BACKGROUND: The effective management of fatigue in patients with cancer requires a clear delineation of what constitutes nontrivial fatigue. The authors defined numeric cutpoints for fatigue severity based on functional interference and described the prevalence and characteristics of fatigue in patients with cancer and survivors.METHODS: In a multicenter study, outpatients with breast, prostate, colorectal, or lung cancer rated their fatigue severity and symptom interference with functioning on the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory numeric scale of 0 to 10. Ratings of symptom interference guided the selection of numeric rating cutpoints between mild, moderate, and severe fatigue levels. Regression analysis identified significant factors related to reporting moderate/severe fatigue.RESULTS: The statistically optimal cutpoints were ≥ 4 for moderate fatigue and ≥ 7 for severe fatigue. Moderate/severe fatigue was reported by 983 of 2177 patients (45%) undergoing active treatment and was more likely to occur in patients receiving treatment with strong opioids (odds ratio [OR], 3.00), those with a poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (OR, 2.00), those who had > 5% weight loss within 6 months (OR, 1.60), those who were receiving > 10 medications (OR, 1.58), those with lung cancer (OR, 1.55), and those with a history of depression (OR, 1.42). Among survivors (patients with complete remission or no evidence of disease, and not currently receiving cancer treatment), 29% of patients (150 of 515 patients) had moderate/severe fatigue that was associated with poor performance status (OR, 3.48) and a history of depression (OR, 2.21).CONCLUSIONS: The current study statistically defined fatigue severity categories related to significantly increased symptom interference. The high prevalence of moderate/severe fatigue in both actively treated patients with cancer and survivors warrants the promoting of the routine assessment and management of patient‐reported fatigue. Cancer 2014;120:425–432. © 2013 American Cancer Society.

Spinal stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is increasingly used to manage spinal metastases, yet the technique's effectiveness in controlling the symptom burden of spinal metastases has not been well described. We investigated the clinical benefit of SBRT for managing spinal metastases and reducing cancer-related symptoms. 149 patients with mechanically stable, non-cord-compressing spinal metastases (166 lesions) were given SBRT in a phase 1-2 study. Patients received a total dose of 27-30 Gy, typically in three fractions. Symptoms were measured before SBRT and at several time points up to 6 months after treatment, by the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and the M D Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI). The primary endpoint was frequency and duration of complete pain relief. The study is completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00508443. Median follow-up was 15·9 months (IQR 9·5-30·3). The number of patients reporting no pain from bone metastases, as measured by the BPI, increased from 39 of 149 (26%) before SBRT to 55 of 102 (54%) 6 months after SBRT (p<0·0001). BPI-reported pain reduction from baseline to 4 weeks after SBRT was clinically meaningful (mean 3·4 [SD 2·9] on the BPI pain-at-its-worst item at baseline, 2·1 [2·4] at 4 weeks; effect size 0·47, p=0·00076). These improvements were accompanied by significant reduction in opioid use during the first 6 months after SBRT (43 [28·9%] of 149 patients with strong opioid use at baseline vs 20 [20·0%] of 100 at 6 months; p=0·011). Ordinal regression modelling showed that patients reported significant pain reduction according to the MDASI during the first 6 months after SBRT (p=0·00003), and significant reductions in a composite score of the six MDASI symptom interference with daily life items (p=0·0066). Only a few instances of non-neurological grade 3 toxicities occurred: nausea (one event), vomiting (one), diarrhoea (one), fatigue (one), dysphagia (one), neck pain (one), and diaphoresis (one); pain associated with severe tongue oedema and trismus occurred twice; and non-cardiac chest pain was reported three times. No grade 4 toxicities occurred. Progression-free survival after SBRT was 80·5% (95% CI 72·9-86·1) at 1 year and 72·4% (63·1-79·7) at 2 years. SBRT is an effective primary or salvage treatment for mechanically stable spinal metastasis. Significant reductions in patient-reported pain and other symptoms were evident 6 months after SBRT, along with satisfactory progression-free survival and no late spinal cord toxicities. National Cancer Institute of the US National Institutes of Health.

PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of patient-reported outcome (PRO)-based symptom management in the early period after lung cancer surgery. METHODS: Before surgery, patients with clinically diagnosed lung cancer were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive postoperative PRO-based symptom management or usual care. All patients reported symptoms on MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer presurgery, daily postsurgery, and twice a week after discharge for up to 4 weeks via an electronic PRO system. In the intervention group, treating surgeons responded to overthreshold electronic alerts driven by any of the five target symptom scores (score ≥ 4 on a 0-10 scale for pain, fatigue, disturbed sleep, shortness of breath, and coughing). The control group patients received usual care and no alerts were generated. The primary outcome was the number of symptom threshold events (any target symptom with a score of ≥ 4) at discharge. Per-protocol analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Of the 166 participants, 83 were randomly allocated to each group. At discharge, the intervention group reported fewer symptom threshold events than the control group (median [interquartile range], 0 [0-2] v 2 [0-3]; P = .007). At 4 weeks postdischarge, this difference was maintained between the intervention and control groups (median [interquartile range], 0 [0-0] v 0 [0-1]; P = .018). The intervention group had a lower complication rate than the control group (21.5% v 40.6%; P = .019). Surgeons spent a median of 3 minutes managing an alert. CONCLUSION: PRO-based symptom management after lung cancer surgery showed lower symptom burden and fewer complications than usual care for up to 4 weeks postdischarge.