GMGunita Mitera

Gunita Mitera

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article


Gunita Mitera has a total of 72 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:


Latest Publications

  • A Survey of Expectations and Understanding of Palliative Radiotherapy from Patients with Advanced Cancer

    by G. Mitera, L. Zhang, A. Sahgal, E. Barnes, M. Tsao, C. Danjoux, L. Holden, E. Chow


  • Open Access

    Inter-Rater Reliability between Musculoskeletal Radiologists and Orthopedic Surgeons on Computed Tomography Imaging Features of Spinal Metastases

    by L. Khan, G. Mitera, L. Probyn, M. Ford, M. Christakis, J. Finkelstein, A. Donovan, L. Zhang, L. Zeng, J. Rubenstein, et al.

    Introduction: The primary objective of this pilot study was to examine the inter-rater reliability in scoring the computed tomography (ct) imaging features of spinal metastases in patients referred for radiotherapy (rt) for bone pain. Methods: In a retrospective review, 3 musculoskeletal radiologists and 2 orthopedic spinal surgeons independently evaluated ct imaging features for 41 patients with spinal metastases treated with rt in an outpatient radiation clinic from January 2007 to October 2008. The evaluation used spinal assessment criteria that had been developed in-house, with reference to: osseous and soft tissue tumour extent; presence of a pathologic fracture; severity of vertebral height loss, and; presence of kyphosis. The Cohen kappa coefficient between the two specialties was calculated. Results: Mean patient age was 69.2 years (30 men, 11 women). The mean total daily oral morphine equivalent was 73.4 mg. Treatment dose–fractionation schedules included 8 Gy/1 (n = 28), 20 Gy/5 (n = 12), and 20 Gy/8 (n = 1). Areas of moderate agreement in identifying the ct imaging appearance of spinal metastasis included extent of vertebral body involvement (κ = 0.48) and soft-tissue component (κ = 0.59). Areas of fair agreement included extent of pedicle involvement (κ = 0.28), extent of lamina involvement (κ = 0.35), and presence of pathologic fracture (κ = 0.20). Areas of poor agreement included nerve-root compression (κ = 0.14) and vertebral body height loss (κ = 0.19). Conclusions: The range of agreement between musculoskeletal radiologists and orthopedic surgeons for most spinal assessment criteria is moderate to poor. A consensus for managing challenging vertebral injuries secondary to spinal metastases needs to be established so as to best triage patients to the most appropriate therapeutic modality.


  • Correlation of Computed Tomography Imaging Features With Pain Response in Patients With Spine Metastases After Radiation Therapy

    by Gunita Mitera, Linda Probyn, Michael Ford, Andrea Donovan, Joel Rubenstein, Joel Finkelstein, Monique Christakis, Liying Zhang, Sarah Campos, Shaelyn Culleton, et al.


  • Total quality culture in radiotherapy departments across Ontario

    by Gunita Mitera, Anthony Whitton, Eric Gutierrez, Sheila Robson


  • Preoperative Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy to a Skull Renal Cell Metastasis: An Alternative to Preoperative Embolization?

    by Gunita Mitera, Georg A. Bjarnason, Farhad Pirouzmand, Juan Bilbao, Cyril Danjoux, Arjun Sahgal

    Introduction: This is the first case study to report on using stereotactic body radiotherapy as an alternative and novel treatment modality for embolization to reduce the risk of operative bleeding for a metastatic renal cell tumor. Case presentation: A 58-year-old woman presented with an asymptomatic large 7-cm tumor on the parieto-occipital vertex of the skull. Given the location of this lesion along with its vascular histology, it was a challenge to provide safe and effective treatment using conventional management strategies. Conclusion: We report on a rare presentation of a metastatic renal cell cancer and the use of stereotactic body radiotherapy as an innovative radiation approach to deliver high-dose radiation safely to control this large aggressive and vascular metastasis. The success of this management strategy allowed for minimal intraoperative blood loss, and the patient continues with local control 1-year posttreatment.


  • Open Access

    A Rare Adverse Skin Reaction after 8 Gy of Radiation Therapy to the Thoracic Spine: Case Report and Review of the Literature

    by G. Mitera, G. Chan, K. Mah, R. Law, C. DeAngelis, R. Dent, E. Chow

    A 60-year-old woman with breast cancer metastatic to the bones experienced no adverse skin reaction at the lumbar spine after a single 8-Gy photon-beam fraction prescribed to a depth of 5 cm. However, a subsequent treatment to the thoracic spine using the same dose, fractionation, and technique resulted in skin erythema and permanent hyperpigmentation. After careful investigation, no differences were identified in her concurrent use of possibly radiosensitizing medications during the various radiotherapy treatments nor in possible errors of treatment planning and radiation delivery. To our knowledge, this is the first case report to document that, with similar medications, a previous skin response to a given radiotherapy dose, fraction, and technique may not be predictive of subsequent skin response to similar radiotherapy.


  • A Multicenter Assessment of the Adequacy of Cancer Pain Treatment Using the Pain Management Index

    by Gunita Mitera, Alysa Fairchild, Carlo DeAngelis, Urban Emmenegger, Laura Zurawel-Balaura, Liying Zhang, Andrea Bezjak, Wilfred Levin, Michael Mclean, Nadil Zeiadin, et al.

    Purposes: Determine adequacy of management of pain secondary to bone metastases by physicians referring to specialized outpatient palliative radiotherapy (RT) clinics in Canada; compare geographic differences in adequacy of pain management and pain severity between these cohorts; compare results with published international literature. Methods: Prospectively collected data from three participating centers were used to calculate the Pain Management Index (PMI) by subtracting the patient-rated pain score at time of initial clinic visit from the analgesic score. Scores were 0, 1, 2, and 3 when patients reported no pain (0), mild (1–4), moderate (5–6), or severe pain (7–10), respectively, on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System or Brief Pain Inventory. Analgesic scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3 were assigned for no pain medication, nonopioids, weak opioids, and strong opioids respectively. A negative PMI suggests inadequate pain managemfent. Results: Overall incidence of negative PMI and moderate to severe pain was 25.1% and 70.9% respectively for 2011 patients. Comparing the three participating centers, the incidence of negative PMI was 31.0%, 20.0%, and 16.8% ( p < 0.0001), and severe pain was 55.5%, 48.2% and 43.4% ( p < 0.0001), these correlated with a negative PMI. Patients referred to our clinics were less likely to be undertreated for their pain when compared to study results from international countries. Conclusion: Geographic differences in adequacy of analgesic management for painful bone metastases exist between Canadian specialized outpatient palliative RT clinics and between centers globally. Investigating reasons for these differences may provide insight into solutions to improve quality of life for these patients.


  • Retrospective Assessment of Cancer Pain Management in an Outpatient Palliative Radiotherapy Clinic Using the Pain Management Index

    by Gunita Mitera, Nadil Zeiadin, Andrea Kirou-Mauro, Carlo DeAngelis, Jennifer Wong, Teenu Sanjeevan, Emily Sinclair, Cyril Danjoux, Elizabeth Barnes, May Tsao, et al.


  • Open Access

    Radiotherapy for Oncologic Emergencies on Weekends: Examining Reasons for Treatment and Patterns of Practice at a Canadian Cancer Centre

    by Gunita Mitera, A. Swaminath, S. Wong, P. Goh, S. Robson, E. Sinclair, C. Danjoux, E. Chow

    Purpose: Radiotherapy for oncologic emergencies is an important aspect of the management of cancer patients. These emergencies—which include malignant spinal cord compression, brain metastases, superior vena cava obstruction, and uncontrolled tumour hemorrhage —may require treatment outside of hospital hours, particularly on weekends and hospital holidays. To date, there remains no consensus among radiation oncologists regarding the indications and appropriateness of radiotherapy treatment on weekends, and treatment decisions remain largely subjective. The main aim of the present study was to document the incidence and indications for patients receiving emergency treatment on weekends or scheduled hospital holidays at a single institution. The secondary aim was to investigate the compliance of such treatment with the institution’s quality assurance policies, both local and provincial. Methods: From 1 September 2002, to 30 September 2004, patients being treated over weekends (defined as commencing at 6 pm on a Friday and concluding at 8 am of the next scheduled workday) and hospital holidays were retrospectively identified using the Oncology Patient Information System scheduling module. Relevant patient data—including patient age, sex, primary cancer site, specific radiation field, rationale for treatment, referring hospital, total treatment dose, radiation dose fractionation, inpatient or outpatient status, and duration of treatment—were collected and subsequently analyzed. Comparison to local policy was performed subjectively. Results: Over the 2-year period, 161 patients were prescribed urgent radiotherapy over a weekend or on a hospital holiday. Of this cohort, 68% were treated on both Saturday and Sunday, 22% on Saturday alone, and 10% on Sunday alone. Most patients presented with lung (31%), prostate (18%), and breast cancer (17%). The top reasons for referral for emergency weekend treatment included spinal cord compression (56%), brain metastases (15%), and superior vena cava obstruction (6%). Most of the indications for treatment generally followed the quality assurance policies implemented both locally and provincially. Conclusions: Patients treated over a weekend or on a hospital holiday were generally found to be treated with appropriate intent. Most treatment indications within this study both complied with provincial policy and showed a pattern of care similar to that seen in other studies in the literature. Local policy appears to be robust; however, policy improvements may allow for more cohesiveness across radiation oncologists in patterns of care in this important group of patients. Comparisons with practice at other institutions would be valuable and also a key step in developing sound guidelines for all members of the radiotherapy community to follow.