New quality outcome indicators for bone metastases: expert consensus analysis of patients, their families and specialist healthcare professionals.

OBJECTIVES: As workload increases, surgical care for patients with bone metastases is increasingly decentralised, with a shift in management away from primary bone tumour units to local centres. We must ensure that patients have similar outcomes regardless of where they receive their treatment. The aim was to develop and validate a set of quality outcome indicators (QOIs) to evaluate treatment success for patients undergoing surgery for bone metastases. METHODS: Outcome recommendations were adapted from the literature and field tested in a retrospective patient cohort to determine feasibility. The provisional outcome indicators were assessed during a modified RAND/Delphi consensus process by a group of patients, relatives and healthcare professionals with validated targets added. RESULTS: 1534 articles were reviewed. 38 quality objectives were extracted and assessed for feasibility using clinical records for 117 patients. 28 provisional outcome indicators proceeded to expert consensus and were reviewed by a group of 22 panellists including 10 patients and 4 relatives/carers. After two rounds, 15 QOIs were generated, with validated targets based on expert consensus. These included specific statements such as 'surgery improves pain and reduces the need for morphine, target: at follow-up, pain is documented in 80% of individuals and 50% of these have reduced need for morphine'. CONCLUSIONS: The published evidence and guidelines were adapted into a set of outcome indicators validated by patients, their family/carers and healthcare professionals. These can be used to compare care between centres and identify units of excellence in maximising good outcome after surgery for bone metastases.

Metastatic bone disease: new quality performance indicator development.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with metastatic bone disease (MBD) should receive the same standard of care regardless of which centre they are treated in. The aim was to develop and test a set of quality performance indicators (QPIs) to evaluate care for patients with MBD referred to orthopaedics. METHODS: QPIs were adapted from the literature and ranked on feasibility and necessity during a modified RAND/Delphi consensus process. They were then validated and field tested in a retrospective cohort of 108 patients using indicator-specific targets set during consensus. RESULTS: 2568 articles including six guidelines were reviewed. 43 quality objectives were extracted and 40 proceeded to expert consensus. After two rounds, 18 QPIs for MBD care were generated, with the following generating the highest consensus: 'Patients with high fracture risk should receive urgent assessment' (combined mean 6.7/7, 95% CI 6.5 to 6.8) and 'preoperative workup should include full blood tests including group and save' (combined mean 6.7/7, 95% CI 6.5 to 6.9). In the pilot test, targets were met for 5/18 QPIs (mean 52%, standard deviation 22%). The median deviation from projected target was -14% (interquartile range -11% to -31%, range -74% to 11%). The highest scoring QPI was 'adults with fractures should have surgery within 7 days' (target 80%:actual 92%). CONCLUSIONS: The published evidence and guidelines were adapted into a set of validated QPIs for MBD care which can be used to evaluate variation in care between centres. These QPIs should be correlated with outcome scores to determine whether they can act as predictors of outcome after surgery.

Patient-reported assessment of outcome after surgery for bone metastases.

Regardless of prognosis, surgery is often considered in metastatic bone disease (MBD) as a palliative procedure to improve function and quality of life. Traditional focus on objective outcomes such as mortality is inappropriate in this group, and there is a drive to assess outcomes via patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). This is an overview of current understanding of MBD outcomes and how this should influence future decision-making and research. The objectives of this review were to identify difficulties in measuring PROMs in the MBD patient population and explore alternatives to patientreported outcomes. We also provide an overview of current understanding of outcomes in MBD and how this should influence decision-making and direct research.

A prospective longitudinal study investigating outcomes including patient-reported outcome measures after surgery for metastatic bone disease.

AIMS: Surgery is often indicated in patients with metastatic bone disease (MBD) to improve pain and maximize function. Few studies are available which report on clinically meaningful outcomes such as quality of life, function, and pain relief after surgery for MBD. This is the published protocol for the Bone Metastasis Audit - Patient Reported Outcomes (BoMA-PRO) multicentre MBD study. The primary objective is to ascertain patient-reported quality of life at three to 24 months post-surgery for MBD. METHODS: This will be a prospective, longitudinal study across six UK orthopaedic centres powered to identify the influence of ten patient variables on quality of life at three months after surgery for MBD. Adult patients managed for bone metastases will be screened by their treating consultant and posted out participant materials. If they opt in to participate, they will receive questionnaire packs at regular intervals from three to 24 months post-surgery and their electronic records will be screened until death or five years from recruitment. The primary outcome is quality of life as measured by the European Organisation for Research and the Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ) C30 questionnaire. The protocol has been approved by the Newcastle & North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee (REC ref 19/NE/0303) and the study is funded by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow (RCPSG) and the Association for Cancer Surgery (BASO-ACS). DISCUSSION: This will be the first powered study internationally to investigate patient-reported outcomes after orthopaedic treatment for bone metastases. We will assess quality of life, function, and pain relief at three to 24 months post-surgery and identify which patient variables are significantly associated with a good outcome after MBD treatment. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(2):79-85.

Prospective audit showing improved patient-assessed skin toxicity with use of betamethasone cream for those at high risk of radiation dermatitis.

This audit was conducted before and after introduction of a risk-based skincare policy with prophylactic steroids recommended for those at high risk. Comparison of the two cohorts confirmed results seen in trials with significant reduction in redness, itch, discomfort, sleep disturbance, and use of analgesia with the addition of steroids.

Seminal vesicle interfraction displacement and margins in image guided radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: To analyze interfraction motion of seminal vesicles (SV), and its motion relative to rectal and bladder filling. METHODS AND MATERIALS: SV and prostate were contoured on 771 daily computed tomography "on rails" scans from 24 prostate cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy. Random and systematic errors for SV centroid displacement were measured relative to the prostate centroid. Margins required for complete geometric coverage of SV were determined using isotropic expansion of reference contours. SV motion relative to rectum and bladder was determined. RESULTS: Systematic error for the SV was 1.9 mm left-right (LR), 2.9 mm anterior-posterior (AP) and 3.6 mm superior-inferior (SI). Random error was 1.4 mm (LR), 2.7 mm (AP) and 2.1 mm (SI). 10 mm margins covered the entire left SV and right SV on at least 90% of fractions in 50% and 33% of patients and 15 mm margins covered 88% and 79% respectively. SV AP movement correlated with movement of the most posterior point of the bladder (mean R2 = 0.46, SD = 0.24) and rectal area (mean R2 = 0.38, SD = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: Considerable interfraction displacement of SV was observed in this cohort of patients. Bladder and rectal parameters correlated with SV movement.

Does inverse-planned intensity-modulated radiation therapy have a role in the treatment of patients with left-sided breast cancer?

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of the study was to determine if multi-field inverse-planned intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) improves on the sparing of organs at risk (heart, lungs and contralateral breast) when compared with field-in-field forward-planned RT (FiF). METHODS: The planning CT scans of 10 women with left-sided breast cancer previously treated with whole-breast RT on an inclined breast board with both arms supported above the head were retrieved. The whole breast planning target volume (PTV) was defined by clinical mark-up and contoured on all relevant CT slices as were the organs at risk. For each patient, three plans were generated using FiF, five- and nine-field inverse-planned IMRT, all to a total dose of 50 Gy to the whole breast. Mean and maximum doses to the organs at risk and the homogeneity index (HI) of the whole-breast PTV were compared. RESULTS: The mean heart dose for the FiF plans was 2.63 Gy compared with 4.04 Gy for the five-field and 4.30 Gy for the nine-field IMRT plans, with no significant differences in the HI of the whole-breast PTV in all plans. The FiF plans resulted in a mean contralateral breast dose of 0.58 Gy compared with 0.70 and 2.08 Gy for the five- and nine-field IMRT plans, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: FiF resulted in a lower mean heart and contralateral breast dose with comparable HI of the whole-breast PTV in comparison with inverse-planned IMRT using five or nine fields.

Merkel cell carcinoma: 27-year experience at the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate the treatment outcome of patients with Merkel cell carcinoma after local and/or regional treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients presenting to our center between January 1980 and July 2006 with Merkel cell carcinoma and without distant metastases were reviewed. The primary endpoint was locoregional control. Secondary endpoints were distant recurrence, survival and treatment toxicity. RESULTS: A total of 176 patients were identified. The median age was 79 years. The median follow-up was 2.2 years for all patients and 3.9 years for those alive at the last follow-up visit. The most common primary site was the head and neck (56%), and 62 patients(35%) had regional disease at presentation. The initial surgery to the primary tumor involved (wide) local excision in 140 patients and biopsy only in 28 patients (8 patients had no identifiable primary tumor); 33 patients underwent nodal surgery. Of the 176 patients, 165 (94%) underwent radiotherapy (RT) and 29 of them also underwent concurrent chemotherapy. The median radiation dose was 50 Gy (range, 18-60). Locoregional recurrence developed in 33 patients(19%), with a median interval to recurrence of 8 months. Distant metastases developed in 43 patients(24%). Age, primary tumor size, and RT (no RT vs. < 45 Gy vs. ≥ 45 Gy) were predictive of locoregional control on univariate analysis. However, only RT remained significant on multivariate analysis. The estimated 5-year actuarial rate for locoregional control, progression-free survival, and overall survival was 76%, 60%, and 45%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The locoregional control rate for Merkel cell carcinoma in our study was comparable to those from other series using combined modality treatment with RT an integral part of treatment.

Should extrapulmonary small cell cancer be managed like small cell lung cancer?

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine if extrapulmonary small cell carcinomas (EPSCC) should be managed using protocols similar to those for small cell lung cancer (SCLC). METHODS: Treatment strategies, survival, patterns of failure, and prognostic factors for patients with EPSCC were analyzed retrospectively at a large cancer center. SCLC was excluded by thoracic computed tomography (75%) or chest radiography (25%). RESULTS: Of 120 eligible patients, 70% had limited disease (LD). Treatment modalities included chemotherapy (n = 82; 68%), radiotherapy (RT) (n = 80; 67%), and surgery (n = 41, 34%). The median survival for patients with LD and extensive disease was 1.4 years and 0.7 years, respectively. Gynecologic (n = 31) and gastrointestinal (n = 28) were the most common primary tumor sites. Gynecologic and head and neck primary tumor sites had better 1-year survival than other sites (P = .019 and 0.005, respectively). Brain metastasis was the site of first distant failure in 4.1% of patients versus 35% for soft tissue metastases. The lifetime risk of brain metastasis was 13%. Definitive RT (P = .004), LD (P = .028), and prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) (P = .022) were found to be positive prognostic factors and weight loss (P < .001) was a negative prognostic factor on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with EPSCC usually experienced short survival, often with early distant metastasis. Although PCI was associated with improved overall survival, brain metastasis was less frequent than in patients with SCLC, and therefore the potential benefit of PCI was less than in patients with SCLC. Definitive chemoradiotherapy was associated with better outcomes and should be delivered whenever feasible.