Patients with progression of spinal metastases who present to the clinic have better outcomes compared to those who present to the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: As cancer therapies have improved, spinal metastases are increasingly common. Resulting complications have a significant impact on patient's quality of life. Optimal methods of surveillance and avoidance of neurologic deficits are understudied. This study compares the clinical course of patients who initially presented to the emergency department (ED) versus a multidisciplinary spine oncology clinic and who underwent stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) secondary to progression/presentation of metastatic spine disease. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of adult oncologic patients who underwent spinal SBRT at a single hospital from 2010 to 2021. Descriptive statistics and survival analyses were performed. RESULTS: We identified 498 spinal radiographic treatment sites in 390 patients. Of these patients, 118 (30.3%) presented to the ED. Patients presenting to the ED compared to the clinic had significantly more severe spinal compression (52.5% vs. 11.7%; p < 0.0001), severe pain (28.8% vs. 10.3%; p < 0.0001), weakness (24.5% vs. 4.5%; p < 0.0001), and difficulty walking (24.5% vs. 4.5%; p < 0.0001). Patients who presented to the ED compared to the clinic were significantly more likely to have surgical intervention followed by SBRT (55.4% vs. 15.3%; p < 0.0001) compared to SBRT alone. Patients who presented to the ED compared to the clinic had a significantly quicker interval to distant spine progression (5.1 ± 6.5 vs. 9.1 ± 10.2 months; p = 0.004), systemic progression (5.1 ± 7.2 vs. 9.2 ± 10.7 months; p < 0.0001), and worse overall survival (9.3 ± 10.0 vs. 14.3 ± 13.7 months; p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: The establishment of multidisciplinary spine oncology clinics is an opportunity to potentially allow for earlier, more data-driven treatment of their spinal metastatic disease.

Feasibility of a virtual reality intervention targeting distress and anxiety symptoms in patients with primary brain tumors: Interim analysis of a phase 2 clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Cancer patients experience distress and anxiety when undergoing imaging studies to monitor disease status, yet these symptoms are not always appropriately identified or well-managed. This interim analysis of a phase 2 clinical trial explored feasibility and acceptability of a virtual reality relaxation (VR) intervention for primary brain tumor (PBT) patients at the time of clinical evaluation. METHODS: English speaking, adult PBT patients with previous reports of distress and upcoming neuroimaging were recruited between March of 2021 and March 2022. A brief VR session was done within 2 weeks prior to neuroimaging with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collected before and immediately post-intervention. Self-directed VR use over the next 1 month was encouraged with additional PROs assessments at 1 and 4 weeks. Feasibility metrics included enrollment, eligibility, attrition, and device-related adverse effects with satisfaction measured with qualitative phone interviews. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were approached via email, 40 (73%) responded and 20 (50%) enrolled (9 declines, 11 screen fails). 65% of participants were ≤ 50 years, 50% were male, 90% were White/non-Hispanic, 85% had good KPS (≥ 90), and most were on active treatment. All patients completed the VR intervention, PROs questionnaires, weekly check-ins, and qualitative interview. Most (90%) reported frequent VR use and high satisfaction and only 7 mild AEs were recorded (headache, dizziness, nausea, neck pain). CONCLUSION: This interim analysis supports feasibility and acceptability of a novel VR intervention to target psychological symptoms for PBT patients. Trial enrollment will continue to assess for intervention efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04301089 registered on 3/9/2020.

Association of Employment Status With Symptom Burden and Health-Related Quality of Life in People Living With Primary CNS Tumors.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Financial toxicity significantly affects many patients, especially cancer survivors. We evaluated the association of unemployment as a major contributor to financial toxicity with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessing multiple illness experience domains in a primary CNS tumor (PCNST) cohort. METHODS: Patient and disease characteristics and PROs measuring symptom burden, interference, psychologic distress, functional impairment, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) from participants enrolled in an institutional review board-approved observational study at the US NIH's Neuro-Oncology Branch were collected between September 2016 and December 2019. Descriptive statistics, tests of association, and comparison of group mean values were used to describe and evaluate PROs. RESULTS: Of the 277 participants diagnosed with a PCNST, 57% were male and 43% were female. Participants reported their race as White, non-Hispanic (78%); White, Hispanic/Latino (9%); Asian (7%); Black (4%); Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (1%); and other (2%) with 8% missing. The median age of the overall cohort was 45 years (range 18-74). Hispanic participants in the overall sample were 2.3 times more likely, and in the brain tumor group 3.2 times more likely, to report unemployment (p = 0.043, odds ratio [OR] 2.3, 95% CI 1.0-5.4 and p = 0.008, OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.3-7.9, respectively). 77 (28%) individuals unemployed due to tumor reported more functional impairment with walking, washing, dressing, and performing usual activities and reduced HRQOL (p < 0.001). More unemployed participants in the total sample reported moderate-to-severe depressive symptoms (25%) than those employed (8%) (χ2(1) = 13.9, p < 0.001, OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.8-7.8) and more moderate-to-severe anxiety symptoms (30%) than those employed (15%) (χ2(1) = 7.8, p = 0.005, OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.3-4.5). Unemployed participants with brain tumor reported on average 3 more symptoms as moderate-to-severe compared with those employed (t(83) = -4.0, 95% CI [Formula: see text] difference -5 to -2, p < 0.001, Hedge g = 0.70). DISCUSSION: Being unemployed due to a PCNST strongly correlated with high symptom burden, functional impairment, psychological distress, and reduced HRQOL, which may be impediments to returning to work that warrant intervention. Lack of employer-based health insurance and reduced earnings are financial sequelae of unemployment superimposed on the physical, social, and cognitive effects of living with a PCNST. Innovations to screen for and address financial toxicity and its contributing factors are needed.

Feasibility of a virtual reality intervention targeting distress and anxiety symptoms in patients with primary brain tumors: Interim analysis of a phase 2 clinical trial.

Purpose: Cancer patients experience distress and anxiety when undergoing imaging studies to monitor disease status, yet these symptoms are not always appropriately identified or well-managed. This interim analysis of a phase 2 clinical trial explored feasibility and acceptability of a virtual reality relaxation (VR) intervention for primary brain tumor (PBT) patients at the time of clinical evaluation. Methods: English speaking, adult PBT patients with previous reports of distress and upcoming neuroimaging were recruited between March of 2021 and March 2022. A brief VR session was done within 2 weeks prior to neuroimaging with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collected before and immediately post-intervention. Self-directed VR use over the next 1 month was encouraged with additional PROs assessments at 1 and 4 weeks. Feasibility metrics included enrollment, eligibility, attrition, and device-related adverse effects with satisfaction measured with qualitative phone interviews. Results: 55 patients were approached via email, 40 (73%) responded and 20 (50%) enrolled (9 declines, 11 screen fails). 65% of participants were ≤ 50 years, 50% were male, 90% were White/non-Hispanic, 85% had good KPS (≥ 90), and most were on active treatment. All patients completed the VR intervention, PROs questionnaires, weekly check-ins, and qualitative interview. Most (90%) reported frequent VR use and high satisfaction and only 7 mild AEs were recorded (headache, dizziness, nausea, neck pain). Conclusion: This interim analysis confirmed feasibility and acceptability of a novel VR intervention to target psychological symptoms for PBT patients. Trial enrollment will continue to assess for intervention efficacy. Trial Registration: NCT04301089 registered on 3/9/2020.

The link between psychological distress and survival in solid tumor patients: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Research has demonstrated that solid tumor patients experience high levels of psychological distress at the time of diagnosis. While distress has been associated with many adverse clinical outcomes, little is known about how this symptom may influence the disease trajectory for cancer patients, affecting outcomes such as progression, recurrence, and survival. The purpose of this systematic review was to explore the literature linking distress with survival in solid tumor patients, which may guide future work exploring clinical outcomes as a function of distress. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was performed using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines with predefined eligibility criteria. Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were selected for review. RESULTS: Findings from this review demonstrated a weak-to-moderate relationship between cancer patients' experience of distress and overall survival, with most included studies (11/13) finding at least one predictive analysis to be significant when controlling for confounders. However, significant heterogeneity in the literature, particularly with study sample characteristics and varying methodologies, made direct comparisons across studies challenging. CONCLUSION: Findings from this review suggest that psychological distress may have an impact on disease-related outcomes, including (but not limited to) survival. Future work should consider performing disease-specific analyses controlling for key prognostic factors to better understand the nuanced relationship between distress and clinical outcomes, which may allow further understanding of the biological underpinnings of this relationship and enable the development of targeted interventions for improving distress.

Relationship between RANO-PRO Working Group standardised priority constructs and disease progression among malignant glioma patients: A retrospective cohort study.

Background: Recognising the importance of clinical outcomes assessments (COAs), the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology-Patient Reported Outcome (RANO-PRO) Working Group recommended inclusion of core symptoms and functions in clinical care or research for malignant glioma patients. This study evaluated the association of the recommended symptoms (pain, perceived cognition, seizures, aphasia, symptomatic adverse events) and functions (weakness, walking, work, usual activities) with disease progression in these patients. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, patients with malignant glioma were included from the US National Cancer Institute Neuro-Oncology Branch Natural History Study (NOB-NHS) which follows primary central nervous system tumour patients aged 18 years and older throughout their disease trajectory. The M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor (MDASI-BT), EQ-5D-3L, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), and Neurologic Function scores (NFS) were evaluated in relation to disease progression by chi-square tests, independent- and paired-samples t-tests, adjusted for multiple comparisons at first assessment and over time to a second assessment. Radiographic disease progression was determined on the interpretation of the imaging study by a radiologist and neuro-oncologist using standard criteria as part of clinical trial participation or routine standard of care. The priority constructs were evaluated to provide initial evidence of their relevance, relationship to disease status over time, and sensitivity to change in a diverse group of patients with malignant glioma. Findings: Seven hundred and sixty-five patients had enrolled into the NOB-NHS between September 1, 2016 and January 31, 2020. Three hundred and thirty-six patients had a diagnosis of a malignant glioma (anaplastic astrocytoma, anaplastic oligodendroglioma, glioblastoma, and gliosarcoma) and were included in the current study. The sample was 64% male (n = 215), 36% female (n = 121), median age of 52 years (IQR = 18.75), 82% White (n = 276), and 65% had tumour recurrence (n = 219). One hundred and fifty-four (46%) had radiographic disease progression. Difficulty remembering, fatigue, and weakness were worse in the group whose imaging was interpreted as radiographic disease progression versus stable disease, as well as the functions of walking, work, activity, and self-care (1.1 < difference < 1.8). Patients with disease progression were four times more likely to have a poor KPS (≤80) and worse NFS. Among patients with disease progression at a second assessment (n = 112), all symptoms, except seizures, worsened between first assessment and disease progression and up to 22% of patients (n = 25) reported worsening mobility, self-care, and usual activity; 46% (n = 51) and 35% (n = 30) had worsened KPS and NFS, respectively. On average, 4 symptoms or functions (SD = 3) were reported as moderate-to-severe and 30% (n = 33) and 23% (n = 26) had a change to moderate-to-severe fatigue and walking, respectively, at time of disease progression. Over 7% of patients with worsening (n = 7 of 100) reported every symptom and function as having changed the most severely including seizures with fatigue and activity reported as the top symptom and function, respectively. Interpretation: The identified core symptoms and functions worsened at the time of progression, supporting the relevance and sensitivity of the priority constructs identified by the RANO-PRO Working Group for clinical care and clinical trials for malignant glioma patients. Funding: The Natural History Study is supported by Intramural Project 1ZIABC011786-03.

The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in neuro-oncology: A pilot study of feasibility and utility in telehealth and in-person clinical assessments.

Background: Cognitive impairments are a common burden for patients with primary CNS tumors. Neuropsychological assessment batteries can be too lengthy, which limits their use as an objective measure of cognition during routine care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and utility of the brief Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in routine in-person and telehealth visits (as a result of the global COVID-19 pandemic) with neuro-oncology patients. Methods: Seventy-one adults with primary CNS tumors completed MoCA testing in person (n = 47) and via telehealth (n = 24). Correlation analysis and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including symptom burden and interference, perceived cognition, general health status, and anxiety and depression, were included in this study. Feasibility was assessed through a provider satisfaction questionnaire. Results: Patients were primarily White (83%), college-educated (71%) males (54%) with high-grade tumors (66%). The average total score on the MoCA administered in person was 25 (range: 6-30), with 34% classified as abnormal, and the average total score via telehealth was 26 (range: 12-30), with 29% classified as abnormal. Providers reported satisfaction in using the MoCA during routine clinical care, both in person and via telehealth. Lower MoCA scores correlated with worse symptom severity, KPS, age, education, and previous treatment. Conclusions: The MoCA was feasible in clinical and telehealth settings, and its relationship to clinical characteristics and PROs highlights the need for both objective and patient-reported measures of cognition to understand the overall cognitive profile of a patient with a CNS tumor.

Evaluation of the key geriatric assessment constructs in primary brain tumor population - a descriptive study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite an increasing aging population, older adults (≥ 65 years) with primary brain tumors (PBTs) are not routinely assessed for geriatric vulnerabilities. Recent reports of geriatric assessment (GA) in patients with glioblastomas demonstrated that GA may serve as a sensitive prognosticator of overall survival. Yet, current practice does not include routine evaluation of geriatric vulnerabilities and the relevance of GA has not been previously evaluated in broader cohorts of PBT patients. The objective of this descriptive study was to assess key GA constructs in adults with PBT dichotomized into older versus younger groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of data collected from 579 participants with PBT recruited between 2016 and 2020, dichotomized into older (≥ 65 years, n = 92) and younger (≤ 64 years, n = 487) from an ongoing observational trial. GA constructs were evaluated using socio-demographic characteristics, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), polypharmacy (>5 daily medications), Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), Neurologic Function Score (NFS), and patient-reported outcome assessments including general health, functional status, symptom burden and interference, and mood. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, chi-square tests, and Pearson correlations were used to evaluate differences between age groups. RESULTS: Older participants were more likely to have problems with mobility (58% vs. 44%), usual activities (64% vs 50%) and self-care (38% vs 26%) compared to the younger participants (odds ratios [ORs] = 1.3-1.4, ps < 0.05), while older participants were less likely to report feeling distressed (OR = 0.4, p < 0.05). Older participants also had higher CCI and were more likely to have polypharmacy (OR = 1.7, ps < 0.05). Increasing age strongly correlated with worse KPS score (r = -0.232, OR = 1.4, p < 0.001) and worse NFS (r = 0.210, OR = 1.5, p < 0.001). No differences were observed in overall symptom burden, symptom interference, and anxiety/depression scores. DISCUSSION: While commonly used GA tools were not available, the study employed patient- and clinician-reported outcomes to identify potential future research directions for the use of GA in the broader neuro-oncology population. Findings illustrate missed opportunities in neuro-oncology practice and underscore the need for incorporation of GA into routine care of this population. Future studies are warranted to further evaluate the prognostic utility of GA and to better understand functional aging outcomes in this patient population.