Palliative Appropriateness Criteria: A Pragmatic Method to Evaluate the Suitability of Palliative Radiotherapy Fractionation.

To describe a novel metric to aid clinical decision making between shorter versus longer palliative radiotherapy (PRT) regimens using objective patient factors. Patients receiving PRT at a single institution between 2014 and 2018 were reviewed. The time between PRT start and finish was calculated and divided by overall survival (in days from start of PRT) to generate the percent of remaining life (PRL). This value was compared across various clinical factors using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Factors identified with a significance level  < 0.01 were included in a novel Palliative Appropriateness Criteria Score (PACS) and were included in an online risk assessment tool to assist clinicians in patient-specific fractionation decisions. Totally 1027 courses of PRT were analyzed. Median age was 64 years; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status was 3-4 in 22%. Primary malignancies included were lung (38%), breast (13.8%), prostate (9.3%), and other (39%). The indication for PRT was pain (61%), neurological (21%), or other (18%). Palliative regimens included 199 (19.4%) receiving single fraction, 176 (17.1%) receiving 2-5 fractions, and 652 (63.5%) receiving 10 fractions. Median follow-up was 83 days overall and 437 days for patients alive at last follow-up. Factors significantly associated with increased PRL (and included in the PACS) were male gender, ECOG 3-4, lung or "other" primary diagnosis (vs. breast or prostate), PRT indication (neurological dysfunction vs. pain/other), inpatient status, and extraosseous sites treatment. Death within 30 days was significantly associated with high-risk PACS categorization, regardless of fractionation scheme ( < 0.001). The PACS is a novel metric for evaluating the utility of PRT regimens to improve clinical decision making. Single fraction is associated with low PRL. When considering multifraction PRT regimens, the PACS identifies patients who may benefit from shorter courses of PRT and alternatively, low-risk patients for whom a more protracted course is reasonable. Prospective external validation is warranted.