OBJECTIVE: Metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) is an oncologic emergency that often warrants emergent treatment; but, it is unclear whether radiation treatment (RT) can be optimally managed from an offsite radiotherapy facility. METHODS: Patient charts from consecutive patients with MSCC who were treated with radiotherapy alone at either an onsite hospital radiation department (from 2008 to 2012) or an offsite radiotherapy centre (2012-2015) were reviewed. Patient clinical parameters were compared across groups with either the χ2 test or Fisher's exact test, while survival curves were compared with the log-rank test. The primary end points were ambulatory rate over time, overall survival and cancer-specific survival. RESULTS: A total of 45 patients were identified, with 19 patients treated onsite in the hospital department and 26 patients treated at the offsite radiotherapy centre with median follow-up of 42 days vs 48.5 days, respectively. The ambulatory rate over time, overall survival and cancer-specific survival were not significantly different between the two eras. Patients treated in-hospital were more likely to start treatment the same day as the consult ("sim and treat") (79% vs 27%, p = 0.006) and were more likely to not complete treatment (26% vs 4%, p = 0.029) as compared with those treated in the offsite centre. CONCLUSION: Patients with MSCC can be feasibly treated at an offsite radiotherapy centre with outcomes similar to those treated in-hospital. Advances in knowledge: This is the first study in literature to compare outcomes between onsite and offsite RT of MSCC.
OBJECTIVE: Metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) is an oncologic emergency that often warrants emergent treatment; but, it is unclear whether radiation treatment (RT) can be optimally managed from an offsite radiotherapy facility. METHODS:Patient charts from consecutive patients with MSCC who were treated with radiotherapy alone at either an onsite hospital radiation department (from 2008 to 2012) or an offsite radiotherapy centre (2012-2015) were reviewed. Patient clinical parameters were compared across groups with either the χ2 test or Fisher's exact test, while survival curves were compared with the log-rank test. The primary end points were ambulatory rate over time, overall survival and cancer-specific survival. RESULTS: A total of 45 patients were identified, with 19 patients treated onsite in the hospital department and 26 patients treated at the offsite radiotherapy centre with median follow-up of 42 days vs 48.5 days, respectively. The ambulatory rate over time, overall survival and cancer-specific survival were not significantly different between the two eras. Patients treated in-hospital were more likely to start treatment the same day as the consult ("sim and treat") (79% vs 27%, p = 0.006) and were more likely to not complete treatment (26% vs 4%, p = 0.029) as compared with those treated in the offsite centre. CONCLUSION:Patients with MSCC can be feasibly treated at an offsite radiotherapy centre with outcomes similar to those treated in-hospital. Advances in knowledge: This is the first study in literature to compare outcomes between onsite and offsite RT of MSCC.
Authors: Roy A Patchell; Phillip A Tibbs; William F Regine; Richard Payne; Stephen Saris; Richard J Kryscio; Mohammed Mohiuddin; Byron Young Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 Aug 20-26 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Dirk Rades; Sarah Douglas; Stefan Huttenlocher; Volker Rudat; Theo Veninga; Lukas J A Stalpers; Hiba Basic; Johann H Karstens; Peter J Hoskin; Irenaeus A Adamietz; Steven E Schild Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-06-03 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: P H Graham; A Capp; G Delaney; G Goozee; B Hickey; S Turner; L Browne; C Milross; A Wirth Journal: Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 4.126