为控制疼痛而对骨转移进行再治疗:2023 年 ASTRO 教育小组。

4区 医学 Q2 Nursing
Annals of palliative medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-12 DOI:10.21037/apm-24-15
Shing Fung Lee, Charles B Simone, Dirk Rades, Henry C Y Wong, Edward Chow
{"title":"为控制疼痛而对骨转移进行再治疗:2023 年 ASTRO 教育小组。","authors":"Shing Fung Lee, Charles B Simone, Dirk Rades, Henry C Y Wong, Edward Chow","doi":"10.21037/apm-24-15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Bone metastases are a common and debilitating consequence of advanced cancer, often necessitating palliative radiation therapy (RT) for pain relief. Reirradiation (reRT) of bone metastases is often considered after lack of pain relief following an initial course of RT, after a partial but unsatisfying pain response to an initial course of radiotherapy, or after pain recurrence following a complete or partial pain response to an initial course of RT. The NCIC CTG SC.20 trial, a landmark multicenter, randomized, non-blinded, controlled non-inferiority trial, addressed the critical question of optimal dose fractionation for reRT in this patient population. This trial compared the efficacy and toxicity of a single 8 Gy fraction to multiple fractions totaling 20 Gy in 850 patients with painful bone metastases requiring reRT. The primary endpoint was overall pain response at 2 months, with secondary endpoints of quality of life (QoL) measures, functional interference, and toxicity profiles assessed using patient-reported questionnaires and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30. The intention-to-treat analysis revealed no significant difference in pain response between the two arms, meeting the pre-specified non-inferiority criteria. The per-protocol analysis suggested a potential benefit for a subset of patients receiving multiple fractions, although this was not statistically robust. Acute toxicities were more prevalent in the multiple fractions arm, with implications for patient comfort and healthcare utilization. Importantly, responders to reRT reported significant improvements in functional interference and QoL. The trial's findings support the use of a patient-centric approach to palliative RT, highlighting the viability of a single 8 Gy fraction as a less toxic and more convenient treatment option, albeit with consideration for individual patient circumstances. These results have significant implications for clinical practice, potentially reducing healthcare burdens while optimizing patient convenience during palliative care for painful bone metastases.</p>","PeriodicalId":7956,"journal":{"name":"Annals of palliative medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1154-1160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Re-treatment of bone metastases for pain control: 2023 ASTRO education panel.\",\"authors\":\"Shing Fung Lee, Charles B Simone, Dirk Rades, Henry C Y Wong, Edward Chow\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/apm-24-15\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Bone metastases are a common and debilitating consequence of advanced cancer, often necessitating palliative radiation therapy (RT) for pain relief. Reirradiation (reRT) of bone metastases is often considered after lack of pain relief following an initial course of RT, after a partial but unsatisfying pain response to an initial course of radiotherapy, or after pain recurrence following a complete or partial pain response to an initial course of RT. The NCIC CTG SC.20 trial, a landmark multicenter, randomized, non-blinded, controlled non-inferiority trial, addressed the critical question of optimal dose fractionation for reRT in this patient population. This trial compared the efficacy and toxicity of a single 8 Gy fraction to multiple fractions totaling 20 Gy in 850 patients with painful bone metastases requiring reRT. The primary endpoint was overall pain response at 2 months, with secondary endpoints of quality of life (QoL) measures, functional interference, and toxicity profiles assessed using patient-reported questionnaires and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30. The intention-to-treat analysis revealed no significant difference in pain response between the two arms, meeting the pre-specified non-inferiority criteria. The per-protocol analysis suggested a potential benefit for a subset of patients receiving multiple fractions, although this was not statistically robust. Acute toxicities were more prevalent in the multiple fractions arm, with implications for patient comfort and healthcare utilization. Importantly, responders to reRT reported significant improvements in functional interference and QoL. The trial's findings support the use of a patient-centric approach to palliative RT, highlighting the viability of a single 8 Gy fraction as a less toxic and more convenient treatment option, albeit with consideration for individual patient circumstances. These results have significant implications for clinical practice, potentially reducing healthcare burdens while optimizing patient convenience during palliative care for painful bone metastases.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7956,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of palliative medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1154-1160\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of palliative medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/apm-24-15\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of palliative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/apm-24-15","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

骨转移是晚期癌症的常见病和致残性后果,通常需要姑息性放射治疗(RT)来缓解疼痛。骨转移瘤的再放疗(reRT)通常是在初始放疗疗程后疼痛未缓解、初始放疗疗程后出现部分疼痛反应但不满意、初始放疗疗程后完全或部分疼痛反应后疼痛复发的情况下考虑的。NCIC CTG SC.20 试验是一项具有里程碑意义的多中心、随机、非盲、对照非劣效性试验,它解决了此类患者再放疗的最佳剂量分量这一关键问题。该试验比较了单次 8 Gy 分次治疗和多次共 20 Gy 分次治疗对 850 例需要进行再放射治疗的疼痛性骨转移患者的疗效和毒性。主要终点是2个月时的总体疼痛反应,次要终点是生活质量(QoL)测量、功能干扰和毒性概况,采用患者报告问卷和欧洲癌症研究和治疗组织(EORTC)QLQ-C30进行评估。意向治疗分析显示,两组患者的疼痛反应无明显差异,符合预先规定的非劣效标准。按协议分析表明,接受多次分次治疗的部分患者可能会获益,但在统计学上并不可靠。急性毒性在多次分次治疗组中更为普遍,这对患者的舒适度和医疗服务的利用率产生了影响。重要的是,接受再透析治疗的患者在功能干扰和生活质量方面均有显著改善。试验结果支持采用以患者为中心的方法进行姑息性 RT,强调了单次 8 Gy 分段作为毒性较低、更方便的治疗方案的可行性,但也要考虑到患者的个体情况。这些结果对临床实践具有重要意义,有可能减轻医疗负担,同时优化患者在疼痛性骨转移姑息治疗中的便利性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Re-treatment of bone metastases for pain control: 2023 ASTRO education panel.

Bone metastases are a common and debilitating consequence of advanced cancer, often necessitating palliative radiation therapy (RT) for pain relief. Reirradiation (reRT) of bone metastases is often considered after lack of pain relief following an initial course of RT, after a partial but unsatisfying pain response to an initial course of radiotherapy, or after pain recurrence following a complete or partial pain response to an initial course of RT. The NCIC CTG SC.20 trial, a landmark multicenter, randomized, non-blinded, controlled non-inferiority trial, addressed the critical question of optimal dose fractionation for reRT in this patient population. This trial compared the efficacy and toxicity of a single 8 Gy fraction to multiple fractions totaling 20 Gy in 850 patients with painful bone metastases requiring reRT. The primary endpoint was overall pain response at 2 months, with secondary endpoints of quality of life (QoL) measures, functional interference, and toxicity profiles assessed using patient-reported questionnaires and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30. The intention-to-treat analysis revealed no significant difference in pain response between the two arms, meeting the pre-specified non-inferiority criteria. The per-protocol analysis suggested a potential benefit for a subset of patients receiving multiple fractions, although this was not statistically robust. Acute toxicities were more prevalent in the multiple fractions arm, with implications for patient comfort and healthcare utilization. Importantly, responders to reRT reported significant improvements in functional interference and QoL. The trial's findings support the use of a patient-centric approach to palliative RT, highlighting the viability of a single 8 Gy fraction as a less toxic and more convenient treatment option, albeit with consideration for individual patient circumstances. These results have significant implications for clinical practice, potentially reducing healthcare burdens while optimizing patient convenience during palliative care for painful bone metastases.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of palliative medicine
Annals of palliative medicine Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
自引率
0.00%
发文量
231
期刊介绍: Annals of Palliative Medicine (Ann Palliat Med; Print ISSN 2224-5820; Online ISSN 2224-5839) is an open access, international, peer-reviewed journal published quarterly with both online and printed copies since 2012. The aim of the journal is to provide up-to-date and cutting-edge information and professional support for health care providers in palliative medicine disciplines to improve the quality of life for patients and their families and caregivers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信