1
|
Janssen S, El Shafie RA, Grohmann M, Knippen S, Putora PM, Beck M, Baehr A, Clemens P, Stefanowicz S, Rades D, Becker JN, Fahlbusch FB. Survey in radiation oncology departments in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland: state of digitalization by 2023. Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:497-506. [PMID: 38052968 PMCID: PMC11111513 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02182-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2023] [Accepted: 11/01/2023] [Indexed: 12/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this work was to assess the current state of digitalization in radiation oncology departments in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. METHODS A comprehensive survey was conducted in a digital format, consisting of 53 questions that covered various aspects of digitalization including patient workflow, departmental organization, radiotherapy planning, and employee-related aspects. RESULTS Overall, 120 forms were eligible for evaluation. Participants were mainly physicians or medical physicists responsible for digitalization aspects in their departments. Nearly 70% of the institutions used electronic patient records, with 50% being completely paperless. However, the use of smartphone apps for electronic patient reported outcomes (ePROMs) and digital health applications (DIGA) was limited (9% and 4.9%, respectively). In total, 70.8% of the radio-oncology departments had interfaces with diagnostic departments, and 36% had digital interchanges with other clinics. Communication with external partners was realized mainly through fax (72%), e‑mails (55%), postal letters (63%), or other digital exchange formats (28%). Almost half of the institutions (49%) had dedicated IT staff for their operations. CONCLUSION To the best of our knowledge, this survey is the first of its kind conducted in German-speaking radiation oncology departments within the medical field. The findings suggest that there is a varied level of digitalization implementation within these departments, with certain areas exhibiting lower rates of digitalization that could benefit from targeted improvement initiatives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefan Janssen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
- Private Practice of Radiation Oncology, Hannover, Germany.
| | - Rami A El Shafie
- Clinic of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Maximilian Grohmann
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Stefan Knippen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Helios Hospitals Schwerin, 19053 Schwerin, Germany
- Department for Human Medicine, MSH Medical School Hamburg, 20457 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Paul M Putora
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Marcus Beck
- Department of Radiooncology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany
| | - Andrea Baehr
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Patrick Clemens
- Department of Radio-Oncology, Academic Teaching Hospital Feldkirch, Carinagasse 47, 6800, Feldkirch, Austria
| | - Sarah Stefanowicz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Dirk Rades
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Jan-Niklas Becker
- Department of Radiotherapy and Special Oncology, Medical School Hannover, 30625, Hannover, Germany
| | - Fabian B Fahlbusch
- Neonatology and Pediatric Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, University of Augsburg, 86156 Augsburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
von Eyben FE, Kairemo K, Kapp DS. Prostate-Specific Antigen as an Ultrasensitive Biomarker for Patients with Early Recurrent Prostate Cancer: How Low Shall We Go? A Systematic Review. Biomedicines 2024; 12:822. [PMID: 38672176 PMCID: PMC11048591 DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines12040822] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2023] [Revised: 12/25/2023] [Accepted: 03/05/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) needs to be monitored with ultrasensitive PSA assays (uPSAs) for oncologists to be able to start salvage radiotherapy (SRT) while PSA is <0.5 µg/L for patients with prostate cancer (PCa) relapsing after a radical prostatectomy (RP). Our systematic review (SR) aimed to summarize uPSAs for patients with localized PCa. The SR was registered as InPLASY2023110084. We searched for studies on Google Scholar, PUBMED and reference lists of reviews and studies. We only included studies on uPSAs published in English and excluded studies of women, animals, sarcoidosis and reviews. Of the 115 included studies, 39 reported PSA assay methods and 76 reported clinical findings. Of 67,479 patients, 14,965 developed PSA recurrence (PSAR) and 2663 died. Extremely low PSA nadir and early developments of PSA separated PSAR-prone from non-PSAR-prone patients (cumulative p value 3.7 × 1012). RP patients with the lowest post-surgery PSA nadir and patients who had the lowest PSA at SRT had the fewest deaths. In conclusion, PSA for patients with localized PCa in the pre-PSAR phase of PCa is strongly associated with later PSAR and survival. A rising but still exceedingly low PSA at SRT predicts a good 5-year overall survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Kalevi Kairemo
- Department of Molecular Radiotherapy & Nuclear Medicine, Docrates Cancer Center, FI-00185 Helsinki, Finland;
| | - Daniel S. Kapp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Clinical outcome in metastatic prostate cancer after primary radiotherapy. Strahlenther Onkol 2022; 199:536-543. [PMID: 35953611 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-022-01993-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2022] [Accepted: 07/17/2022] [Indexed: 10/15/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To describe a local radio-oncological treatment for patients with prostate cancer that metastasized to either the lymph nodes or distant regions. METHODS AND MATERIALS We included 133 patients with prostate cancer that displayed either distant metastases (DM) or lymph node metastases alone (NM) and were treated between 2004 and 2019. All patients underwent computed tomography and a bone scan or 18F- or prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted positron emission tomography. Patients received local external beam radiation therapy to the prostate to achieve local control (60-81.4 Gy to the prostate, and 45-50.4 Gy to pelvic lymph nodes), with either the 3D conformal (4-field box) or volumetric modulated arc therapy technique. A urologist prescribed additional therapy. RESULTS We included 51 patients with DM and 82 patients with NM. The mean follow-up was 42 months for all patients. The groups were similar in T stage, initial prostate-specific antigen, histology, androgen deprivation therapy, age, treatment techniques, and prescribed doses, but different in lymph node inclusion and follow-up times. In the NM and DM groups, the 5‑year biochemical recurrence-free rates were 52% and 24%, respectively (p < 0.0001); the 5‑year disease-specific survival rates were 92% and 61%, respectively (p = 0.001); and the 5‑year OS rates were 77% and 48%, respectively (p = 0.01). The groups had similar acute and late gastrointestinal and genitourinary side effects, except that late genitourinary side effects occurred significantly more frequently in the NM group (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS DM was associated with significantly worse outcomes than NM. The long-term survival of patients with metastatic prostate cancer was low.
Collapse
|
4
|
Haehl E, Rühle A, Spohn S, Sprave T, Gkika E, Zamboglou C, Grosu AL, Nicolay NH. Patterns-of-Care Analysis for Radiotherapy of Elderly Head-and-Neck Cancer Patients: A Trinational Survey in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Front Oncol 2022; 11:723716. [PMID: 35047384 PMCID: PMC8761738 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.723716] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2021] [Accepted: 12/08/2021] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The number of elderly head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients is increasing, and clinical trials defining the standard of care either excluded or underrepresented elderly patients. This leaves physicians with a challenging and highly individual treatment decision largely lacking clinical evidence. METHODS A tri-national patterns-of-care survey was sent to all members of the German (DEGRO), Austrian (ÖGRO), and Swiss (SRO/SSRO) national societies of radiation oncology. The online questionnaire consisted of 27 questions on the treatment of elderly HNSCC patients, including 6 case-based questions. Frequency distributions and subgroup comparisons were calculated using SPSS statistics software. RESULTS A total of 132 answers were collected, including 46(35%) form universities, 52(39%) from non-university-hospitals and 34(26%) from private practices. 83(63%) treat 1-5 and 42(32%) >5 elderly HNSCC patients per month. Target volumes are defined analog current guidelines by 65(50%) of responders and altered based on age/comorbidities or tumor stage by 36(28%) and 28(22%), respectively. Chemotherapy is routinely administered by 108(84%) if indicated, with weekly 40mg/m2 of cisplatin being the favored regimen by 68(53%) in the definitive situation and 60(47%) in the adjuvant setting. Hypofractionation and hyperfractionation/acceleration are used by 26(20%) and 11(9%), respectively. Only 7(5%) clinicians routinely recommend inpatient treatment for elderly HNSCC patients. In a typical definitive patient case, 73(63%) responders recommended chemoradiation with bilateral elective node irradiation analog current guidelines. In an adjuvant example case recommendations regarding elective volume and chemotherapy were heterogeneous. Differences between responders' institutions concern the frequency of PET-CT in staging, preventive port-catheter and PEG implantation, the choice of chemotherapy regimens and the use of alternative fractionations. CONCLUSION Treatment of elderly HNSCC-patients in the German-speaking countries mainly follows guidelines established for younger patients. Algorithms for patient stratification and treatment de-escalation for "unfit" elderly patients are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erik Haehl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Freiburg - Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Alexander Rühle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Freiburg - Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Simon Spohn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Freiburg - Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Tanja Sprave
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Freiburg - Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Eleni Gkika
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Freiburg - Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Constantinos Zamboglou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Freiburg - Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Anca-Ligia Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Freiburg - Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nils H Nicolay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Freiburg - Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Rogowski P, Trapp C, von Bestenbostel R, Eze C, Ganswindt U, Li M, Unterrainer M, Zacherl MJ, Ilhan H, Beyer L, Kretschmer A, Bartenstein P, Stief C, Belka C, Schmidt-Hegemann NS. Outcome after PSMA-PET/CT-based salvage radiotherapy for nodal recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 49:1417-1428. [PMID: 34628521 PMCID: PMC8921036 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-021-05557-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2021] [Accepted: 09/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
Purpose Nodal recurrent prostate cancer (PCa) represents a common state of disease, amenable to local therapy. PSMA-PET/CT detects PCa recurrence at low PSA levels. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of PSMA-PET/CT-based salvage radiotherapy (sRT) for lymph node (LN) recurrence. Methods A total of 100 consecutive patients treated with PSMA-PET/CT-based salvage elective nodal radiotherapy (sENRT) for LN recurrence were retrospectively examined. Patients underwent PSMA-PET/CT scan due to biochemical persistence (bcP, 76%) or biochemical recurrence (bcR, 24%) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) defined as PSA < post-RT nadir + 0.2 ng/ml and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method and uni- and multivariate analysis was performed. Results Median follow-up was 37 months. Median PSA at PSMA-PET/CT was 1.7 ng/ml (range 0.1–40.1) in patients with bcP and 1.4 ng/ml (range 0.3–5.1) in patients with bcR. PSMA-PET/CT detected 1, 2, and 3 or more LN metastases in 35%, 23%, and 42%, respectively. Eighty-three percent had only pelvic, 2% had only paraaortic, and 15% had pelvic and paraaortic LN metastases. Cumulatively, a total dose converted to EQD21.5 Gy of 66 Gy (60–70 Gy) was delivered to the prostatic fossa, 70 Gy (66–72 Gy) to the local recurrence, if present, 65.1 Gy (56–66 Gy) to PET-positive lymph nodes, and 47.5 Gy (42.4–50.9 Gy) to the lymphatic pathways. Concomitant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was administered in 83% of patients. One-, 2-, and 3-year BRFS was 80.7%, 71.6%, and 65.8%, respectively. One-, 2-, and 3-year DMFS was 91.6%, 79.1%, and 66.4%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, concomitant ADT, longer ADT duration (≥ 12 vs. < 12 months) and LN localization (pelvic vs. paraaortic) were associated with improved BRFS and concomitant ADT and lower PSA value before sRT (< 1 vs. > 1 ng/ml) with improved DMFS, respectively. No such association was seen for the number of affected lymph nodes. Conclusions Overall, the present analysis shows that the so far, unmatched sensitivity and specificity of PSMA-PET/CT translates in comparably high BRFS and DMFS after PSMA-PET/CT-based sENRT for patients with PCa LN recurrence. Concomitant ADT, duration of ADT, PSA value before sRT, and localization of LN metastases were significant factors for improved outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul Rogowski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
| | - Christian Trapp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany
| | - Rieke von Bestenbostel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany
| | - Chukwuka Eze
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany
| | - Ute Ganswindt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Minglun Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany
| | - Marcus Unterrainer
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Mathias J Zacherl
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Harun Ilhan
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Leonie Beyer
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | | | - Peter Bartenstein
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Christian Stief
- Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Munich, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|