Search

Abstract Background The decision to administer palliative radiotherapy (RT) to patients with bone metastases (BMs), as well as the selection of treatment protocols (dose, fractionation), requires an accurate assessment of survival expectancy. In this study, we aimed to develop three predictive models (PMs) to estimate short‐, intermediate‐, and long‐term overall survival (OS) for patients in this clinical setting. Materials and Methods This study constitutes a sub‐analysis of the PRAIS trial, a longitudinal observational study collecting data from patients referred to participating centers to receive palliative RT for cancer‐induced bone pain. Our analysis encompassed 567 patients from the PRAIS trial database. The primary objectives were to ascertain the correlation between clinical and laboratory parameters with the OS rates at three distinct time points (short: 3 weeks; intermediate: 24 weeks; prolonged: 52 weeks) and to construct PMs for prognosis. We employed machine learning techniques, comprising the following steps: (i) identification of reliable prognostic variables and training; (ii) validation and testing of the model using the selected variables. The selection of variables was accomplished using the LASSO method (Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator). The model performance was assessed using receiver operator characteristic curves (ROC) and the area under the curve (AUC). Results Our analysis demonstrated a significant impact of clinical parameters (primary tumor site, presence of non‐bone metastases, steroids and opioid intake, food intake, and body mass index) and laboratory parameters (interleukin 8 [IL‐8], chloride levels, C‐reactive protein, white blood cell count, and lymphocyte count) on OS. Notably, different factors were associated with the different times for OS with only IL‐8 included both in the PMs for short‐ and long‐term OS. The AUC values for ROC curves for 3‐week, 24‐week, and 52‐week OS were 0.901, 0.767, and 0.806, respectively. Conclusions We successfully developed three PMs for OS based on easily accessible clinical and laboratory parameters for patients referred to palliative RT for painful BMs. While our findings are promising, it is important to recognize that this was an exploratory trial. The implementation of these tools into clinical practice warrants further investigation and confirmation through subsequent studies with separate databases.

Background: Patients with advanced cancer and bone metastases may have unmet palliative care (PC) needs that go unnoticed during clinical oncological practice. This observational study describes interventions that were initiated as the patients participated in the Palliative Radiotherapy and Inflammation Study (PRAIS). It was hypothesized that the patients would benefit from study participation due to PC interventions initiated by the study team. Methods: A retrospective review of patients' electronic records. Patients with advanced cancer and painful bone metastases included in PRAIS were eligible. All patients met with the study team before start of radiotherapy, after completion of Patient Reported Outcome Measures. Interventions initiated by the study team were documented in the patients' electronic records. Results: A total of 133 patients were reviewed: 63% males, mean (standard deviation [SD]) age 65 (9.6) and mean (SD) Karnofsky performance status (KPS) score 73.2 (9.1). Interventions were initiated in 50% (n?=?67) of the patients. Changes in opioid management (69%), treatment of constipation (43%), and nausea (24%) and nutritional advice were most frequent (21%). Patients receiving interventions had lower mean KPS (70 vs. 77 p?0.001), shorter survival time after study inclusion (median 28 vs. 57.5 weeks p?=?0.005) and were more often opioid na?ve (12% vs. 39% p?

Abstract Background Radiation therapy (RT) results in pain relief for about 6 of 10 patients with cancer induced bone pain (CIBP) caused by bone metastases. The high number of non-responders, the long median time from RT to pain response and the risk of adverse effects, makes it important to determine predictors of treatment response. Clinical features such as cancer type, performance status and pain intensity, and biomarkers for osteoclast activity are proposed as predictors of response to RT. However, results are inconsistent and there is a need for better predictors of RT response. A similar argument can be stated for the development of cachexia; there are currently no predictors that can identify patients who will develop cachexia later in the cancer disease trajectory. Experimental and preclinical studies show that pain, depression and cachexia are related to inflammation. However, it is not known if inflammatory biomarkers can predict CIBP, depression or development of cachexia. Methods This multicenter, multinational longitudinal observational study will include 600 adult patients receiving RT for CIBP. Demographic data, clinical variables, osteoclast and inflammatory biomarkers will be assessed before start of RT, and 3, 8, 16, 24 and 52 weeks after last course of RT. The primary aim of the study is to identify potential predictors for pain relief from RT. Secondary aims are to explore potential predictors for development of cachexia, the longitudinal relationship between pain intensity and depression, and if inflammatory biomarkers are associated with changes in pain intensity, cachexia and depression during one-year follow up. Discussion The immediate clinical implication of the PRAIS study is to identify potential predictive factors for a RT response on CIBP, and thereby reduce non-efficacious RT. Patient benefits are fewer hospital visits, reduced risk of adverse effects and more individualized pain treatment. The long-term clinical implication of the PRAIS study is to improve the knowledge about inflammation in relation to CIBP, cachexia and depression and potentially identify associations and mechanisms that can be targeted for treatment. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02107664, date of registration April 8, 2014 (retrospectively registered). Trial sponsor The European Palliative Care Research Centre (PRC), Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, NTNU, Faculty of medicine and Health Sciences, Trondheim, N-7491, Norway.