Daniel E Spratt1, Brandon R Mancini2, James A Hayman2, Thomas Boike3, Lori J Pierce2, Jean M Moran2, Michael M Dominello4, Mark Fireman5, Kent Griffith6, Shruti Jolly2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic address: sprattda@med.umich.edu. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, McLaren Northern Michigan, Petoskey, Michigan. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Center, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, MidMichigan Health, Midland, Michigan. 6. Center for Cancer Biostatistics, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Palliative radiation therapy for bone metastases is often viewed as a single entity, despite national guidelines providing input principally only for painful uncomplicated bone metastases. Data surrounding the treatment of bone metastases are often gleaned from questionnaires of what providers would theoretically do in practice or from population-based data lacking critical granular information. We investigated the real-world treatment of bone metastases with radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty diverse institutions across the state of Michigan had data extracted for their 10 most recent cases of radiation therapy delivered for the treatment of bone metastases at their institution between January and February 2017. Uni- and multivariable binary logistic regression was used to assess the use of single fraction (8 Gy × 1) radiation therapy. RESULTS: A total of 196 cases were eligible for inclusion. Twenty-eight different fractionation schedules were identified. The most common schedule was 3 Gy × 10 fractions (n = 100; 51.0%), 4 Gy × 5 fractions (n = 32; 16.3%), and 8 Gy × 1 (n = 15; 7.7%). The significant predictors for the use of single fraction radiation therapy were the presence of oligometastatic disease (P = .008), previous overlapping radiation therapy (P = .050), and academic practice type (P = .039). Twenty-nine cases (14.8%) received >10 fractions (median 15, range 11-20). Intensity modulated radiation therapy was used in 14 cases (7.1%), stereotactic body radiation therapy in 11 (5.6%), and image guidance with cone beam computed tomography in 11 (5.6%). Of the cases of simple painful bone metastases (no previous surgery, spinal cord compression, fracture, soft tissue extension, or overlapping previous radiation therapy; n = 70), only 12.9% were treated with 8 Gy × 1. CONCLUSIONS: Bone metastases represent a heterogeneous disease, and radiation therapy for bone metastases is similarly diverse. Future work is needed to understand the barriers to single fraction use, and clinical trials are necessary to establish appropriate guidelines for the breadth of this complex disease.
PURPOSE: Palliative radiation therapy for bone metastases is often viewed as a single entity, despite national guidelines providing input principally only for painful uncomplicated bone metastases. Data surrounding the treatment of bone metastases are often gleaned from questionnaires of what providers would theoretically do in practice or from population-based data lacking critical granular information. We investigated the real-world treatment of bone metastases with radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty diverse institutions across the state of Michigan had data extracted for their 10 most recent cases of radiation therapy delivered for the treatment of bone metastases at their institution between January and February 2017. Uni- and multivariable binary logistic regression was used to assess the use of single fraction (8 Gy × 1) radiation therapy. RESULTS: A total of 196 cases were eligible for inclusion. Twenty-eight different fractionation schedules were identified. The most common schedule was 3 Gy × 10 fractions (n = 100; 51.0%), 4 Gy × 5 fractions (n = 32; 16.3%), and 8 Gy × 1 (n = 15; 7.7%). The significant predictors for the use of single fraction radiation therapy were the presence of oligometastatic disease (P = .008), previous overlapping radiation therapy (P = .050), and academic practice type (P = .039). Twenty-nine cases (14.8%) received >10 fractions (median 15, range 11-20). Intensity modulated radiation therapy was used in 14 cases (7.1%), stereotactic body radiation therapy in 11 (5.6%), and image guidance with cone beam computed tomography in 11 (5.6%). Of the cases of simple painful bone metastases (no previous surgery, spinal cord compression, fracture, soft tissue extension, or overlapping previous radiation therapy; n = 70), only 12.9% were treated with 8 Gy × 1. CONCLUSIONS:Bone metastases represent a heterogeneous disease, and radiation therapy for bone metastases is similarly diverse. Future work is needed to understand the barriers to single fraction use, and clinical trials are necessary to establish appropriate guidelines for the breadth of this complex disease.
Authors: Xin Shelley Wang; Laurence D Rhines; Almon S Shiu; James N Yang; Ugur Selek; Ibrahima Gning; Ping Liu; Pamela K Allen; Syed S Azeem; Paul D Brown; Hadley J Sharp; David C Weksberg; Charles S Cleeland; Eric L Chang Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2012-01-27 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: B Ashleigh Guadagnolo; Kai-Ping Liao; Linda Elting; Sharon Giordano; Thomas A Buchholz; Ya-Chen Tina Shih Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-11-19 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kristin J Redmond; Simon S Lo; Scott G Soltys; Yoshiya Yamada; Igor J Barani; Paul D Brown; Eric L Chang; Peter C Gerszten; Samuel T Chao; Robert J Amdur; Antonio A F De Salles; Matthias Guckenberger; Bin S Teh; Jason Sheehan; Charles R Kersh; Michael G Fehlings; Moon-Jun Sohn; Ung-Kyu Chang; Samuel Ryu; Iris C Gibbs; Arjun Sahgal Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2016-11-11
Authors: Alysa Fairchild; Elizabeth Barnes; Sunita Ghosh; Edgar Ben-Josef; Daniel Roos; William Hartsell; Tanya Holt; Jackson Wu; Nora Janjan; Edward Chow Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2009-05-21 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Daniel E Spratt; Whitney H Beeler; Fabio Y de Moraes; Laurence D Rhines; Joseph J Gemmete; Neeraj Chaudhary; David B Shultz; Sean R Smith; Alejandro Berlin; Max Dahele; Ben J Slotman; Kelly C Younge; Mark Bilsky; Paul Park; Nicholas J Szerlip Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Divya Yerramilli; Amy J Xu; Erin F Gillespie; Annemarie F Shepherd; Kathryn Beal; Daniel Gomez; Josh Yamada; C Jillian Tsai; T Jonathan Yang Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2020-04-08