidence to address all 8 clinical questions was low to very low. Conclusion: The evidence summarized in this systematic review addresses the benefits and harms of treatments of hypercalcemia of malignancy. Additional information about patients' values and preferences, and other important decisional and contextual factors is needed to facilitate the development of clinical recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Hounsfield units (HUs) may better predict biomechanical complications of instrumented fusion than conventional bone quality measures. Typically, noncontrast axial slices are used. This study aims to address the influence of reconstruction plane and contrast administration on measured HUs in patients undergoing lumbar spine imaging., Methods: Patients without prior spine surgery, infection, or tumor were identified for 3 groups: 1) 150 patients with high-resolution noncontrast lumbar CT, 2) 109 patients with noncontrast and contrast-enhanced lumbar CT, and 3) 100 patients with noncontrast lumbar CT and lumbar CT myelograms. Noncontrast HU measures in group 1 were compared between axial, sagittal, and coronal reconstructions. HU measures for groups 2 and 3 were compared on axial slice averages. HU measures between groups were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test to investigate the presence of a statistically significant difference between groups (α = 0.05). Linear regression was also used to determine the degree of correlation between HU measures on noncontrast axial CT slices and HU measures on other sequences., Results: The mean patient age was 58.8 ± 15.9 years for group 1 (54.0% male), 65.5 ± 15.9 years for group 2 (61.5% male), and 65.2 ± 14.2 years (53.5% male) for group 3. Comparison of HU measures in group 1 showed significant differences across measurement modalities with the exception of axial average versus coronal average measures (p = 0.257) and sagittal average versus midsagittal measures (p = 0.726). There were significant differences in average axial HUs for each vertebral body between contrast and noncontrast lumbar CT and between CT myelography and noncontrast CT. Linear regression analysis demonstrated an extremely high correlation between measures for all methodologies (r2 = 0.950-0.986, all p < 0.001), and between contrast-enhanced and noncontrast studies (r2 = 0.870, p < 0.001). Measurements on CT myelography were significantly correlated with those in noncontrast studies, although to a lesser degree (r2 = 0.745, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: HU measures on noncontrast CT appear similar across multiple different planes, suggesting that a simpler methodology such as single-slice measurement on midsagittal reconstruction may allow for more rapid assessment of underlying bone quality. Consistent with prior work, contrast-enhanced CT sequences appear to reliably mirror underlying bone quality, although CT myelogram measures may vary in a more unpredictable way that precludes their use to interpret underlying bone quality. HU measures on contrast-enhanced studies are on average greater, suggesting the need for higher cutoff values.