Search

Importance: Conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) are commonly used treatment options for relieving metastatic bone pain. The effectiveness of SBRT compared with cEBRT in pain relief has been a subject of debate, and conflicting results have been reported., Objective: To compare the effectiveness associated with SBRT vs cEBRT for relieving metastatic bone pain., Data Sources: A structured search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases on June 5, 2023. Additionally, results were added from a new randomized clinical trial (RCT) and additional unpublished data from an already published RCT., Study Selection: Comparative studies reporting pain response after SBRT vs cEBRT in patients with painful bone metastases., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two independent reviewers extracted data from eligible studies. Data were extracted for the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations. The study is reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline., Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall and complete pain response at 1, 3, and 6 months after radiotherapy, according to the study's definition. Relative risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs were calculated for each study. A random-effects model using a restricted maximum likelihood estimator was applied for meta-analysis., Results: There were 18 studies with 1685 patients included in the systematic review and 8 RCTs with 1090 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In 7 RCTs, overall pain response was defined according to the International Consensus on Palliative Radiotherapy Endpoints in clinical trials (ICPRE). The complete pain response was reported in 6 RCTs, all defined according to the ICPRE. The ITT meta-analyses showed that the overall pain response rates did not differ between cEBRT and SBRT at 1 (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.99-1.30), 3 (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.96-1.47), or 6 (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.96-1.54) months. However, SBRT was associated with a higher complete pain response at 1 (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.02-2.01), 3 (RR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.16-2.78), and 6 (RR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.24-4.91) months after radiotherapy. The PP meta-analyses showed comparable results., Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, patients with painful bone metastases experienced similar overall pain response after SBRT compared with cEBRT. More patients had complete pain alleviation after SBRT, suggesting that selected subgroups will benefit from SBRT.

Introduction: Bones are frequent sites of metastatic disease, observed in 30-75% of advanced cancer patients. Quality of life (QoL) is an important endpoint in studies evaluating the treatments of bone metastases (BM), and many patient-reported outcome tools are available. The primary objective of this systematic review was to compile a list of QoL issues relevant to BM and its interventions. The secondary objective was to identify common tools used to assess QoL in patients with BM, and the QoL issues they fail to address., Methods: A search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases between 1946 and 27 January 2023 with the keywords "bone metastases", "quality of life", and "patient reported outcomes". Specific QoL issues in original research studies and the QoL tools used were extracted., Results: The review identified the QoL issues most prevalent to BM in the literature. Physical and functional issues observed in patients included pain, interference with ambulation and daily activities, and fatigue. Psychological symptoms, such as helplessness, depression, and anxiety were also common. These issues interfered with patients' relationships and social activities. Items not mentioned in existing QoL tools were related to newer treatments of BM, such as pain flare, flu-like symptoms, and jaw pain due to osteonecrosis., Conclusions: This systematic review highlights that QoL issues for patients with BM have expanded over time due to advances in BM-directed treatments. If they are relevant, additional treatment-related QoL issues identified need to be validated prospectively by patients and added to current assessment tools., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: This study aimed to compare SBRT and cEBRT for treating spinal metastases through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs)., Methods: PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched up to 6 May 2023 for RCTs comparing SBRT and cEBRT for spinal metastases. Overall and complete pain response, local progression, overall survival, quality of life and adverse events were extracted. Data were pooled using random-effects models. Results were reported as risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes, and hazard ratios (HRs) for time-to-event outcomes, along with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I 2 statistic., Results: Three RCTs were identified involving 642 patients. No differences were seen in overall pain response comparing SBRT and cEBRT (RR at 3 months: 1.12, 95% CI, 0.74-1.70, p = 0.59; RR at 6 months: 1.29, 95% CI, 0.97-1.72, p = 0.08). Only two of three studies presented complete pain response data. SBRT demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in complete pain response compared to cEBRT (RR at 3 months: 2.52; 95% CI, 1.58-4.01; P < 0.0001; RR at 6 months: 2.48; 95% CI, 1.23-4.99; P = 0.01). There were no significant differences in local progression and overall survival. Adverse events were similar, except for any grade radiation dermatitis, which was significantly lower in SBRT arm (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.03-0.96, P = 0.04)., Conclusion: SBRT is a safe treatment option for spine metastases. It may provide better complete pain response compared to cEBRT. Additional trials are needed to determine the potential benefits of SBRT in specific patient subsets., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Radiotherapy is an important treatment modality for pain control in patients with bone metastases. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), which allows delivering a much higher dose per fraction while sparing critical structures compared to conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT), has become more widely used, especially in the oligometastatic setting. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the pain response rate of SBRT and cEBRT for bone metastases have shown conflicting results, as have four recent systematic reviews with meta-analyses of these trials. Possible reasons for the different outcomes between these reviews include differences in methodology, which trials were included, and the endpoints examined and how they were defined. We suggest ways to improve analysis of these RCTs, particularly performing an individual patient-level meta-analysis since the trials included heterogeneous populations. The results of such studies will help guide future investigations needed to validate patient selection criteria, optimize SBRT dose schedules, include additional endpoints (such as the time to onset of pain response, durability of pain response, quality of life (QOL), and side effects of SBRT), and better assess the cost-effectiveness and trade-offs of SBRT compared to cEBRT. An international Delphi consensus to guide selection of optimal candidates for SBRT is warranted before more prospective data is available.

Background: Spinal metastases can lead to unremitting pain and neurological deficits, which substantially impair daily functioning and quality of life. Patients with unstable spinal metastases receive surgical stabilization followed by palliative radiotherapy as soon as wound healing allows. The time between surgery and radiotherapy delays improvement of mobility, radiotherapy-induced pain relief, local tumor control, and restart of systemic oncological therapy. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) enables delivery of preoperative high-dose radiotherapy while dose-sparing the surgical field, allowing stabilizing surgery within only hours. Patients may experience earlier recovery of mobility, regression of pain, and return to systemic oncological therapy. The BLEND RCT evaluates the effectiveness of SBRT followed by surgery within 24 h for the treatment of symptomatic, unstable spinal metastases., Methods: This phase III randomized controlled trial is embedded within the PRospective Evaluation of interventional StudiEs on boNe meTastases (PRESENT) cohort. Patients with symptomatic, unstable spinal metastases requiring stabilizing surgery and radiotherapy will be randomized (1:1). The intervention group (n = 50) will be offered same-day SBRT and surgery, which they can accept or refuse. According to the Trial within Cohorts (TwiCs) design, the control group (n = 50) will not be informed and receive standard treatment (surgery followed by conventional radiotherapy after 1-2 weeks when wound healing allows). Baseline characteristics and outcome measures will be captured within PRESENT. The primary outcome is physical functioning (EORTC-QLQ-C15-PAL) 4 weeks after start of treatment. Secondary endpoints include pain response, time until return to systemic oncological therapy, quality of life, local tumor control, and adverse events up to 3 months post-treatment., Discussion: The BLEND RCT evaluates the effect of same-day SBRT and stabilizing surgery for the treatment of symptomatic, unstable spinal metastases compared with standard of care. We expect better functional outcomes, faster pain relief, and continuation of systemic oncological therapy. The TwiCs design enables efficient recruitment within an ongoing cohort, as well as prevention of disappointment bias and drop-out as control patients will not be informed about the trial., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05575323. Registered on October 11, 2022., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background and Objective: The 30-day expected mortality rate is frequently used as a metric to determine which patients benefit from palliative radiation treatment (RT). We conducted a narrative review to examine whether its use as a metric might be appropriate for patient selection., Methods: A literature review was conducted to identify relevant studies that highlight the benefits of palliative RT in timely symptom management among patients with a poor performance status, the accuracy of predicting survival near the end of life and ways to speed up the process of RT administration through rapid response clinics., Key Content and Findings: Several trials have demonstrated substantial response rates for pain and/or bleeding by four weeks and sometimes within the first two weeks after RT. Models of patient survival have limited accuracy, particularly for predicting whether patients will die within the next 30 days. Dedicated Rapid Access Palliative RT (RAPRT) clinics, in which patients are assessed, simulated and treated on the same day, reduce the number of patient visits to the radiation oncology department and hence the burden on the patient as well as costs., Conclusions: Single-fraction palliative RT should be offered to eligible patients if they are able to attend treatment and could potentially benefit from symptom palliation, irrespective of predicted life expectancy. We discourage the routine use of the 30-day mortality as the only metric to decide whether to offer RT. More common implementation of RAPRT clinics could result in a significant benefit for patients of all life expectancies, but particularly those having short ones.

Background Context: Palliative radiotherapy (RT) can lead to remineralization of osteolytic lesions thereby potentially restoring some of the weight-bearing capacity and preventing vertebral collapse. It is not clear, however, under which circumstances remineralization of osteolytic lesions occurs., Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the change in bone mineral density in spinal metastases after RT compared to a reference region, and find associated factors., Study Design: Retrospective analysis within prospective observational cohort OUTCOME MEASURES: change in bone mineral density measured in Hounsfield Units (HU)., Patient Sample: patients treated with RT for (painful) bone metastases., Methods: Patients with spinal metastases were included if computed tomography scans both pre- and post-RT were available. Bone density was measured in HU. A region of interest (ROI) was drawn manually in the metastatic lesion. As a reference, a measurement of bone density in adjacent, unaffected, and non-irradiated vertebrae was used. Factors tested for association were origin of the primary tumor, RT dose and fractionation scheme, and concomitant use of bisphosphonates., Results: A total of 31 patients with 49 spinal metastases, originating from various primary tumors, were included. The median age on baseline was 58 years (IQR: 53-63) and median time between baseline and follow-up scan was 8.2 months (IQR: 3.0-18.4). Difference in HU in the lesion before and after treatment was 146.9 HU (95% CI 68.4-225.4; p<.01). Difference in HU in the reference vertebra between baseline and first follow-up was 19.1 HU (95% CI -47.9 to 86.0; p=.58). Difference between reference vertebrae and metastatic lesions on baseline was -194.1 HU (95% CI -276.2 to -112.0; p<.01). After RT, this difference was reduced to -50.3 HU (95% CI -199.6 to 99.0; p=.52). Patients using bisphosphonates showed a greater increase in HU, 194.1 HU versus 60.6 HU, p=.01., Conclusions: Palliative radiation of osteolytic lytic spinal metastases is positively associated with an increased bone mineral density at follow-up. The use of bisphosphonates was linked to an increased bone mineral density when used during or after RT., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The primary goal of palliative treatment of spinal metastases is to maintain or improve health-related quality of life (HRQOL). We translated and validated a Dutch version of The Spine Oncology Study Group Outcome Questionnaire (SOSGOQ2.0), a valid and reliable 20-item questionnaire to evaluate HRQOL in patients with spinal metastases., Methods: After cross-cultural translation and adaptation, the questionnaire was pre-tested in fifteen patients referred for spine surgery and/or radiotherapy. This resulted in a final questionnaire that was sent to patients for assessment of internal consistency, construct (i.e., convergent and divergent) validity, discriminative power and test-retest reliability., Results: Overall, 147 patients (mean age 65.6 years, SD = 10.4) completed the questionnaire after a median time of 45.4 months (IQR = 18.9-72.9) after spine surgery and/or radiotherapy. Internal consistency was good for the Physical function, Pain, and Mental health domains (α = 0.87, 0.86, 0.72), but not for Social function (α = 0.04). Good convergent validity was demonstrated except for Social function (r s  = 0.37 95%CI = 0.21-0.51). Discriminative power between patients with ECOG performance scores of 0-1 and 2-4 was found on all domains and Neurological function items. Test-retest reliability was acceptable for Physical function, Pain and Mental health (ICC = 0.89 95%CI = 0.81-0.94, ICC = 0.88 95%CI = 0.78-0.93, ICC = 0.68 95%CI = 0.48-0.81), whereas ICC = 0.45 (95%CI = 0.17-0.66) for Social function was below threshold. After removing item 20 from the Social function domain, internal consistency improved, and convergent validity and test-retest reliability were good., Conclusion: The Dutch version of the SOSGOQ2.0 questionnaire is a reliable and valid tool to measure HRQOL in patients with spinal metastases. Item 20 was removed to retain psychometric properties., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

This is the second part of the guidelines on the management of bone metastases. In the first part, the diagnosis and management of uncomplicated bone metastases have been addressed. Bone metastases may significantly reduce quality of life due to related symptoms and possible complications. The most common symptoms include pain and neurologic deficits. The most serious complications of bone metastases are skeletal-related events (SRE), defined as pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, pain, or other symptoms requiring an urgent intervention such as surgery or radiotherapy. Diffuse bone metastases may lead to hypercalcaemia that can be fatal if untreated. The growing access to modern diagnostic tools allows early detection of asymptomatic bone metastases that could be successfully managed with local treatment if oligometastatic or systemic treatment for diffuse bone metastases to try to avoid the development of SRE., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To evaluate patients' experience of having served as controls without a notification at the time of randomization in the context of the trial within cohorts (TwiCs) design., Methods: Patients were asked for their opinion on having served as controls in TwiCs, before and after having been provided the trial results. Patients had provided broad consent to randomization at cohort entry and had served as controls in one of two TwiCs (an exercise program after breast cancer treatment or radiotherapy dose-escalation for rectal cancer)., Results: Two to 6 years after cohort entry, 15% (n = 16) of all patients remembered having provided broad consent to randomization. Before disclosure of trial results, 47% (n = 52) of patients thought positively, 45% (n = 50) neutrally, and 2% (n = 2) negatively of having served as controls in one of the two trials. Seventeen percent (n = 18) of patients were positive, 65% (n = 71) neutral, and 11% (n = 12) negative about not having been notified when serving as controls. The survey results were comparable after disclosure of trial results., Conclusions: These results support the use of the TwiCs design with the staged-informed consent procedure. Keeping patients engaged and aware of the consents provided might further improve patients' experience of serving as controls in TwiCs., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: Magnetic resonance (MR)-guided linear accelerators (MR-Linac) enable accurate estimation of delivered doses through dose accumulation using daily MR images and treatment plans. We aimed to assess the association between the accumulated bladder (wall) dose and patient-reported acute urinary toxicity in prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT)., Materials and Methods: One-hundred-and-thirty PCa patients treated on a 1.5 T MR-Linac were included. Patients filled out International Prostate Symptom Scores (IPSS) questionnaires at baseline, 1 month, and 3 months post-treatment. Deformable image registration-based dose accumulation was performed to reconstruct the delivered dose. Dose parameters for both bladder and bladder wall were correlated with a clinically relevant increase in IPSS (≥ 10 points) and/or start of alpha-blockers within 3 months using logistic regression., Results: Thirty-nine patients (30%) experienced a clinically relevant IPSS increase and/or started with alpha-blockers. Bladder D5cm 3 , V 10-35Gy (in %), and D mean and Bladder wall V 10-35Gy (cm 3 and %) and D mean were correlated with the outcome (odds ratios 1.04-1.33, p-values 0.001-0.044). Corrected for baseline characteristics, bladder V 10-35Gy (in %) and D mean and bladder wall V 10-35Gy (cm 3 and %) and D mean were still correlated with the outcome (odds ratios 1.04-1.30, p-values 0.001-0.028). Bladder wall parameters generally showed larger AUC values., Conclusion: This is the first study to assess the correlation between accumulated bladder wall dose and patient-reported urinary toxicity in PCa patients treated with MR-guided SBRT. The dose to the bladder wall is a promising parameter for prediction of patient-reported urinary toxicity and therefore warrants prospective validation and consideration in treatment planning., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Painful bone metastases hamper quality of life (QoL). The aim of this prespecified secondary analysis of the PRESENT trial was to compare change in global QoL, physical functioning, emotional functioning, functional interference, and psychosocial aspects after conventional radiation therapy (cRT) versus stereotactic body RT (SBRT)., Methods and Materials: A total of 110 patients were enrolled in the phase 2 randomized controlled VERTICAL trial (NCT02364115) following the "trials within cohorts" design and randomized 1:1 to cRT or SBRT. Patient-reported global QoL, physical functioning, emotional functioning, functional interference, and psychosocial aspects were assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire (QLQ) Core 15 Palliative Care and QLQ Bone Metastases 22 modules. Changes in QoL domains over time were compared between patients treated with cRT and SBRT using intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) linear mixed model analysis adjusting for baseline scores. Proportions of patients in the cRT versus SBRT arm reporting a clinically relevant change in QoL within 3 months were compared using a χ 2 test., Results: QoL scores had improved over time and were comparable between groups for all domains in both the ITT and PP analyses, except for functional interference and psychological aspects in the ITT. Functional interference scores had improved more after 12 weeks in the cRT arm than in the SBRT arm (25.5 vs 14.1 points, respectively; effect size [ES] = 0.49, P = .04). Psychosocial aspects scores had improved more after 8 weeks in the cRT arm than in the SBRT arm (12.2 vs 7.3; ES = 0.56, P = .04). No clinically relevant differences between groups at 12 weeks in terms of global QoL, physical functioning, emotional functioning, functional interference, and psychosocial aspects were observed., Conclusions: Palliative RT improves QoL. Both SBRT and cRT have a comparable effect on patient-reported QoL outcomes in patients with painful bone metastases. Functional interference and psychological aspects scores improved more in patients treated with cRT versus patients offered SBRT., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: Spine delineation is essential for high quality radiotherapy treatment planning of spinal metastases. However, manual delineation is time-consuming and prone to interobserver variability. Automatic spine delineation, especially using deep learning, has shown promising results in healthy subjects. We aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of deep learning-based vertebral body delineations for radiotherapy planning purposes., Materials and Methods: A multi-scale convolutional neural network (CNN) was used for automatic segmentation and labeling. Two approaches were tested: the combined approach using one CNN for both segmentation and labeling, and the sequential approach using separate CNN's for these tasks. Training and internal validation data included 580 vertebrae, external validation data included 202 vertebrae. For quantitative assessment, Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and Hausdorff distance (HD) were used. Axial slices from external images were presented to radiation oncologists for subjective evaluation., Results: Both approaches performed comparably during the internal validation (DSC: 96.7%, HD: 3.6 mm), but the sequential approach proved more robust during the external validation (DSC: 94.5% vs 94.4%, p < 0.001, HD: 4.5 vs 7.1 mm, p < 0.001). Subsequently, subjective evaluation of this sequential approach showed that experienced radiation oncologists could distinguish automatic from human-made contours in 63% of cases. They rated automatic contours clinically acceptable in 77% of cases, compared to 88% of human-made contours., Conclusion: We present a feasible approach for automatic vertebral body delineation using two variants of a multi-scale CNN. This approach generates high quality automatic delineations, which can save time in a clinical radiotherapy workflow., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2022 The Author(s).)

Competing Interests: We declare no competing interests.

Purpose: Pain response after conventional external beam radiation therapy (cRT) in patients with painful bone metastases is observed in 60% to 70% of patients. The aim of the VERTICAL trial was to investigate whether stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) improves pain response., Methods and Materials: This single-center, phase 2, randomized controlled trial was conducted within the PRESENT cohort, which consists of patients referred for radiation therapy of bone metastases to our tertiary center. Cohort participants with painful bone metastases who gave broad informed consent for randomization were randomly assigned to cRT or SBRT. Only patients in the intervention arm received information about the trial and were offered SBRT (1 × 18 Gy, 3 × 10 Gy, or 5 × 7 Gy), which they could accept or refuse. Patients who refused SBRT underwent standard cRT (1 × 8 Gy, 5 × 4 Gy, or 10 × 3 Gy). Patients in the control arm were not informed. Primary endpoint was pain response at 3 months after radiation therapy. Secondary outcomes were pain response at any point within 3 months, mean pain scores, and toxicity. Data were analyzed intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP). This trial was registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02364115., Results: Between January 29, 2015, and March 20, 2019, 110 patients were randomized. ITT analysis included 44 patients in the cRT arm and 45 patients in the SBRT arm. In the intervention arm, 12 patients (27%) declined SBRT, and 7 patients (16%) were unable to complete the SBRT treatment. In ITT, 14 of 44 patients (32%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 18%-45%) in the control arm and 18 of 45 patients (40%; 95% CI, 26%-54%) in the SBRT arm reported a pain response at 3 months (P = .42). In PP, these proportions were 14 of 44 (32%; 95% CI, 18%-45%) and 12 of 23 patients (46%; 95% CI, 27%-66%), respectively (P = .55). In ITT, a pain response within 3 months was reported by 30 of 44 control patients (82%; 95% CI, 68%-90%) and 38 of 45 patients (84%; 95% CI, 71%-92%) in the SBRT arm (P = .12). In PP, these proportions were 36 of 44 (82%; 95% CI, 68%-90%) and 26 of 27 patients (96%; 95% CI; 81%-100%), respectively (P = .12). No grade 3 or 4 toxicity was observed in either arm., Conclusions: SBRT did not significantly improve pain response in patients with painful bone metastases. One in 4 patients preferred to undergo cRT over SBRT, and 1 in 5 patients starting SBRT was unable to complete this treatment. Because of this selective dropout, which can be attributed to the character of the intervention, the trial was underpowered to detect the prespecified difference in pain response., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Implementation of COVID-19 measures may have induced concerns about access and quality of health care for cancer patients with bone metastases, and it may have affected their quality of life. In this study, we evaluated the effect of the first COVID-19 lockdown on quality of life and emotional functioning of patients with stage IV cancer treated for painful bone metastases in the UMC Utrecht, the Netherlands. A COVID-19 specific questionnaire was sent to active participants in the Prospective Evaluation of interventional StudiEs on boNe meTastases (PRESENT) cohort, consisting of patients irradiated for metastatic bone disease. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) were compared with the last two PROs collected within the PRESENT cohort before the COVID-19 lockdown in the Netherlands on the 16th of March. For the 169 (53%) responders, median age at start of lockdown was 68 years (range 38-92) and 62% were male. Patients reported a statistically significant decrease in emotional functioning (83.6 to 79.2, P = 0.004) and in general quality of life score during the COVID-19 lockdown (72.4 to 68.7, P = 0.007). A steep increase in feeling isolated was reported (18% before and 67% during lockdown). This study has shown a strong increase in the experience of isolation and a decrease of emotional functioning and general quality of life during the COVID-19 lockdown in cancer patients with bone metastases. Due to the nature of the treatment of this patient population, efforts should be made to minimize these changes during future lockdowns.

Background and Objective: The Trials within Cohorts design aims to reduce recruitment difficulties and disappointment bias in pragmatic trials. On cohort enrollment, broad informed consent for randomization is asked, after which cohort participants can be randomized to interventions or serve as controls without further notification. We evaluated patients' recollection, understanding, and acceptance of broad consent in a clinical oncology setting., Methods: We surveyed 610 patients with cancer participating in ongoing TwiCs; 482 patients (79%) responded, of which 312 patients shortly after cohort enrollment, 108 patients after randomization to an intervention (12-18 months after cohort enrollment), and a random sample of 62 cohort participants who had not been selected for interventions (1-6 months after cohort enrollment)., Results: Shortly after providing cohort consent, 76% of patients (238/312) adequately remembered whether they had given broad consent for randomization. Of patients randomly offered interventions, 76% (82/108) remembered giving broad consent for randomization; 41% (44/108) understood they were randomly selected, 44% (48/108) were not interested in selection procedures, and 10% (11/108) did not understand selection was random. Among patients not selected for interventions, 42% (26/62) understood selection was random; 89% felt neutral regarding the scenario of "not being selected for an intervention while your data were being used in comparison with patients receiving interventions," 10% felt reassured (6/62) and 2% scared/insecure (2/62)., Conclusion: Patients adequately remember giving broad consent for randomization shortly after cohort enrollment and after being offered an intervention, but recollection is lower in those never selected for interventions. Patients are acceptant of serving as control without further notifications., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: An increasing number of patients is diagnosed with spinal metastases due to elevated cancer incidence and improved overall survival. Patients with symptomatic spinal bone metastases often receive radiotherapy with or without surgical stabilisation. Patients with a life expectancy of less than 3 months are generally deemed unfit for surgery, therefore adequate pre-treatment assessment of life expectancy is necessary. The aim of this study was to assess new factors associated with overall survival for this category of patients. Patients and methods: Patients who received radiotherapy for thoracic or lumbar spinal metastases from June 2013 to December 2016 were included in this study. The pre-treatment planning CT for radiotherapy treatment was used to assess the patient's visceral fat area, subcutaneous fat area, total muscle area and skeletal muscle density on a single transverse slice at the L3 level. The total muscle area was used to assess sarcopenia. Furthermore, data were collected on age, sex, primary tumour, Karnofsky performance score, medical history, number of bone metastases, non-bone metastases and neurological symptoms. Univariable and multivariable cox regressions were performed to determine the association between our variables of interest and the survival at 90 and 365 days. Results: A total of 310 patients was included. The median age was 67 years. Overall survival rates for 90 and 365 days were 71% and 36% respectively. For 90- and 365-day survival, the Karnofsky performance score, muscle density and primary tumour were independently significantly associated. The visceral or subcutaneous fat area and their ratio and sarcopenia were not independently associated with overall survival. Conclusions: Of the body morphology, only muscle density was statistically significant associated with overall survival after 90 and 365 days in patients with spinal bone metastases. Body fat distribution was not significantly associated with overall survival.

Background: Stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) might improve pain and local control in patients with bone metastases compared to conventional radiotherapy, although an overall estimate of these outcomes is currently unknown., Methods: A systematic review was carried out following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched to identify studies reporting pain response and local control among patients with bone metastases from solid-organ tumors who underwent SBRT in 1-6 fractions. All studies prior to April 15, 2017, were included. Study quality was assessed by predefined criteria, and pain response and local control rates were extracted., Results: A total of 2619 studies were screened; 57 were included (reporting outcomes for 3995 patients) of which 38 reported pain response and 45 local control rates. Local control rates were high with pain response rates above those previously reported for conventional radiotherapy. Marked heterogeneity in study populations and delivered treatments were identified such that quantitative synthesis was not appropriate. Reported toxicity was limited. Of the pain response studies, 73.7% used a retrospective cohort design and only 10.5% used the international consensus endpoint definitions of pain response. The median survival within the included studies ranged from 8 to 30.4 months, suggesting a high risk of selection bias in the included observational studies., Conclusions: This review demonstrates the potential benefit of SBRT over conventional palliative radiotherapy in improving pain due to bone metastases. Given the methodological limitations of the published literature, however, large randomized trials are now urgently required to better quantify this benefit., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Introduction: Decreasing the radiation dose in the surgical area is important to lower the risk of wound complications when surgery and radiotherapy are combined for the treatment of spinal metastases. The purpose of this study was to compare the radiation dose in the surgical area for spinal metastases between single fraction external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), single fraction stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and single fraction SBRT with active sparing (SBRT-AS) of the posterior surgical area., Methods: Radiotherapy treatment plans for EBRT, SBRT and SBRT-AS of the posterior surgical area were created for 13 patients with spinal metastases. A single fraction of 8Gy was prescribed to the spinal metastasis in the EBRT plan. For the SBRT treatment plans, a single fraction of 18Gy was prescribed to the metastasis and 8Gy to the rest of the vertebral body. For the SBRT plan with active sparing the dose in the designated surgical area was minimized without compromising the dose to the organs at risk., Results: The median dose in the surgical area was 2.6Gy (1.6-5.3Gy) in the SBRT plan with active sparing of the surgical area compared to a median dose of 3.7Gy (1.6-6.3Gy) in the SBRT plan without sparing and 6.5Gy (3.5-9.1Gy) in the EBRT plans (p < .001). The radiation doses to the spinal metastases and organs at risk were not significantly different between the SBRT plan with and without sparing the surgical area., Conclusions: The radiation dose to the surgical area is significantly decreased with the use of SBRT compared to EBRT. Active sparing of the surgical area further decreased the mean radiation dose in the surgical area without compromising the dose to the spinal metastasis and the organs at risk.

Background: Assessment of pain is important in daily clinical practice and as an endpoint in clinical studies. Because pain perception is highly subjective, pain measurement is complex. Self-rating pain scales are currently of great importance but have limitations. They depend on many more factors than pain, which could lead to an incorrect assessment of therapies or clinical studies. Therefore, there is need for valid, reliable, safe, and low-cost methods to determine and quantify patients' pain more objectively., Objective: To provide an overview of devices and techniques that can be used to administer a pain stimulus with similar intensity as the endogenous pain experienced by the patient, in order to quantify and subsequently follow patients' pain more objectively., Study Design: In this systematic review, articles from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library and Scopus were reviewed for eligibility., Methods: Studies that described a device or technique that could be used to induce a variable, controlled, and measurable pain stimulus were included. Studies that made correlations with established pain scales or those who compared outcomes in multiple tests were selected to assessvalidity and reliability., Results: A total of 1,308 manuscripts were initially retrieved. After independent screening by a team of 4 reviewers, 19 studies were eventually included describing 15 different devices or techniques. These devices could be divided into groups based on stimulus administration: electrical, external pressure (probe) and miscellaneous pain stimulators. Electrical stimulators were found to be tested extensively and proven to be both valid and reliable., Limitations: To correlate new techniques with older methods such as the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for which an improvement is desired, is debatable. To (partially) address this problem, the reliability is added as an additional primary outcome to assess which device works best. Further limitations include the heterogeneity of studies found in both the types of pain measured as in outcome measures presented. In addition, it is important to note that part of the devices described cannot directly be used for clinical practice due to products that have cease to exist or the description of solely techniques rather than testing ready-to-use devices., Conclusion: Several devices and techniques compared pain intensity experienced by patients with an external pain stimulus that potentially could be used as a new objective pain measurement tool. Given the results of our review, electrical stimulators that have been tested extensively with high validity, reliability, and feasibility would be recommended for use for clinical and research purposes. Moreover, normalization of pain intensity scores for current perception is important. Pain intensity normalization leads to higher correlations with established pain scales and possibly to increased inter-patient reliability.Registration number: Registered in the PROSPERO database (PROSPERO 2016:CRD42016041974)KEY WORDS: Systematic review, objective pain measurement, pain scales; devices, techniques, validity, reliability, safety, feasibility.

Background: Routine treatment for unstable spinal metastases consists of surgical stabilization followed by external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) after a minimum of 1-2 weeks to allow for initial wound healing. Although routine treatment, there are several downsides. First, radiotherapy induced pain relief is delayed by the time interval required for wound healing. Second, EBRT often requires multiple hospital visits and only 60% of the patients experience pain relief. Third, spinal implants cause imaging artifacts hindering SBRT treatment planning and delivery. Reversing the order of surgery and radiotherapy, with dose sparing of the surgical area by SBRT, could overcome these disadvantages and by eliminating the interval between the two treatments, recovery, and palliation may occur earlier. Design: The safety of SBRT followed by surgical stabilization within 24 h for the treatment of unstable spinal metastases was investigated. Safety was evaluated using the Common-Toxicity-Criteria-Adverse-Events-4.0, with the occurrence of wound complications within 90-days being the primary concern. Results: Between June-2015 and January-2017, 13 patients underwent SBRT followed by surgical stabilization for unstable spinal metastases. The median time between SBRT and surgery was 17-h (IQR 5-19). None of the patients experienced wound complications. Improvements in pain and quality of life were observed over time for all patients. Conclusion: SBRT followed by surgical stabilization within 24 h for the treatment of unstable spinal metastases is safe. Palliation may be experienced earlier and with both treatments being performed in one hospital admission the treatment burden decreases.

Purpose: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a highly effective and potentially ablative treatment for complex spinal metastases. Recent data have suggested radiobiologic effects of SBRT that expand beyond the traditional concept of DNA damage. Antitumor immunity, vascular damage leading to tumor necrosis, and increased rates of tumor apoptosis have been implied; however, in-human evidence remains scarce. The present study reports unique pathologic confirmation of SBRT-induced biological effects within spinal metastases treated with preoperative SBRT., Methods and Materials: Ten patients with spinal metastases secondary to various solid tumors were treated with preoperative single-fraction SBRT (18 Gy) to the magnetic resonance imaging-defined macroscopic metastasis, followed by spinal stabilization within 24 hours. Perioperative samples of spinal metastases were obtained, and 6 patients also had a pre-SBRT biopsy specimen available for a matched comparison. The samples were stained for tumor necrosis on routine hematoxylin-eosin-stained slices and, subsequently, immunohistochemical staining for T cells (CD3+, CD4+, CD8+), natural killer cells (CD56+), endothelium (CD31+), and apoptotic activity (caspase-3)., Results: Perioperative biopsy specimens were obtained ∼6 hours (range 4.5-7.5) or 21 hours (range 18.5-22.5) after SBRT. Necrosis was observed in 83% of the 21-hour post-SBRT samples (5 of 6) compared with 0% of pre-SBRT biopsies (0 of 6) and 6-hour post-SBRT biopsies (0 of 4). Tumor cell apoptosis had increased greatly in the 21-hour post-SBRT samples compared with before and 6 hours after SBRT. The CD31+ vessel counts decreased after SBRT, as did mitotic activity. Both of the renal cell metastases displayed major decreases in vessel density. Desmoplastic reaction was visible in 67% (4 of 6) of the pre-SBRT samples compared with 100% (10 of 10) the post-SBRT samples. The T-cell and natural killer cell counts were relatively unaffected., Conclusions: High-dose single-fraction SBRT induced tumor necrosis, desmoplasia, and tumor apoptosis and decreased tumor vessel density within 24 hours, even in renal cell metastases. The role of immune cells seems limited in this early phase. These first-in-human results imply direct vascular and DNA damage mechanisms important in the clinical efficacy specific to spinal SBRT., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: The use of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) for bone metastases is increasing rapidly. Therefore, knowledge of the inter-observer differences in tumor volume delineation is essential to guarantee precise dose delivery. The aim of this study is to compare inter-observer agreement in bone metastases delineated on different imaging modalities., Material and Methods: Twenty consecutive patients with bone metastases treated with SBRT were selected. All patients received CT and MR imaging in treatment position prior to SBRT. Five observers from three institutions independently delineated gross tumor volume (GTV) on CT alone, CT with co-registered MRI and MRI alone. Four contours per imaging modality per patient were available, as one set of contours was shared by 2 observers. Inter-observer agreement, expressed in generalized conformity index [CIgen], volumes of contours and contours center of mass (COM) were calculated per patient and imaging modality., Results: Mean GTV delineated on MR (45.9±52.0cm 3 ) was significantly larger compared to CT-MR (40.2±49.4cm 3 ) and CT (34.8±41.8cm 3 ). A considerable variation in CIgen was found on CT (mean 0.46, range 0.15-0.75) and CT-MRI (mean 0.54, range 0.17-0.71). The highest agreement was found on MRI (mean 0.56, range 0.20-0.77). The largest variations of COM were found in anterior-posterior direction for all imaging modalities., Conclusions: Large inter-observer variation in GTV delineation exists for CT, CT-MRI and MRI. MRI-based GTV delineation resulted in larger volumes and highest consistency between observers., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: A survival estimation for patients with symptomatic long bone metastases (LBM) is crucial to prevent overtreatment and undertreatment. This study analyzed prognostic factors for overall survival and developed a simple, easy-to-use prognostic model., Methods: A multicenter retrospective study of 1,520 patients treated for symptomatic LBM between 2000 and 2013 at the radiation therapy and/or orthopaedic departments was performed. Primary tumors were categorized into 3 clinical profiles (favorable, moderate, or unfavorable) according to an existing classification system. Associations between prognostic variables and overall survival were investigated using the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate Cox regression models. The discriminatory ability of the developed model was assessed with the Harrell C-statistic. The observed and expected survival for each survival category were compared on the basis of an external cohort., Results: Median overall survival was 7.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.7 to 8.1 months). On the basis of the independent prognostic factors, namely the clinical profile, Karnofsky Performance Score, and presence of visceral and/or brain metastases, 12 prognostic categories were created. The Harrell C-statistic was 0.70. A flowchart was developed to easily stratify patients. Using cutoff points for clinical decision-making, the 12 categories were narrowed down to 4 categories with clinical consequences. Median survival was 21.9 months (95% CI, 18.7 to 25.1 months), 10.5 months (95% CI, 7.9 to 13.1 months), 4.6 months (95% CI, 3.9 to 5.3 months), and 2.2 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 2.6 months) for the 4 categories., Conclusions: This study presents a model to easily stratify patients with symptomatic LBM according to their expected survival. The simplicity and clarity of the model facilitate and encourage its use in the routine care of patients with LBM, to provide the most appropriate treatment for each individual patient., Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Objective: Radiotherapy is the standard local treatment for patients with painful bone metastases, but effectiveness has primarily been evaluated in trial populations. The aim of this study was to study pain response to palliative radiotherapy in a prospective cohort of unselected patients with bone metastases., Methods: Patients with painful bone metastases referred to the UMC Utrecht for radiotherapy and enrolled in the PRESENT cohort were included in this study. For all patients, pain response to radiotherapy was assessed, and responders were defined as patients with a complete or partial pain response. Patients with stable pain scores, pain increase, or undetermined response were regarded non-responders. Pain scores obtained at baseline and after 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12 weeks following radiotherapy were obtained. Pain response rates of the total treated population, as well as response rates of the assessable patients, were calculated. To measure the percentage of the remaining time spent with pain relief, the net pain relief (NPR) was calculated by dividing the period of pain relief by the period of survival., Results: Of the 432 patients enrolled in this study, 262 patients (61%) experienced a complete or partial response. In the 390 assessable patients, this percentage was 67%. Median time to response was 4 weeks (range 1-15 weeks), and the NPR was 64%., Conclusion: Compared to randomized trial populations, palliative radiotherapy in our unselected patients with bone metastases showed similar pain response rates (61%), with a reasonable duration of this effect., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.All persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study.

Background: In metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) there has been a treatment shift towards targeted therapy, which has resulted in improved overall survival. Therefore, there is a need for better local control of the tumor and its metastases. Image-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in bone metastases provides improved symptom palliation and local control. With the use of SBRT there is a need for accurate target delineation. The hypothesis is that MRI allows for better visualization of the extend of bone metastases in mRCC and will optimize the accuracy of tumor delineation for stereotactic radiotherapy purposes, compared with CT only., Methods: From 2013 to 2016, patients who underwent SBRT for RCC bone metastases were included. A planning CT and MRI were performed in radiotherapy treatment position. Gross tumor volumes (GTV) in both CT and MRI were delineated. Contouring was performed by a radiation oncologist specialized in bone metastases and verified by a radiologist, based on local consensus contouring guidelines. In both CT and MRI, the GTV volumes, conformity index (CI) and distance between the centers of mass (dCOM) were compared., Results: Nine patients with 11 RCC bone metastases were included. The GTV volume as defined on MRI was in all cases larger or at least as large as the GTV volume on CT. The median GTV volume on MRI was 33.4 mL (range 0.2-247.6 mL), compared to 18.1 mL on CT (range 0.1-195.9) (P=0.013)., Conclusions: Contouring of RCC bone metastases on MRI resulted in clinically relevant and statistically significant larger lesions (mean increase 41%) compared with CT. MRI seems to represent the extend of the GTV in RCC bone metastases more accurately. Contouring based on CT-only could result in an underestimation of the actual tumor volume, which may cause underdosage of the GTV in SBRT treatment plans.

Purpose: To investigate the relationship between patient and tumor characteristics and pain response in patients with metastatic bone disease, and construct and internally validate a clinical prediction model for pain response to guide individualized treatment decision making., Material and Methods: A total of 965 patients with painful bone metastases undergoing palliative radiation therapy at a tertiary referral center between 1999 and 2007 were identified. Pain scores were measured at 1, 2, and 3 months after radiation therapy. Pain response was defined as at least a 2-point decrease on a pain score scale of 0-10, without increase in analgesics, or an analgesic decrease of at least 25% without an increase in pain score. Thirteen candidate predictors were identified from the literature and expert experience. After multiple imputation, final predictors were selected using stepwise regression and collapsed into a prediction model. Model performance was evaluated by calibration and discrimination and corrected for optimism., Results: Overall 462 patients (47.9%) showed a response. Primary tumor site, performance status, and baseline pain score were predictive for pain response, with a corrected c-statistic of 0.63. The predicted response rates after radiation therapy increased from 37.5% for patients with the highest risk score to 79.8% for patients with the lowest risk score and were in good agreement with the observed response rates., Conclusions: A prediction score for pain response after palliative radiation therapy was developed. The model performance was moderate, showing that prediction of pain response is difficult. New biomarkers and predictors may lead to improved identification of the large group of patients who are unlikely to respond and who may benefit from other or innovative treatment options., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: A substantial number of patients with spinal metastases experience no treatment effect from palliative radiotherapy. Mechanical spinal instability, due to metastatic disease, could be associated with failed pain control following radiotherapy. This study investigates the relationship between the degree of spinal instability, as defined by the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS), and response to radiotherapy in patients with symptomatic spinal metastases in a multi-institutional cohort., Methods and Materials: The SINS of 155 patients with painful thoracic, lumbar, or lumbosacral metastases from two tertiary hospitals was calculated using images from radiotherapy planning CT scans. Patient-reported pain response, available for 124 patients, was prospectively assessed. Pain response was categorized, according to international guidelines, as complete, partial, indeterminate, or progression of pain. The association between SINS and pain response was estimated by multivariable logistic regression analysis, correcting for predetermined clinical variables., Results: Of the 124 patients, 16 patients experienced a complete response and 65 patients experienced a partial response. Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score was associated with a complete pain response (adjusted odds-radio [ORadj] 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.98), but not with an overall pain response (ORadj 0.94; 95% CI 0.81-1.10)., Conclusions: A lower SINS, indicating spinal stability, is associated with a complete pain response to radiotherapy. This supports the hypothesis that pain resulting from mechanical spinal instability responds less well to radiotherapy compared with pain from local tumor activity. No association could be determined between SINS and an overall pain response, which might indicate that this referral tool is not yet optimal for prediction of treatment outcome., Implications for Practice: Patients with stable painful spinal metastases, as indicated by a Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) of 6 or lower, can effectively be treated with palliative external beam radiotherapy. The majority of patients with (impending) spinal instability, as indicated by a SINS score of 7 or higher, will achieve a (partial) response after palliative radiotherapy; however, some patients might require surgical intervention. Therefore, it is recommended to refer patients with a SINS score of 7 or higher to a spine surgeon to evaluate the need for surgical intervention., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of the article., (© AlphaMed Press 2017.)

Background: The aim of this article was to systematically review the efficacy and safety of various antiemetics in prophylaxis of radiation-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV)., Methods: A literature search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of prophylaxis for RINV in patients receiving radiotherapy to abdomen/pelvis, including total body irradiation (TBI). Primary endpoints were complete control of nausea and complete control of vomiting during acute and delayed phases. Secondary endpoints included use of rescue medication, quality of life (QoL) and incidence of adverse events., Results: Seventeen RCTs were identified. Among patients receiving radiotherapy to abdomen/pelvis, our meta-analysis showed that prophylaxis with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5HT3 RA) was significantly more efficacious than placebo and dopamine receptor antagonists in both complete control of vomiting [OR 0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33-0.72 and OR 0.17; 95% CI: 0.05-0.58 respectively] and complete control of nausea (OR 0.43; 95% CI: 0.26-0.70 and OR 0.46; 95% CI: 0.24-0.88 respectively). 5HT3 RAs were also more efficacious than rescue therapy and dopamine receptor antagonists plus dexamethasone. The addition of dexamethasone to 5HT3 RA compared to 5HT3 RA alone provides a modest improvement in prophylaxis of RINV. Among patients receiving TBI, 5HT3 RA was more effective than other agents (placebo, combination of metoclopramide, dexamethasone and lorazepam)., Conclusions: 5HT3 RAs are more effective than other antiemetics for prophylaxis of RINV in patients receiving radiotherapy to abdomen/pelvis and TBI. Future RCTs should investigate the efficacy of newer agents such as substance P neurokinin 1 receptor antagonists in addition to 5HT3 RAs in prophylaxis of RINV during both acute and delayed phases.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs)-the gold standard for evaluating the effects of medical interventions-are notoriously challenging in terms of logistics, planning and costs. The cohort multiple randomized controlled trial approach is designed to facilitate randomized trials for pragmatic evaluation of (new) interventions and is a promising variation from conventional pragmatic RCTs. In this paper, we evaluate methodological challenges of conducting an RCT within a cohort. We argue that equally valid results can be obtained from trials conducted within cohorts as from pragmatic RCTs. However, whether this design is more efficient compared with conducting a pragmatic RCT depends on the amount and nature of non-compliance in the intervention arm., (© The Author 2016; all rights reserved. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association.)

Background: Standard radiotherapy is the treatment of first choice in patients with symptomatic spinal metastases, but is only moderately effective. Stereotactic body radiation therapy is increasingly used to treat spinal metastases, without randomized evidence of superiority over standard radiotherapy. The VERTICAL study aims to quantify the effect of stereotactic radiation therapy in patients with metastatic spinal disease., Methods/design: This study follows the 'cohort multiple Randomized Controlled Trial' design. The VERTICAL study is conducted within the PRESENT cohort. In PRESENT, all patients with bone metastases referred for radiation therapy are enrolled. For each patient, clinical and patient-reported outcomes are captured at baseline and at regular intervals during follow-up. In addition, patients give informed consent to be offered experimental interventions. Within PRESENT, 110 patients are identified as a sub cohort of eligible patients (i.e. patients with unirradiated painful, mechanically stable spinal metastases who are able to undergo stereotactic radiation therapy). After a protocol amendment, also patients with non-spinal bony metastases are eligible. From the sub cohort, a random selection of patients is offered stereotactic radiation therapy (n = 55), which patients may accept or refuse. Only patients accepting stereotactic radiation therapy sign informed consent for the VERTICAL trial. Non-selected patients (n = 55) receive standard radiotherapy, and are not aware of them serving as controls. Primary endpoint is pain response after three months. Data will be analyzed by intention to treat, complemented by instrumental variable analysis in case of substantial refusal of the stereotactic radiation therapy in the intervention arm., Discussion: This study is designed to quantify the treatment response after (stereotactic) radiation therapy in patients with symptomatic spinal metastases. This is the first randomized study in palliative care following the cohort multiple Randomized Controlled Trial design. This design addresses common difficulties associated with classic pragmatic randomized controlled trials, such as disappointment bias in patients allocated to the control arm, slow recruitment, and poor generalizability., Trial Registration: The Netherlands Trials Register number NL49316.041.14. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT02364115 . Date of trial registration February 1, 2015.

The "cohort multiple randomized controlled trial," a new design for pragmatic trials, embeds multiple trials within a cohort. The cohort multiple RCT is an attractive alternative to conventional RCTs in fields where recruitment is slow, multiple new (competing) interventions for the same condition have to be tested, new interventions are highly preferred by patients and doctors, and the risk of disappointment bias, cross-over, and contamination is considerable. To prevent these unwanted effects, the cohort multiple RCT provides information on randomization to the intervention group/arm only, and only after randomization (i.e., prerandomization). To some, especially in a clinical setting, this is not ethically acceptable. In this article, we argue that prerandomization in the cohort multiple randomized controlled trial (cmRCT) can be avoided by adopting a staged-informed consent procedure. In the first stage, at entry into the cohort, all potential participants are asked for their informed consent to participate in a cohort study and broad consent to be either randomly selected to be approached for experimental interventions or to serve as control without further notice during participation in the cohort. In a second stage, at the initiation of an RCT within the cohort, informed consent to receive the intervention is then only sought in those randomly selected for the intervention arm. At the third stage, after completion of each RCT, all cohort participants receive aggregate disclosure of trial results. This staged-informed consent procedure avoids prerandomization in cmRCT and aims to keep participants actively engaged in the research process.

Background: Stable spinal metastases are effectively treated with radiotherapy, whereas unstable spinal metastases often need surgical fixation followed by radiotherapy for local control. The Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) was developed as a tool to assess spinal neoplastic related instability with the goal of helping to guide referrals among oncology specialists. We compare the average degree of spinal instability between patients with spinal metastases referred for surgery or for radiotherapy and evaluate whether this difference changed after introduction of the SINS in clinical practice., Methods: All patients with spinal metastases treated with palliative surgery or radiotherapy in the period 2009-2013 were identified in two spine centers. For all patients, the SINS was scored on pretreatment imaging. The SINS before and after introduction of the SINS in 2011 were compared within the surgical and radiotherapy group. Furthermore, the overall SINS was compared between the two groups., Results: The overall SINS was significantly higher in the surgical group, with a mean SINS of 10.7 (median 11) versus 7.2 (median 8) for the radiotherapy group. The mean SINS decreased significantly for both groups after introduction of the SINS in clinical practice from 11.2 to 10.3 in the surgical group and from 8.4 to 7.2 in the radiotherapy group., Conclusion: The SINS differed significantly between patients treated with surgery or radiotherapy. The introduction of SINS led to a decrease in SINS score for both groups, suggesting that using SINS in metastatic spinal disease increases awareness for instability and may subsequently result in earlier referrals for surgical intervention., Implications for Practice: Spinal metastases can present with varying degrees of mechanical instability. Because unstable spinal metastases may respond insufficiently to palliative radiotherapy and can lead to loss of ambulation, timely detection and appropriate referral are important. The Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) may help physicians caring for patients with metastasized disease to identify spinal instability before the onset of neurological deficits. In this study, it was shown that the introduction of SINS in routine practice led to a decrease in spinal instability in radiotherapy and surgical cohorts. The use of SINS may increase awareness of instability and subsequently result in earlier referrals., (©AlphaMed Press.)

The purpose of this study was to investigate what pseudo-CT (pCT) strategy is sufficient for online MRI based treatment plan adaptation of a stereotactic treatment for spinal bone metastases. For this purpose, the dosimetric accuracy of five increasingly complex pCT strategies was evaluated using the planning CT data of 20 patients suffering from spinal metastases. For each pCT, a treatment plan was developed and simulated on both the pCT and the original CT data of the patient. The two resulting dose distributions were compared using gamma analysis of 2%/2 mm. In this paper, a Gamma Pass Rate (GPR) of ⩾ 95% within the Target Volume (TV) was considered clinically acceptable. We additionally demonstrated in this paper the automatic generation of each investigated pCT strategy with the use of dedicated MRI data complemented with pre-treatment CT data of a patient in treatment position. The dosimetric accuracy of a pCT increases when additional bulk densities are utilized for a pCT. However, the dosimetric accuracy of even the most complex 'bulk density' pCT strategy used in this study had an average GPR of only 78% within the TV. However, if information on the heterogeneous electron density distribution within the affected vertebral body was available, a clinically acceptable 99% mean GPR was observed. All pCTs could successfully be generated using the MRI data in combination with the CT data of a patient in treatment position. The results presented in this study show that a simple 'bulk density' pseudo-CT strategy is not feasible for online MRI based treatment plan adaptation for spinal bone metastases. However, a clinically acceptable result is generated if the information on the heterogeneous electron density (ED) distribution within the affected vertebral bone is available. Therefore, any pCT strategy for this tumor site should include a method which can estimate the heterogeneous ED of the affected vertebral bone.

Background Context: Although radiotherapy is effective in achieving pain relief in most patients, it is not completely understood why some patients respond well to radiotherapy and others do not. Our hypothesis was that metastatic bone pain, if predominantly caused by mechanical instability of the spine, responds less well to radiotherapy than metastatic bone pain caused by local tumor activity. Recently, the spinal instability neoplastic score (SINS) was proposed as a standardized referral tool for nonspine specialists to facilitate early diagnosis of spinal instability., Purpose: To investigate the association between spinal instability as defined by the SINS and response to radiotherapy in patients with spinal metastases., Study Design: A retrospectively matched case-control study in an academic tertiary referral center, conducted according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines., Patient Sample: Thirty-eight patients with spinal metastases who were retreated after initial palliative radiotherapy from January 2009 to December 2010 were matched to 76 control patients who were not retreated., Outcome Measures: Radiotherapy failure as defined by retreatment (radiotherapy, surgery, and conservative) after palliative radiotherapy for spinal metastases., Methods: Radiotherapy planning computed tomography scans were scored by a blinded spine surgeon according to the SINS criteria. The association between SINS and radiotherapy failure was estimated by univariate and multivariate conditional logistic regression analysis., Results: Median SINS was 10 (range 4-16) for cases and 7 (range 1-16) for controls. The SINS was significantly and independently associated with radiotherapy failure (adjusted odds ratio, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-1.5; p=.01)., Conclusions: This study shows that a higher spinal instability score increases the risk of radiotherapy failure in patients with spinal metastases, independent of performance status, primary tumor, and symptoms. These results may support the hypothesis that metastatic spinal bone pain, predominantly caused by mechanical instability, responds less well to radiotherapy than pain mainly resulting from local tumor activity., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)