Palliative Radiation Oncology for Gastrointestinal Tract Malignancies

2017 ◽  
pp. 231-256
Author(s):  
P. Venkat ◽  
S.E. Hoffe ◽  
J.M. Frakes
Keyword(s):  
Gastrointestinal Tract ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Palliative Radiation

Impact of the distance from a radiation oncology treatment facilty on initiation of therapy and its influence on survival in patients with stage III and IV NSCLC.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e17594-e17594
Author(s):  
Danielle M. File ◽  
Carlos Eduardo Arce-Lara ◽  
Jeffrey C. Whittle ◽  
Elizabeth Gore ◽  
Rafael Santana-Davila
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Disease ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
The State ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Palliative Radiation ◽  
Stage Iv Disease ◽  
Oncology Treatment ◽  
Time To First Treatment

e17594 Background: Patients with stage III and IV lung cancer require multidisciplinary care. The Milwaukee VA is the only center within the Veterans Health Administration in the state that has a radiation oncology facility. Patients frequently travel from across the state to receive treatment here. We conducted a retrospective review of cases seen in our institution to determine if the distance from the patients’ home to our center influenced their outcome. Methods: Patients with NSCLC treated between 2000 and 2012 were identified from our internal registry. Type of treatment was identified from the registry and confirmed in a chart review.. SAS 9.2 was used for statistical analysis and to measure distance between the patients’ home address and our center. Results: We included 230 patients with stage III disease treated with radiation therapy and 139 patients with stage IV treated with chemotherapy. Of those with Stage III (53% with IIIA and 47% IIIB) 41.3% (n=95) received concurrent radiation therapy and chemotherapy, 14% received sequential therapy, 40% received radiation therapy alone and 5% were treated with chemotherapy followed by palliative radiation. In those with metastatic disease 61% received palliative radiation at some point during their treatment. Median distance between the patients’ home and the Milwaukee VA was 57miles (IQR 10-109) in patients with stage III disease and 22 (IQR 5-84) in those with metastatic disease. There was no correlation between the distance travelled and the time to first treatment in either stage (r=0.008 in stage III and r=0.05 in stage IV). In a univariate analysis living further than 50 miles did not appear to influence survival in stage III (median OS 14.6 vs. 16.4 months p=0.25) nor stage IV disease(9.7 vs 8 p=0.55). In a multivariate analysis when controlling for age, time to first treatment and distance as a continuous variable was not associated with survival in patients with stage III(HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99-1.02 p=0.15) or stage IV disease (HR 1.01, 95%CI 0.98-1.04 p=0.35). Conclusions: Distance traveled to a radiation oncology treatment facility in this cohort did not influence survival in patients with stage III and IV NSCLC.

Timing of referral for palliative radiation therapy and length of hospital stay.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 57-57
Author(s):  
Moeko Nagatsuka ◽  
Ryan T. Hughes ◽  
Chase Glenn ◽  
Doris R. Brown
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Symptomatic Relief ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Continuous Variable ◽  
Palliative Radiation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Palliative Radiation Therapy

57 Background: Palliative radiation therapy (PRT) offers effective symptomatic relief to cancer patients. Increased focus on quality of care and healthcare efficiency necessitate a better understanding of the temporal relationships between consultation for/initiation of PRT and length of hospital stay (LOS). This study aims to assess whether durations from admission to PRT consult/PRT initiation affect LOS. Methods: In an institutional review of patients who received PRT as inpatients between January 2017 and December 2018, 67 met inclusion criteria. Duration of time from admission to consultation or start of PRT were categorized using various thresholds. LOS was compared across groups using the Wilcoxon rank sum test and factors were evaluated as predictors of LOS using bivariate linear regression. Results: PRT was given for pain (37%), neurologic deficits/brain metastases (31%), and respiratory symptoms (19%). Multiple sites were treated in 31%; treatment sites included spine (45%), non-spine bone (27%), chest (22%), abdomen/pelvis (12%), brain (10%) and soft tissue (6%). At admission, patients had known metastases (66%), no prior cancer diagnosis (19%), or known primary cancer (15%). Median LOS was 12 days (IQR 7-18) for all patients. There was a significant difference in LOS for patients referred for PRT within 3 days of admission versus greater than 3 days (11 v. 21 days, p < 0.01). This difference was slightly greater using a threshold of 4 days (11 v. 25 days, p < 0.01) and 5 days (11 v. 26 days, p < 0.01), both of which remained significant when analyzing only patients with prior cancer diagnosis (n = 54). There was no difference in LOS using a threshold of 1 or 2 days. As a continuous variable, duration from admission to PRT was associated with LOS (OR 2.40, p < 0.01). Similar patterns were noted when analyzing by time from admission to PRT start. Conclusions: Earlier radiation oncology consultation for PRT is associated with shorter LOS in patients treated with PRT for symptomatic malignancy. Further research is needed to better define this relationship and improve systematic processes to facilitate early consultation and treatment. A palliative radiation oncology clinic was recently developed to address these issues at our institution.

scholarly journals A Palliative Radiation Oncology Consult Service's Impact on Care of Advanced Cancer Patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 438-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanders Chang ◽  
Peter May ◽  
Nathan E. Goldstein ◽  
Juan Wisnivesky ◽  
Kenneth Rosenzweig ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Palliative Radiation

scholarly journals A Palliative Radiation Oncology Consult Service Reduces Total Costs During Hospitalization

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (6) ◽  
pp. 1452-1458 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanders Chang ◽  
Peter May ◽  
Nathan E. Goldstein ◽  
Juan Wisnivesky ◽  
Doran Ricks ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Consult Service ◽  
Palliative Radiation

scholarly journals Quality Indicators in Palliative Radiation Oncology: Development and Pilot Testing

2021 ◽  
pp. 100856
Author(s):  
Tetsuo Saito ◽  
Naoto Shikama ◽  
Takeo Takahashi ◽  
Misako Miwa ◽  
Kazunari Miyazawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Indicators ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Pilot Testing ◽  
Palliative Radiation

Correlation of demographic factors with length of treatment and survival in a palliative radiation oncology population.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 123-123
Author(s):  
Lauren Michelle Hertan ◽  
Alexandra Nichipor ◽  
Yaseer Mohammed Khouj ◽  
Cierra Zaslowe-Dude ◽  
Tracy A. Balboni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Background Radiation ◽  
Demographic Factors ◽  
Stereotactic Radiation Therapy ◽  
Stereotactic Radiation ◽  
Palliative Radiation ◽  
Length Of Treatment

123 Background: Radiation is often used to palliate symptoms in patients with advanced cancer and the number of fractions used can vary significantly from as short as a single fraction (SF) to up to a multiple week course. No data currently exists regarding demographic factors and their influence on survival and fractionation decisions. The aim of this project is to investigate the association of demographic factors with survival, likelihood of SF use in patients (pts) receiving RT for bone metastases, and likelihood of hypofractionation (HF) (≤ 5 fx) in pts being treated for any palliative reason, excluding those receiving partial brain RT (PBRT) which includes stereotactic radiosurgery, and stereotactic radiation therapy. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed charts of pts treated with palliative RT between 1/2015 – 5/2017 at 2 tertiary centers and 4 community satellite practices. Demographic factors analyzed are included in table 1. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the associations between the factors and outcomes. Results: A total of 928 pts were included in the survival analysis. In the two subset analyses, 373 pts were included in the bone metastasis analysis and 745 were included in the analysis of all patients excluding pts receiving PBRT. In pts treated for bone metastases, consult type (inpatient vs. outpatient) was the only significant factor on multivariate analysis, with inpatient consults being more likely to get SF (HR = 2.169, =.025). In the pts receiving palliative RT (excluding PBRT), race and consult location (tertiary vs. community) were significant. Non-white pts (HR=0.527, p=.012) and pts treated in the community (HR=.778, p<.001) were less likely to get HF. Gender (male vs. female), consult location (tertiary vs. community), and consult type (inpatient vs. outpatient) were significant on multivariate analysis for survival (HR=1.243, p=.028; HR=1.602, p<.001; HR=2.301, p<.001, respectively). Conclusions: This analysis suggests that demographic factors may affect both survival and decision making regarding fractionation in patients receiving palliative radiation. Further investigation into the reasons for these differences is needed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document