This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Save to my personal folders Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Chow, E. Articles by Sze, W. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Chow, E. Articles by Sze, W. M. Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Palliative Radiotherapy Trials for Bone Metastases: A Systematic Review

Edward Chow, Kristin Harris, Grace Fan, May Tsao, Wai M. Sze

From the Toronto Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Address reprint requests to Edward Chow, MBBS, MSc, FRCPC, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centre, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4N 3M5; e-mail: edward.chow{at}sunnybrook.ca

Purpose The objective is to update previous meta-analyses with a systematic review of randomized palliative radiotherapy (RT) trials comparing single fractions (SFs) versus multiple fractions (MFs).

Methods The analysis includes all published reports from randomized trials comparing SF or MF schedules for the treatment of painful bone metastases with localized RT. A systematic review was performed using the random-effects model with Review Manager version 4.1 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). The odds ratio and 95% CI were calculated for each trial and presented in a forest plot.

Results A total of 16 randomized trials from 1986 onward were identified. For intention-to-treat patients, the overall response (OR) rates for pain were similar for SF at 1,468 (58%) of 2,513 patients and MF RT at 1,466 (59%) of 2,487 patients. The complete response (CR) rates for pain were 23% (545 of 2,375 patients) for SF and 24% (558 of 2,351 patients) for MF RT. No significant differences were found in response rates. Trends showing an increased risk for SF RT arm patients in terms of pathological fractures and spinal cord compressions were observed, but neither were statistically significant (P = .75 and P = .13, respectively). The likelihood of re-treatment was 2.5-fold higher (95% CI, 1.76 to 3.56) in SF RT arm patients (P < .00001). Repeated analysis of these end points, excluding dropout patients, did not alter the conclusions. Generally, no significant differences with respect to acute toxicities were observed between the arms.

Conclusion No significant differences in the arms were observed for overall and CR rates in both intention-to-treat and assessable patients. However, a significantly higher re-treatment rate with SFs was evident.

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				V. O. Lewis What's New in Musculoskeletal Oncology J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., June 1, 2009; 91(6): 1546 - 1556. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. H. M. A. Bartels, Y. M. van der Linden, and W. T. A. van der Graaf Spinal Extradural Metastasis: Review of Current Treatment Options CA Cancer J Clin, July 1, 2008; 58(4): 245 - 259. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Hoskin Opioids in context: relieving the pain of cancer. The role of comprehensive cancer management Palliative Medicine, June 1, 2008; 22(4): 303 - 309. [Abstract] [PDF]

				Palliative Radiotherapy for Patients with Bone Metastases Journal Watch Oncology and Hematology, June 25, 2007; 2007(625): 2 - 2. [Full Text]