Search

Purpose: The Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) is the most commonly chosen cognitive screening test (CST) in clinical practice and trials, despite its poor sensitivity, likely because of its prognostic utility. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is an alternative CST, is more sensitive, and is better correlated with quality of life.Methods: Sixty-five patients with brain metastases were prospectively accrued and completed both the MMSE and MoCA. We compared the prognostic utility of both CSTs.Results: The mean age of patients was 59.0 years; 42.0% had single brain metastases. Median MMSE and MoCA scores were 28 and 22, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) was worse for individuals with below- versus above-average MMSE scores (10.4 versus 36.3 weeks, p = 0.007). Likewise, below- versus above-average MoCA scores were prognostic (6.3 versus 50.0 weeks, p < 0.001). Median OS for MoCA scores <22, 22-26, and >26 were 6.3, 30.9, and 61.7 weeks, respectively (p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, below-average MMSE scores were no longer prognostic (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.71 [0.90-3.26]), though below-average MoCA scores were (HR = 5.44 [2.70-10.94]). Furthermore, the MoCA demonstrated superior prognostic utility when comparing multivariable models with continuous CST scores.Conclusions: Our results indicate that the MoCA is a superior prognostic indicator than the MMSE. Furthermore, given its superior sensitivity and better correlation with quality of life, the MoCA should be preferentially chosen in clinical practice and trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite advancements in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for non-spine bone metastases (NSBMs), uncertainty remains surrounding target volumes. While expert consensus guidelines recommend a clinical target volume (CTV), patterns of failure analyses are lacking, and larger treatment volumes may be associated with higher toxicity. This study aims to compare local failure, marginal failure, and toxicity in NSBMs treated with versus without a CTV in a population-based cohort. A retrospective review was conducted on all patients in British Columbia treated with SABR for NSBMs on the single-arm phase II SABR-5 trial (November 2016 – July 2020) and on the BC Oligometastases Registry (August 2020 - October 2022). Use of a CTV was optional for both SABR-5 and the Registry. NSBMs were stratified based on CTV use for treatment planning. A total of 158 patients (113 on SABR-5 and 45 on Registry) with 200 NSBMs were included. One hundred fifty-nine (80%) NSBMs were treated with a CTV and 41 (21%) without a CTV. The most common histologies were prostate (60%), breast (17%) and lung cancer (6%), and lesions received 35 Gy in 5 fractions (81%) or 24 Gy in 2 fractions (14%). Rib (34%) and pelvis (47%) were the most common lesion sites. Groups with vs without a CTV did not differ in baseline patient or tumor characteristics. After a median follow-up time of 33.7 months (interquartile range [IQR] = 19.5-48.9), local failure rates did not differ, with 2-year local failure 9.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.4 – 14.2) in lesions treated with a CTV and 7.6% (95% CI = 0 – 15.8) without a CTV (P = 0.39). Marginal failure, defined as disease recurrence outside of the GTV but within 1 cm of the PTV, occurred in 15 (8%) of lesions and 2-year cumulative incidence did not differ between groups (6.2% [95% CI = 2.3 – 10.1] and 2.6%, [95% CI = 0 – 7.5], respectively [ P = 0.16]). Overall survival (OS) was also similar (2-year OS = 84.6%, 95% CI = 78.1 – 91.1, and 90.3%, 95% CI = 79.9 – 100, respectively; P = 0.64). The most common grade ≥ 2 toxicities were pain (n = 18, 9%) and fracture (n = 8, 4%). There were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. The 2-year cumulative incidence of grade ≥ 2 toxicity did not differ between groups (14.9%, 95% CI = 3.9-25.9 and 15.6%, 95% CI = 9.9-21.3, respectively; P = 0.78). Due to low number of events, local and marginal failure events were collated for a multivariable regression analysis. On multivariable regression, use of a CTV was not associated with the risk of local-marginal failure (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.41, 95% CI = 0.81 – 7.18, P = 0.11). Extraosseous extension (HR = 2.62, 95% CI = 1.07-6.38, P = 0.035) and lack of receipt of systemic therapy (HR = 3.03, 95% CI = 1.40-6.67, P = 0.005) were associated with higher risk. Use of a CTV was not associated with local or marginal failure or toxicity. Extraosseous extension and lack of receipt of systemic therapy were associated with higher risk of local-marginal failure. This may assist in informing future approaches to treatment planning in this patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This trial examined if patients with ≤5 sites of oligoprogression benefit from the addition of SABR to standard of care (SOC) systemic therapy., Methods and Materials: We enrolled patients with 1 to 5 metastases progressing on systemic therapy, and after stratifying by type of systemic therapy (cytotoxic vs noncytotoxic), randomized 1:2 between continued SOC treatment versus SABR to all progressing lesions plus SOC. The trial was initially limited to non-small cell lung cancer but was expanded to include all nonhematologic malignancies to meet accrual goals. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), lesional control, quality of life, adverse events, and duration of systemic therapy postrandomization., Results: Ninety patients with 127 oligoprogressive metastases were enrolled across 8 Canadian institutions, with 59 randomized to SABR and 31 to SOC. The median age was 67 years, and 39 (43%) were women. The most common primary sites were lung (44%), genitourinary (23%), and breast (13%). Protocol adherence in the SOC arm was suboptimal, with 11 patients (35%) either receiving high-dose/ablative therapies (conflicting with trial protocol) or withdrawing from the study. The median follow-up was 31 months. There was no difference in PFS between arms (median PFS 8.4 months in the SABR arm vs 4.3 months in the SOC arm, but curves cross and 2-year PFS was 9% vs 24%, respectively; P = .91). The median OS was 31.2 months versus 27.4 months, respectively (P = .22). Lesional control was superior with SABR (70% vs 38%, respectively; P = .0015). There were 2 (3.4%) grade 3 and no grade 4/5 adverse events attributable to SABR., Conclusions: SABR was well-tolerated with superior lesional control but did not improve PFS or OS. Accrual to this study was difficult, and the results may have been impacted by an unwillingness to forgo ablative treatments on the SOC arm. (NCT02756793)., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The optimal sequencing of local and systemic therapy for oligometastatic cancer has not been established. This study retrospectively compared progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and SABR-related toxicity between upfront versus delay of systemic treatment until progression in patients in the SABR-5 trial., Methods and Materials: The single-arm phase 2 SABR-5 trial accrued patients with up to 5 oligometastases across SABR-5 between November 2016 and July 2020. Patients received SABR to all lesions. Two cohorts were retrospectively identified: those receiving upfront systemic treatment along with SABR and those for whom systemic treatment was delayed until disease progression. Patients treated for oligoprogression were excluded. Propensity score analysis with overlap weighting balanced baseline characteristics of cohorts. Bootstrap sampling and Cox regression models estimated the association of delayed systemic treatment with PFS, OS, and grade ≥2 toxicity., Results: A total of 319 patients with oligometastases underwent treatment on SABR-5, including 121 (38%) and 198 (62%) who received upfront and delayed systemic treatment, respectively. In the weighted sample, prostate cancer was the most common primary tumor histology (48%) followed by colorectal (18%), breast (13%), and lung (4%). Most patients (93%) were treated for 1 to 2 metastases. The median follow-up time was 34 months (IQR, 24-45). Delayed systemic treatment was associated with shorter PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.56; 95% CI, 1.15-2.13; P = .005) but similar OS (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.51-1.59; P = .65) compared with upfront systemic treatment. Risk of grade 2 or higher SABR-related toxicity was reduced with delayed systemic treatment (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15-0.70; P < .001)., Conclusions: Delayed systemic treatment is associated with shorter PFS without reduction in OS and with reduced SABR-related toxicity and may be a favorable option for select patients seeking to avoid initial systemic treatment. Efforts should continue to accrue patients to histology-specific trials examining a delayed systemic treatment approach., (Crown Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Radiotherapy delivery regimens can vary between a single fraction (SF) and multiple fractions (MF) given daily for up to several weeks depending on the location of the cancer or metastases. With limited evidence comparing fractionation regimens for oligometastases, there is support to explore toxicity levels to nearby organs at risk as a primary outcome while using SF and MF stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) as well as explore differences in patient-reported quality of life and experience., Methods: This study will randomize 598 patients in a 1:1 ratio between the standard arm (MF SABR) and the experimental arm (SF SABR). This trial is designed as two randomized controlled trials within one patient population for resource efficiency. The primary objective of the first randomization is to determine if SF SABR is non-inferior to MF SABR, with respect to healthcare provider (HCP)-reported grade 3-5 adverse events (AEs) that are related to SABR. Primary endpoint is toxicity while secondary endpoints include lesional control rate (LCR), and progression-free survival (PFS). The second randomization (BC Cancer sites only) will allocate participants to either complete quality of life (QoL) questionnaires only; or QoL questionnaires and a symptom-specific survey with symptom-guided HCP intervention. The primary objective of the second randomization is to determine if radiation-related symptom questionnaire-guided HCP intervention results in improved reported QoL as measured by the EuroQoL-5-dimensions-5levels (EQ-5D-5L) instrument. The primary endpoint is patient-reported QoL and secondary endpoints include: persistence/resolution of symptom reporting, QoL, intervention cost effectiveness, resource utilization, and overall survival., Discussion: This study will compare SF and MF SABR in the treatment of oligometastases and oligoprogression to determine if there is non-inferior toxicity for SF SABR in selected participants with 1-5 oligometastatic lesions. This study will also compare patient-reported QoL between participants who receive radiation-related symptom-guided HCP intervention and those who complete questionnaires alone., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05784428. Date of Registration: 23 March 2023., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background and Purpose: Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for oligometastases may improve survival, however concerns about safety remain. To mitigate risk of toxicity, target coverage was sacrificed to prioritize organs-at-risk (OARs) during SABR planning in the population-based SABR-5 trial. This study evaluated the effect of this practice on dosimetry, local recurrence (LR), and progression-free survival (PFS)., Methods: This single-arm phase II trial included patients with up to 5 oligometastases between November 2016 and July 2020. Theprotocol-specified planning objective was to cover 95 % of the planning target volume (PTV) with 100 % of the prescribed dose, however PTV coverage was reduced as needed to meet OAR constraints. This trade-off was measured using the coverage compromise index (CCI), computed as minimum dose received by the hottest 99 % of the PTV (D99) divided by the prescription dose. Under-coverage was defined as CCI < 0.90. The potential association between CCI and outcomes was evaluated., Results: 549 lesions from 381 patients were assessed. Mean CCI was 0.88 (95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.86-0.89), and 196 (36 %) lesions were under-covered. The highest mean CCI (0.95; 95 %CI, 0.93-0.97) was in non-spine bone lesions (n = 116), while the lowest mean CCI (0.71; 95 % CI, 0.69-0.73) was in spine lesions (n = 104). On multivariable analysis, under-coverage did not predict for worse LR (HR 0.48, p = 0.37) or PFS (HR 1.24, p = 0.38). Largest lesion diameter, colorectal and 'other' (non-prostate, breast, or lung) primary predicted for worse LR. Largest lesion diameter, synchronous tumor treatment, short disease free interval, state of oligoprogression, initiation or change in systemic treatment, and a high PTV Dmax were significantly associated with PFS., Conclusion: PTV under-coverage was not associated with worse LR or PFS in this large, population-based phase II trial. Combined with low toxicity rates, this study supports the practice of prioritizing OAR constraints during oligometastatic SABR 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 © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: A subset of patients with oligometastatic cancer experience early widespread cancer dissemination and do not benefit from metastasis-directed therapy such as SABR. This study aimed to identify factors associated with early polymetastatic relapse (PMR)., Methods and Materials: The SABR-5 trial was a single arm phase 2 study conducted at all 6 regional cancer centers across British Columbia (BC), Canada. SABR for oligometastases was only offered on trial. Patients with up to 5 oligometastatic lesions (total, progressing, or induced) received SABR to all lesions. Patients were 18 years of age or older, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0 to 2 and life expectancy ≥6 months. This secondary analysis evaluated factors associated with early PMR, defined as disease recurrence within 6 months of SABR, which is not amenable to further local treatment. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed using binary logistic regression. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests assessed PMR-free survival and differences between risk groups, respectively., Results: Between November 2016 and July 2020, 381 patients underwent treatment on SABR-5. A total of 16% of patients experienced PMR. Worse performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 1-2 vs 0; hazard ratio [HR] = 2.01, P = .018), nonprostate/breast histology (HR = 3.64, P <.001), and oligoprogression (HR = 3.84, P <.001) were independent predictors for early PMR. Risk groups were identified with median PMR-free survival ranging from 5 months to not yet reached at the time of analysis. Rates of 3-year overall survival were 0%, 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 48-58), 77% (95% CI, 73-81), and 93% (95% CI, 90-96) in groups 1 to 4, respectively (P <.001)., Conclusions: Four distinct risk groups for early PMR are identified, which differ significantly in PMR-free survival and overall survival. The group with all 3 risk factors had a median PMR-free survival of 5 months and may not benefit from local ablative therapy alone. This model should be externally validated with data from other prospective trials., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Despite increasing utilization of SABR for oligometastatic cancer, prospective outcomes are lacking. The purpose of this study was to determine progression-free survival (PFS), local control (LC), and prognostic factors from the population-based phase 2 SABR-5 trial., Methods and Materials: The SABR-5 trial was a single-arm phase 2 study with the primary endpoint of toxicity, conducted at the 6 regional cancer centers across British Columbia (BC), Canada, during which time SABR for oligometastases was only offered on trial. Patients with up to 5 oligometastases (total or not controlled by prior treatment and including induced oligometastatic disease) underwent SABR to all lesions. Patients were 18 years of age or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0 to 2, and had life expectancy ≥ 6 months. The secondary outcomes of PFS and LC are presented here., Results: Between November 2016 and July 2020, 381 patients underwent SABR on trial. Median follow-up was 27 months (interquartile range, 18-36). Median PFS was 15 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12-18). LC at 1 and 3 years were 93% (95% CI, 91-95) and 87% (95% CI, 84-90), respectively. On multivariable analysis, increasing tumor diameter (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; P < .001), declining performance status (HR, 2.13; P < .001), disease-free interval <18 months (HR, 1.52; P = .003), 4 or more metastases at SABR (HR, 1.48; P = .048), initiation or change in systemic treatment (HR, 0.50; P < .001), and oligoprogression (HR, 1.56; P = .008) were significant independent predictors of PFS. Tumor diameter (sub-hazard ratio [SHR], 1.28; P < .001), colorectal histology (SHR, 4.33; P = .002), and "other" histology (SHR, 3.90; P < .001) were associated with worse LC., Conclusions: In this population-based cohort including patients with genuine oligometastatic, oligoprogressive, and induced oligometastatic disease, the median PFS was 15 months and LC at 3 years was 87%. This supports ongoing efforts to randomize patients in phase 3 trials, even outside the original 1 to 5 metachronous oligometastatic paradigm., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: After the publication of the landmark SABR-COMET trial, concerns arose regarding high-grade toxic effects of treatment with stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) for oligometastases., Objective: To document toxic effects of treatment with SABR in a large cohort from a population-based, provincial cancer program., Design, Setting, and Participants: From November 2016 to July 2020, 381 patients across all 6 cancer centers in British Columbia were treated in this single-arm, phase 2 trial of treatment with SABR for patients with oligometastatic or oligoprogressive disease. During this period, patients were only eligible to receive treatment with SABR in these settings in trials within British Columbia; therefore, this analysis is population based, with resultant minimal selection bias compared with previously published SABR series., Interventions: Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy to up to 5 metastases., Main Outcomes and Measures: Rate of grade 2, 3, 4, and 5 toxic effects associated with SABR., Findings: Among 381 participants (122 women [32%]), the mean (SD; range) age was 68 (11.1; 30-97) years, and the median (range) follow-up was 25 (1-54) months. The most common histological findings were prostate cancer (123 [32%]), colorectal cancer (63 [17%]), breast cancer (42 [11%]), and lung cancer (33 [9%]). The number of SABR-treated sites were 1 (263 [69%]), 2 (82 [22%]), and 3 or more (36 [10%]). The most common sites of SABR were lung (188 [34%]), nonspine bone (136 [25%]), spine (85 [16%]), lymph nodes (78 [14%]), liver (29 [5%]), and adrenal (15 [3%]). Rates of grade 2, 3, 4, and 5 toxic effects associated with SABR (based on the highest-grade toxic effect per patient) were 14.2%; (95% CI, 10.7%-17.7%), 4.2% (95% CI, 2.2%-6.2%), 0%, and 0.3% (95% CI, 0%-0.8%), respectively. The cumulative incidence of grade 2 or higher toxic effects associated with SABR at year 2 by Kaplan-Meier analysis was 8%, and for grade 3 or higher, 4%., Conclusions and Relevance: This single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial found that the incidence of grade 3 or higher SABR toxic effects in this population-based study was less than 5%. Furthermore, the rates of grade 2 or higher toxic effects (18.6%) were lower than previously published for SABR-COMET (29%). These results suggest that SABR treatment for oligometastases has acceptable rates of toxic effects and potentially support further enrollment in randomized phase 3 clinical trials., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02933242.

Reducing the incidence and morbidity of pressure ulcers remains a leading national priority in patient safety. However, the optimal strategy for a hospital or health system to address this safety goal is not straightforward given the number and complexity of available solutions. Leveraging techniques from systems engineering, such as the quality function deployment process, may provide a transparent and objective way to address this challenge. A detailed and practical application of quality function deployment is presented that demonstrates the value of applying engineering practices for prioritizing solutions for pressures ulcers specifically and can easily be adapted to other conditions.

The incidence of invasive fungal infections is on the rise worldwide due to the growth of the immunocompromised population. We report here the use of a diagnostic assay that utilizes a universal extraction method, broad spectrum PCR amplification and analysis via electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (PCR/ESI-MS) to detect and identify more than 200 pathogenic fungi directly from bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) specimens in less than 8 hours. In this study, we describe both analytical and clinical performance of the assay, when run with prospectively collected clinical BAL specimens. In 146 patients with probable and possible fungal infections defined by EORTC/MSG (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Mycoses Study Group) criteria, the PCR/ESI-MS assay demonstrated a sensitivity of 90.9% (95% CI: 76.4-96.9%) and a specificity of 82.3% (95% CI: 74.2-88.2%). This data demonstrates the utility of a non-culture based broad fungal targets molecular diagnostic tool for rapid and accurate diagnosis of invasive fungal infections in patients at risk of developing fungal diseases., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)