(1) Background: Prognostication in patients with cancer receiving palliative radiotherapy remains a challenge. To improve the process, we aim to identify prognostic factors in this population from the literature and offer evidence-based recommendations on prognostication in patients undergoing palliative radiotherapy for non-curable or advanced cancers. (2) Methods: A systematic review was performed on the medical literature from 2005 to 2023 to extract papers on the prognosis of palliative radiotherapy patients with advanced cancer. The initial selection was performed by at least two authors to determine study relevance to the target area. Studies were then classified based on type and evidence quality to determine final recommendations. (3) Results: The literature search returned 57 papers to be evaluated. Clinical and biological prognostic factors were identified from these papers to improve clinical decision making or construct prognostic models. Twenty prognostic models were identified for clinical use. There is moderate evidence supporting (i) evidence-based factors (patient, clinical, disease, and lab) in guiding decision making around palliative radiation; (ii) that certain biological factors are of importance; (iii) prognostication models in patients with advanced cancer; and that (iv) SBRT or re-irradiation use can be guided by predictions of survival by prognostic scores or clinicians. Patients with more favorable prognoses are generally better suited to SBRT or re-irradiation, and the use of prognostic models can aid in this decision making. (4) Conclusions: This evaluation has identified several factors or tools to aid in prognosis and clinical decision making. Future studies should aim to further validate these tools and factors in a clinical setting, including the leveraging of electronic medical records for data availability. To increase our understanding of how causal factors interact with palliative radiotherapy, future studies should also examine and include prediction of response to radiation as an outcome.

Background: Subcutaneous pocket infection is a common morbidity associated with the integration of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). A new antibiotic-eluting CIED bioenvelope has been developed as a prophylactic measure to mitigate infection and skin erosion caused by device migration. This study investigated the envelope’s regulatory properties in scar formation and vascularization. Methods: Fibroblasts were seeded on either plastic (n = 6) or small intestine submucosal extracellular matrix (SIS-ECM) (n = 6) for 24 h. The culture media were analyzed for proangiogenic and proinflammatory proteins with multiplex. Sham (n = 8) or SIS-ECM (n = 8) was randomly implanted into the dorsal subcutaneous pocket of mice. The implants were excised on day 7, cultured for 24 h, and the media analyzed. Rabbit models were implanted with either synthetic polymer HDPE (n = 12) or SIS-ECM (n = 11). The treatments were excised at weeks 2, 10, and 26 and then stained for analysis. Results: SIS-ECM significantly increased the fibroblasts’ paracrine release of proangiogenic and proinflammatory factors like VEGF-A (p < 0.05) and IL-6 (p < 0.05) compared with plastic. The murine tissue interacting with SIS-ECM released significantly more angiogenic proteins like VEGF-A (p < 0.05) than the sham. The histology analysis of rabbit subcutaneous tissue revealed a decreasing level of inflammation and fibrosis over time with SIS-ECM. Conclusions: The CIED bioenvelope elicited proangiogenic paracrine signaling and reduced fibrotic response in fibroblasts and animal models. Clinical translation of the CIED bioenvelope as an adjunct to regular prophylactic practice may be warranted in the future.