Paulien G Westhoff1, Alexander de Graeff2, Evelyn M Monninkhof3, Laurens Bollen4, Sander P Dijkstra4, Elzbieta M van der Steen-Banasik5, Marco van Vulpen6, Jan Willem H Leer7, Corrie A Marijnen8, Yvette M van der Linden8. 1. Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: p.g.westhoff@umcutrecht.nl. 2. Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 3. Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands. 5. ARTI Institute for Radiation Oncology Arnhem, Arnhem, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 8. Department of Clinical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE:Patients with bone metastases have a widely varying survival. A reliable estimation of survival is needed for appropriate treatment strategies. Our goal was to assess the value of simple prognostic factors, namely, patient and tumor characteristics, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), and patient-reported scores of pain and quality of life, to predict survival in patients with painful bone metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In the Dutch Bone Metastasis Study, 1157 patients were treated withradiation therapy for painful bone metastases. At randomization, physicians determined the KPS; patients rated general health on a visual analogue scale (VAS-gh), valuation of life on a verbal rating scale (VRS-vl) and pain intensity. To assess the predictive value of the variables, we used multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses and C-statistics for discriminative value. Of the final model, calibration was assessed. External validation was performed on a dataset of 934 patients who were treated with radiation therapy for vertebral metastases. RESULTS:Patients had mainly breast (39%), prostate (23%), or lung cancer (25%). After a maximum of 142 weeks' follow-up, 74% of patients had died. The best predictive model included sex, primary tumor, visceral metastases, KPS, VAS-gh, and VRS-vl (C-statistic = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.70-0.74). A reduced model, with only KPS and primary tumor, showed comparable discriminative capacity (C-statistic = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.69-0.72). External validation showed a C-statistic of 0.72 (95% CI = 0.70-0.73). Calibration of the derivation and the validation dataset showed underestimation of survival. CONCLUSION: In predicting survival in patients with painful bone metastases, KPS combined with primary tumor was comparable to a more complex model. Considering the amount of variables in complex models and the additional burden on patients, the simple model is preferred for daily use. In addition, a risk table for survival is provided.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE:Patients with bone metastases have a widely varying survival. A reliable estimation of survival is needed for appropriate treatment strategies. Our goal was to assess the value of simple prognostic factors, namely, patient and tumor characteristics, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), and patient-reported scores of pain and quality of life, to predict survival in patients with painful bone metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In the Dutch Bone Metastasis Study, 1157 patients were treated with radiation therapy for painful bone metastases. At randomization, physicians determined the KPS; patients rated general health on a visual analogue scale (VAS-gh), valuation of life on a verbal rating scale (VRS-vl) and pain intensity. To assess the predictive value of the variables, we used multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses and C-statistics for discriminative value. Of the final model, calibration was assessed. External validation was performed on a dataset of 934 patients who were treated with radiation therapy for vertebral metastases. RESULTS:Patients had mainly breast (39%), prostate (23%), or lung cancer (25%). After a maximum of 142 weeks' follow-up, 74% of patients had died. The best predictive model included sex, primary tumor, visceral metastases, KPS, VAS-gh, and VRS-vl (C-statistic = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.70-0.74). A reduced model, with only KPS and primary tumor, showed comparable discriminative capacity (C-statistic = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.69-0.72). External validation showed a C-statistic of 0.72 (95% CI = 0.70-0.73). Calibration of the derivation and the validation dataset showed underestimation of survival. CONCLUSION: In predicting survival in patients with painful bone metastases, KPS combined with primary tumor was comparable to a more complex model. Considering the amount of variables in complex models and the additional burden on patients, the simple model is preferred for daily use. In addition, a risk table for survival is provided.
Authors: Noah J Mathis; Connor J Doyle; Daniel B Rosen; N Ari Wijetunga; Max Vaynrub; Meredith Bartelstein; David M Guttmann; Victoria S Brennan; Yoshiya J Yamada; Erin F Gillespie; Divya Yerramilli; Jonathan T Yang Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2021-10-26 Impact factor: 8.013
Authors: Michael F Gensheimer; A Solomon Henry; Douglas J Wood; Trevor J Hastie; Sonya Aggarwal; Sara A Dudley; Pooja Pradhan; Imon Banerjee; Eunpi Cho; Kavitha Ramchandran; Erqi Pollom; Albert C Koong; Daniel L Rubin; Daniel T Chang Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Sara R Alcorn; Jacob Fiksel; Jean L Wright; Christen R Elledge; Thomas J Smith; Powell Perng; Sarah Saleemi; Todd R McNutt; Theodore L DeWeese; Scott Zeger Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2020-05-22 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Natasja R Walterbos; Marta Fiocco; Karen J Neelis; Yvette M van der Linden; Alexandra M J Langers; Marije Slingerland; Wobbe O de Steur; Femke P Peters; Irene M Lips Journal: Clin Transl Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-04-24