Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) is known to be effective in relieving cancer related symptoms. However, many studies and clinical practice show several barriers hindering its use and worsening the quality of patient support during PRT. Various solutions were proposed to overcome these barriers: training on PRT for supportive and palliative care specialists and training on palliative care for radiation oncologists, and introduction of pathways and organizational models specifically dedicated to PRT. Evidence on innovative organizational models and mutual training experiences is few and sparse. Therefore, the aim of this literature review is to present a quick summary of the information available on improving the PRT quality through training, new pathways, and innovative organizational models. The majority of studies on the integration of PRT with other palliative and supportive therapies present low levels of evidence being mostly retrospective analyses. However, it should be emphasized that all reports uniformly showed advantages coming from the integration of PRT with supportive therapies. To actively participate in the integration of PRT and palliative care, providing comprehensive support to the needs of patients with advanced cancer, radiation oncologists should not only plan PRT but also: (i) assess and manage symptoms and stress, (ii) rapidly refer patients to specialists in management of more complex symptoms, and (iii) participate in multidisciplinary palliative care teams. To this end, improved education in palliative care both in residency schools and during professional life through continuous medical education is clearly needed. In particular, effective training is needed for radiotherapy residents to enable them to provide patients with comprehensive palliative care. Therefore, formal teaching of adequate duration, interactive teaching methods, attendance in palliative care services, and education in advanced palliative care should be planned in post-graduated schools of radiotherapy.

Electrochemotherapy (ECT) is an emerging therapeutic approach gaining growing interest for its potential immunomodulatory effects in cancer treatment. This narrative review systematically examines the current state of knowledge regarding the interplay between ECT and the immune system. Through an analysis of preclinical and clinical studies, the review highlights ECT capacity to induce immunogenic cell death, activate dendritic cells, release tumor antigens, trigger inflammatory responses, and occasionally manifest systemic effects—the abscopal phenomenon. These mechanisms collectively suggest the ECT potential to influence both local tumor control and immune responses. While implications for clinical practice appear promising, warranting the consideration of ECT as a complementary treatment to immunotherapy, the evidence remains preliminary. Consequently, further research is needed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms, optimize treatment protocols, explore potential synergies, and decipher the parameters influencing the abscopal effect. As the field advances, the integration of ECT’s potential immunomodulatory aspects into clinical practice will need careful evaluation and collaboration among clinical practitioners, researchers, and policymakers.

Aim: The frequent inadequacy of pain management in cancer patients is well known. Moreover, the quality of analgesic treatment in patients treated with radiotherapy (RT) has only been rarely assessed. In order to study the latter topic, we conducted a multicenter, observational and prospective study based on the Pain Management Index (PMI) in RT Italian departments. Methods: We collected data on age, gender, tumor site and stage, performance status, treatment aim, and pain (type: CP—cancer pain, NCP—non-cancer pain, MP—mixed pain; intensity: NRS: Numeric Rating Scale). Furthermore, we analyzed the impact on PMI on these parameters, and we defined a pain score with values from 0 (NRS: 0, no pain) to 3 (NRS: 7–10: intense pain) and an analgesic score from 0 (pain medication not taken) to 3 (strong opioids). By subtracting the pain score from the analgesic score, we obtained the PMI value, considering cases with values < 0 as inadequate analgesic prescriptions. The Ethics Committees of the participating centers approved the study (ARISE-1 study). Results: Two thousand one hundred four non-selected outpatients with cancer and aged 18 years or older were enrolled in 13 RT departments. RT had curative and palliative intent in 62.4% and 37.6% patients, respectively. Tumor stage was non-metastatic in 57.3% and metastatic in 42.7% of subjects, respectively. Pain affected 1417 patients (CP: 49.5%, NCP: 32.0%; MP: 18.5%). PMI was < 0 in 45.0% of patients with pain. At multivariable analysis, inadequate pain management was significantly correlated with curative RT aim, ECOG performance status = 1 (versus both ECOG-PS3 and ECOG- PS4), breast cancer, non-cancer pain, and Central and South Italy RT Departments (versus Northern Italy).Conclusions: Pain management was less adequate in patients with more favorable clinical condition and stage. Educational and organizational strategies are needed in RT departments to reduce the non-negligible percentage of patients with inadequate analgesic therapy.

Background: Pain is a prevalent symptom among cancer patients, and its management is crucial for improving their quality of life. However, pain management in cancer patients referred to radiotherapy (RT) departments is often inadequate, and limited research has been conducted on this specific population. This study aimed to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of pain management when patients are referred for RT. Moreover, we explored potential predictors of adequate pain management. Methods: This observational, prospective, multicenter cohort study included cancer patients aged 18 years or older who were referred to RT departments. A pain management assessment was conducted using the Pain Management Index (PMI), calculated by subtracting the pain score from the analgesic score (PMI < 0 indicated inadequate pain management). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictors of adequate pain management. Results: A total of 1042 cancer outpatients were included in the study. The analysis revealed that 42.9% of patients with pain did not receive adequate pain management based on PMI values. Among patients with pain or taking analgesics and referred to palliative or curative RT, 72% and 75% had inadequate or ineffective analgesic therapy, respectively. The odds of receiving adequate pain management (PMI ≥ 0) were higher in patients undergoing palliative RT (OR 2.52; p < 0.001), with worse ECOG-PS scores of 2, 3 and 4 (OR 1.63, 2.23, 5.31, respectively; p: 0.017, 0.002, 0.009, respectively) compared to a score of 1 for those with cancer-related pain (OR 0.38; p < 0.001), and treated in northern Italy compared to central and southern of Italy (OR 0.25, 0.42, respectively; p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this study, a substantial proportion of cancer patients referred to RT departments did not receive adequate pain management. Educational and organizational strategies are necessary to address the inadequate pain management observed in this population. Moreover, increasing the attention paid to non-cancer pain and an earlier referral of patients for palliative RT in the course of the disease may improve pain response and treatment outcomes.

Previous trials showed the tolerability and efficacy of a palliative radiotherapy (RT) regimen (SHARON) based on the 4 fractions delivered in 2 days in different oncological settings. In order to identify possible predictors of symptomatic response, the purpose of this study is to perform a pooled analysis of previous trials. We analyzed the impact on symptomatic response of the following parameters: tumor site, histological type, performance status (ECOG), dominant symptom, and RT dose using the Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact test. One-hundred-eighty patients were analyzed. Median RT dose was 20 Gy (range: 14–20 Gy). The overall response rate was 88.8% (95% CI 83.3–92.7%) while pre- and post-treatment mean VAS was 5.3 (± 7.7) and 2.2 (± 2.2), respectively (p < 0.001). The overall response rate of pain, dyspnea, bleeding, dysphagia, and other symptoms was 86.2%, 90.9%, 100%, 87.5%, and 100%, respectively. Comparing the symptomatic effect based on the analyzed parameters no significant differences were recorded. However, patients with locally advanced disease showed a higher rate of symptomatic responses than metastatic ones (97.3% vs 83.0%; p = 0.021). Finally, the complete pain response rate was more than double in patients with mild to moderate (VAS: 4–7) compared to those with severe (VAS > 7) pain (36.0% vs 14.3%; p = 0.028). This pooled analysis showed high efficacy of the SHARON regimen in the relief of several cancer-related symptoms. The markedly and significantly higher complete pain response rate, in patients with mild-moderate pain, suggests early referral to palliative RT for patients with cancer-related pain.

Pain is a complex and burdensome symptom frequently experienced by oncological patients. Despite increased attention from healthcare providers and novel approaches, pain remains undertreated and prevalent in this patient population. Programs of patient education about pain (pain education, PE) have been proposed as a potential method to enhance pain management. However, the effectiveness of such programs and their impact on pain relief have shown variable results across studies. In this narrative review, we analyzed existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses on PE in oncological patients. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases, following established guidelines. Studies meeting the selection criteria were selected and analyzed to evaluate the effectiveness of PE interventions. A total of nine publications, comprising six systematic reviews and three meta-analyses, were included. Across various clinical settings (inpatient and outpatient), the impact of pain education (PE) on pain intensity showed considerable variability: some reviews reported significant reductions, while others observed minimal or no effects. In contrast, PE consistently improved patients’ knowledge about pain and adherence to medication. However, the available evidence did not demonstrate significant improvements in quality of life. The observed heterogeneity in the results of pain relief outcomes could be attributed to the various types of pain analyzed and the diversity of clinical settings evaluated. Furthermore, differences in study designs, comprising the inclusion of non-randomized studies, contributed to the variability in findings. It remains unclear whether the effectiveness of PE is solely attributed to the educational content or if the attention provided to patients during the intervention partly explains the effect.