COVID-19 impact on timing of brachytherapy treatment and strategies for risk mitigation

The impact of a positive COVID-19 test on timeliness of radiation in patients receiving brachytherapy

BACKGROUND

Delays in initiating and completing brachytherapy may have adverse oncologic outcomes for patients with cervical, uterine, and prostate cancer. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on brachytherapy in the United States has not been well-characterized.

OBJECTIVES

We aim to evaluate how a positive COVID-19 test affected timeliness of treatment for patients undergoing brachytherapy for cervical, uterine, and prostate cancer.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database to identify patients diagnosed with cervical, uterine, and prostate cancer in 2019 and 2020 who received brachytherapy in their treatment. Patients who tested positive for COVID-19 between cancer diagnosis and start of radiation were compared to those who did not test positive for COVID-19. Time in days from cancer diagnosis to initiation of radiation was compared using two-sample t-tests with p < 0.05 signifying significant differences.

RESULTS

We identified 38,341 patients with cervical (n = 6,925), uterine (n = 18,587), and prostate cancer (n = 12,829). Rates of COVID-19 positivity were cervical cancer (n = 135; 2%), uterine cancer (n = 236; 1.3%), and prostate cancer (n = 141; 1%). Of those, 35% of cervical, 49% of uterine, and 43% of prostate cancer patients tested positive between their cancer diagnosis and initiation of radiation. Median days to radiation was significantly longer in these patients: 78 versus 51 for cervical cancer (p < 0.01), 150 versus 104 for uterine cancer (p < 0.01), and 154 versus 124 for prostate cancer (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with cervical, uterine, and prostate cancer diagnosed between 2019-2020, testing positive for COVID-19 after their cancer diagnosis was associated with a delay to initiation of radiation by 4-7 weeks.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on brachytherapy and cancer patient outcomes: A systematic review

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the use of brachytherapy in patients with gynecologic and prostate cancers including treatment delays, increased burden of mortality, and associated clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS/METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Databases were searched for studies published through September 2023 using MeSH terms and keywords related to "COVID and brachytherapy." Inclusion criteria included all studies reporting on the impact of COVID-19 on treatment delay, treatment omission, recurrence rates, and clinical outcomes in patients requiring brachytherapy for prostate or gynecologic cancers from December 2019 to September 2023. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers (LH, IV).

RESULTS

Of the 292 screened records, 10 studies (9 retrospective, 1 prospective single-arm exploratory noninferiority) were included. Hypofractioned regimens were the preferred approach in radiation treatment (RT) centers, with 6 of 10 studies noting shift towards hypofractionation. For cervical cancer, intracavitary brachytherapy was limited to 3-4 fractions, reducing personnel and patient exposure. Treatment delays influenced by COVID-19 ranged between 19% and 53% and treatment omissions ranged between 2% and 28%. These disruptions arose from factors such as patient fear of contracting COVID-19, COVID-19 infection, barriers to accessing care, and operating room closures. Three studies reported on a single-application (SA) rather than a multiple application (MA) approach for cervical cancer. They reported excellent local control, shorter overall treatment time at the expense of higher grade ≥2 vaginal, genitourinary, and gastrointestinal events. For cervical cancer patients, overall treatment time (OTT) was significantly impacted by COVID-19 as reported by 2 studies from India. OTT > 60 days occurred in 40-53% of patients.

CONCLUSION

This is the first systematic review to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on brachytherapy in patients with gynecologic and prostate cancers. Although many expert consensus recommendations have been published during the pandemic regarding radiation therapy, few studies evaluated its clinical impact on brachytherapy delivery and patient outcomes. The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in treatment delays, omissions in brachytherapy, and further adoption of hypofractionated regimens. Early results demonstrate that despite increased toxicities, local control rates with hypofractionated treatment are similar to standard fractionation. The impact of the pandemic on gynecologic and prostate cancers is yet to be determined as well as the long-term outcomes on patients treated during the lockdown period.

Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Gynecologic Malignancies-A Peek into the Upcoming Evidence

Radiotherapy (RT) has a fundamental role in the treatment of gynecologic malignancies, including cervical and uterine cancers. Hypofractionated RT has gained popularity in many cancer sites, boosted by technological advances in treatment delivery and image verification. Hypofractionated RT uptake was intensified during the COVID-19 pandemic and has the potential to improve universal access to radiotherapy worldwide, especially in low-resource settings. This review summarizes the rationale, the current challenges and investigation efforts, together with the recent developments associated with hypofractionated RT in gynecologic malignancies. A comprehensive search was undertaken using multiple databases and ongoing trial registries. In the definitive radiotherapy setting for cervical cancers, there are several ongoing clinical trials from Canada, Mexico, Iran, the Philippines and Thailand investigating the role of a moderate hypofractionated external beam RT regimen in the low-risk locally advanced population. Likewise, there are ongoing ultra and moderate hypofractionated RT trials in the uterine cancer setting. One Canadian prospective trial of stereotactic hypofractionated adjuvant RT for uterine cancer patients suggested a good tolerance to this treatment strategy in the acute setting, with a follow-up trial currently randomizing patients between conventional fractionation and the hypofractionated dose regimen delivered in the former trial. Although not yet ready for prime-time use, hypofractionated RT could be a potential solution to several challenges that limit access to and the utilization of radiotherapy for gynecologic cancer patients worldwide.

A two-center experience: The impact of COVID-19 on two brachytherapy programs in Ontario - virtual care, service suspension and radiation therapy workflow

INTRODUCTION

Most brachytherapy (BT) procedures require general anesthesia and are therefore considered aerosol generating medical procedures (AGMPs). The COVID-19 pandemic impacted BT as services were prioritized by balancing the harm associated with COVID-19 infection versus the effect of delay of potentially curative treatment. This article summarizes the impact of the pandemic on BT programs in two cancer centers in a Canadian province.

METHODS

As part of a quality assurance project, a retrospective study was conducted for the first five months of the pandemic (March 1 to July 31, 2020). Chart review and COVID-19 related mitigation strategies were identified by BT Clinical Specialist Radiation Therapists (bCSRT) in each center using electronic medical records, departmental reports, policies and procedures.

RESULTS

Impact included start of virtual care (VC), shortened fractionation, suspension of services and workflow changes.  Both centers implemented VC strategies to reduce clinic visits: "same-day size and treat" strategy for post-operative endometrial cancer patients and virtual patient education for all patients. BT services that were suspended were low-dose-rate and high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate treatments (Center 1), lung and esophagus HDR treatments (Center 2).  Workflow changes that affected staff and patients in both centers included COVID-19 screening and the use of personal protective equipment. The centers were marginally different in workflow adjustments for AGMP procedures.  Those considered high-risk AGMP and low-risk cancer were suspended temporarily with alternate treatment strategies sought for some patients. Others had temporizing treatment such as androgen deprivation therapy to facilitate oncological safe deferral of procedures.

CONCLUSION

Both BT programs delivered treatment to most patients with minimal delays and cancellations, where feasible. Some of the pandemic workflow changes continued to the current state of the pandemic. Long-term follow-up is needed to assess the impact of COVID-19 and treatment interruptions on oncologic outcomes.

Effect of COVID-19 on Gynecologic Oncology Care: A Survey of Practicing Gynecologic Radiation Oncologists in the United States

Purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed demands and limitations on the delivery of health care. We sought to assess the effect of COVID-19 on the delivery of gynecologic oncologic care from the perspective of practicing radiation oncologists in the United States.

Methods and Materials

An anonymous online survey was created and distributed to preidentified radiation oncologists in the United States with clinical expertise in the management of gynecologic patients. The survey consisted of demographic questions followed by directed questions to assess specific patterns of care related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

A total of 47 of 96 invited radiation oncologists responded to the survey for a response rate of 49%. Fifty-six percent of respondents reported an increase in locally advanced cervical cancer with no similar increase for endometrial, vulvar, or vaginal patients. Most respondents (66%) reported a pause in surgical management, with a duration of 1 to 3 months being most common (61%). There was a reported increased use of shorter brachytherapy regimens during the pandemic. Most providers (61%) reported caring for at least 1 patient with a positive COVID-19 test. A pause or delay in treatment due to COVID-19 positivity was reported by 45% of respondents, with 55% reporting that patients chose to delay their own care because of COVID-19-related concerns. Total treatment times >8 weeks for patients with cervical cancer were observed by 33% of respondents, but occurred in >25% of patients.

Conclusions

Data from this prospectively collected anonymous survey of practice patterns among radiation oncologists reveal that the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in delays initiating care, truncated brachytherapy treatment courses, and a reported increase in locally advanced cervical cancer cases at presentation. These data can be used as a means of self-assessment to ensure appropriate decision making for gynecologic patients during the endemic phase of COVID-19.

Safety and efficacy of single insertion accelerated MR-image guided brachytherapy following chemo-radiation in locally advanced cervix cancer: modifying our EMBRACE during the COVID pandemic

BACKGROUND

Utero-vaginal brachytherapy (BT) is an irreplaceable care component for the curative treatment of locally advanced cervix cancer (LACC). Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-image guided adaptive BT (IGABT) using the GYN-GEC-ESTRO EMBRACE guidelines is the international care standard. Usually following chemo-radiation therapy (CRT), IGABT has high proven utility in LACC but requires significant health system resources. Timely access was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic which challenged us to re-design our established IGABT care pathway.

METHODS

From April 2020 consecutive patients with LACC were enrolled after CRT in a single arm exploratory non-inferiority study of a modified IGABT (mIGABT) protocol. This delivered an iso-effective IGABT dose (39.3 Gy: EQD2: α/β10Gy concept) over a 24-h period during a single overnight hospitalisation.

RESULTS

Fourteen LACC patients received mIGABT from April 2020 to March 2022. Median age was 62.5 years (37-82 years). LACC histology was primary squamous (9/14) or adeno-carcinoma (5/14). International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 stages ranged from IB1/2 (N = 3), IIA1/IIB (5), IIIB (2), IIIC1/2 (4) with mean ± standard deviation (SD) gross tumour volume-at-diagnosis (GTV_D) of 37.7 cc ± 71.6 cc. All patients achieved complete metabolic, clinical, and cytologic cancer response with CRT and IGABT. High-risk HPV was cleared by 6-months. Complete MRI-defined cancer response before mIGABT (GTV_Fx1) was seen in 77% of cases (10/13). Only two women developed metastatic disease and one died at 12-months; 13 patients were alive without cancer at mean 20.3 ± 7.2 months follow-up. Actuarial 2-year overall survival was 93%. Compared with our pre-COVID IGABT program, overall mIGABT cost-saving in this cohort was USD 22,866. Prescribed dose covered at least 90% (D90) of the entire cervix and any residual cancer at time of BT (HRCTV_D90: high-risk clinical target volume) with 3-fractions of 8.5 Gy delivered over 24-h (22.8 ± 1.7 h). Total treatment time including CRT was 38 days. The mIGABT schedule was well tolerated and the entire cohort met EMBRACE recommended (EQD2: α/β10Gy) combined HRCTV_D90 coverage of 87.5 ± 3.7 Gy. Similarly, organ-at-risk (OAR) median: interquartile range D2cc constraints (EQD2: α/β3Gy) were EMBRACE compliant: bladder (65.9 Gy: 58.4-72.5 Gy), rectum (59.1 Gy: 55.7-61.8 Gy), and sigmoid colon (54.6 Gy: 50.3-58.9 Gy). ICRU recto-vaginal point dose was significantly higher (75.7 Gy) in our only case of severe (G4) pelvic toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated the utility of mIGABT and VMAT CRT in a small cohort with LACC. Loco-regional control was achieved in all cases with minimal emergent toxicity. Single insertion mIGABT was logistically efficient, cost-saving, and patient-centric during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Early outcomes of abbreviated multi-fractionated brachytherapy schedule for cervix cancer during COVID-19 pandemic

PURPOSE

Brachytherapy (BT) for cervix cancer was listed as a level I priority and reduced number of implants and multiple fractions were recommended during COVID-19 pandemic. We present early clinical outcome of this approach.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients treated with (chemo)radiotherapy and BT with single implant and multiple fractions BT were included. Treatment protocol included 3-5 fractions of 5-8.5 Gy with an aim to achieve point A dose of 70 Gy EQD2_10Gy (or HRCTV dose of >80 Gy EQD2_10Gy) in those undergoing intracavitary (IC) and HRCTV dose >85 Gy EQD2 10Gy in patients undergoing Intracavitary-Interstitial (IC/IS) whereas maintaining bladder (B2cc), rectum (R2cc), sigmoid (S 2cc) doses of 90, 75, and 75 Gy EQD2_3Gy. Time to event analysis was used to report oncological endpoints. Toxicity was reported using crude proportions.

RESULTS

From April 2020 to March, 2021, 64 patients with stage IB2-IV received single implant and multi-fraction BT after external radiation of 45 Gy/25 fractions/5 weeks. Only 76.7% (n = 49) received concurrent chemotherapy. Median overall treatment time (OTT) was 56 days (38-131 days). Overall, 62.5% (n = 40) patients received IC and 37.5% (n = 24) received IC+IS. The median HRCTV was 34.7 cc (IQR 25-41). Median (IQR) point A dose, HRCTV D90, B2cc, R2cc, and S2cc for those undergoing IC was 74 Gy (71-78), 80 Gy (73-84), 86 Gy (82-89), 70 Gy (65-74), 65 Gy (59-73) respectively. For the IC+IS cohort, HRCTV D90, B2cc, R2cc, and S2cc was 84 Gy (78-89 Gy), 89 Gy (86-92), 70 Gy (67-74), 68 Gy (59-76). At a median follow-up of 16 months (5-27) the 2-year local control, pelvic control, cause specific and overall survival was 88%, 85.3%, 92.2%, and 81.3% respectively. Late gastrointestinal and genitourinary grade ≥III toxicities were 14% and 1.5% each.

CONCLUSIONS

Abbreviated BT outcomes are encouraging for oncological outcomes despite delays in overall treatment time and omission of chemotherapy. Further mature follow up is needed.

Outcomes from a 3-fraction high-dose-rate brachytherapy regimen for patients with cervical cancer

PURPOSE

To estimate local control, survival, and toxicity associated with a 3-fraction (3F) image-guided brachytherapy (IGBT) regimen compared to longer fraction (LF) for cervical cancer.

METHODS

150 patients treated between 2015-2020 with 3F (24Gy in 3 fractions) or LF (28...30 Gy in 4-5 fractions) were reviewed. The primary outcome was 2-year local failure. We compared overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), hospitalizations, and toxicity.

RESULTS

There were 32 patients in the 3F group and 118 in the LF group, with a median follow up of 22 months. The 3F had worse performance status (p = 0.01) but otherwise similar characteristics. The 2-year local failure rate was 3.6% (95% CI 0%, 10.6%) for 3F, and 7.5% (95% CI 2.4%, 12.6%) for LF. The univariable hazard ratio (HR) for local failure for 3F was 0.43 (0.05, 3.43; p = 0.43). Moreover, 2 of 32 (6.3%) 3F patients experienced Grade ...3 toxicity compared to 7 of 118 (5.9%) LF patients (p = 1.0), with no difference in hospitalization within 2 years (p = 0.66) and no treatment-related deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Local control was excellent, with long term survival and toxicity similar between the groups. These findings support consideration of 3F.

Covid-19 and radiotherapy: a systematic review after 2 years of pandemic

Introduction

Following the Covid-19 pandemic spread, changes in clinical practice were necessary to limit the pandemic diffusion. Also, oncological practice has undergone changes with radiotherapy (RT) treatments playing a key role.Although several experiences have been published, the aim of this review is to summarize the current evidence after 2 years of pandemic to provide useful conclusions for clinicians.

Methods

A Pubmed/MEDLINE and Embase systematic review was conducted. The search strategy was "Covid AND Radiotherapy" and only original articles in the English language were considered.

Results

A total of 2.733 papers were obtained using the mentioned search strategy. After the complete selection process, a total of 281 papers were considered eligible for the analysis of the results.

Discussion

RT has played a key role in Covid-19 pandemic as it has proved more resilient than surgery and chemotherapy. The impact of the accelerated use of hypofractionated RT and telemedicine will make these strategies central also in the post-pandemic period.

Effect of treatment interruptions and outcomes in cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary care institute

Introduction

COVID-19 patients with cancer had poorer outcomes due to immunosuppression during cancer care, poor general condition, and other comorbidities. The study was conducted to present the real-world analysis of the effect of treatment interruptions on the outcomes of patients treated with radiation therapy during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary care institute in India.

Materials and methods

The study is a retrospective observational cohort study on cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy from March 2020 to January 2021. The study’s primary outcome was to analyze the effect of treatment interruptions on the outcomes of patients treated with radiation therapy during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

Between March 2020 to January 2021, 218 eligible patients undergoing radiation therapy were found for the study. Among the 218 patients, 25 patients (11.47%) were found positive for COVID-19, while 193 patients (88.53%) were negative for COVID-19. Among COVID-19-positive patients, ten patients had < 3 weeks of treatment interruption, while 15 patients had > 3 weeks of treatment interruptions. After recovering from COVID-19, treatment was resumed and completed for 15 (60.00%) of the COVID-19-positive patients. In comparison, 13 patients (52.00%) were lost to follow-up. Three of the COVID-19-positive patients died. The disease was clinically controlled in 12 (48.00%) of the COVID-19-positive patients, and the patients reported locoregional disease progression in 10 (40.00%). Among the 193 COVID-19-negative patients, 32 patients (16.58%) had treatment interruption. Twelve patients (37.50%) had treatment interruptions for less than 1 week. There was a significant difference in the delay of radiation treatment delivery by 2 weeks (11 fractions) in COVID-19-positive patients compared to only two fractions delay in COVID-19-negative patients.

Conclusion

COVID-19 impacted the treatment outcomes in both COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative cohorts of patients. There was a longer duration of treatment interruptions in the COVID-19-positive patients, leading to fewer patients completing the radiation treatment and thereby increased locoregional disease progression. There was a significant difference in the delay in treatment between the two groups.

The COVID-19 Status of Patients Is an Essential Determinant for Decision-Making by Radiation Oncologists: A European Survey

AIM

To assess the tendencies of radiation oncologists (ROs) in adjusting radiotherapy treatments (RTH) according to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) status of patients during the early severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV2) pandemic in Europe.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic survey was sent to 79 academic RTH departments across Europe. Only one respondent per institution was included. Respondents were asked how they would adjust RTH treatments based on COVID-19 status for more common cancers during the first wave of the pandemic. Respondents were also asked to report the number of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) units and the number of new cases referred to their department. Descriptive statistical analysis was conducted focusing on different cancers.

RESULTS

The overall response rate to the survey was 30.38% (24 institutions from 13 European countries). There was a wide range of different institutions regarding the number of patients, radiation oncologists, and facilities. A large proportion of respondents supported adjustment of RTH treatment (delay or switch to a shorter fractionation) for COVID-19-negative patients during the first wave of the pandemic only for early breast cancer (20% delay, 42.3% shorter), prostate cancer (53.6% delay, 21.4% shorter), and benign brain tumours (32% delay, 12% shorter). For COVID-19-negative patients with other cancers, most respondents recommended the standard RTH treatment. For COVID-19-positive patients, most respondents favoured a delay in RTH treatment or a shorter fractionation, regardless of cancer type and stage.

CONCLUSION

The patient's COVID status significantly influenced the decision to undergo RTH treatment, regardless of the type and aggressiveness of cancer.

Gynecologic radiation therapy in low and middle income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has forever affected healthcare and posed an incredible challenge to our society to care for our sick. Patients with cancer were found early on to have higher rates of complications with COVID-19. Radiation therapy is an integral part of treatment for many types of gynecologic cancer and adaptation on its utilization during the pandemic varied across the globe. In this review, we detail certain guidelines for the use of radiation in gynecologic cancers during the pandemic as well as real world accounts of how different countries adapted to these guidelines or created their own based on individualized resources, staffing, government restrictions, and societal norms. Critically, this review demonstrates the breadth of fractionation schemes and technologies used when resources were limited but highlights the importance of long term follow-up for many of our patients during this time.

Implementation of High-Dose-Rate, CT-Based Prostate Brachytherapy in an Academic Teaching Hospital and Residency Training Program

Introduction

Prostate brachytherapy provides the most durable local control for prostate adenocarcinoma among all radiation treatment options. However, likely due to decreased trainee familiarity with the technique and resource intensity, it has seen a decline in utilization. Here we outline our experience with starting a high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy program within a residency training program and present our outcome data.

Methods

Patients were identified and screened using clinical data and volume study for candidacy for brachytherapy implantation. Eligible candidates were implanted and subsequently had radiation planning and delivery in our clinic. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed on our outcomes and dosimetry data and presented in tabular form.

Results

Seventeen patients were treated for a total of 18 implants (one monotherapy). No implant was aborted. No acute urinary retention requiring catheterization or chronic urethral stricture occurred. Biochemical recurrence-free survival was 94% at a median follow-up of 28.5 months (range 8.2-50 months); the one failure occurred in a very high-risk patient at 37 months following treatment. Dosimetrically, prostate coverage, urethra sparing, and rectum sparing aims were met. Volumetric bladder aims were also met; however, the max point dose to the bladder neck was above the guideline.

Conclusion

Our department successfully implemented an HDR prostate brachytherapy program. Treatments were effective and there was no grade 3 toxicity to report.

COVID-19 and Gynecologic Oncology: What Have We Learned?

COVID-19 has transformed the care we provide to gynecologic oncology patients. In addition to directly impacting the diagnosis and treatment of women with gynecologic cancer, it has affected our patient’s ability to undergo recommended surveillance and has made an impact on every caregiver providing care during this time. Herein we review the current literature on the impact of COVID-19 on gynecologic oncology and highlight new approaches and innovations that have resulted in gynecologic cancer care as a result of the pandemic. The impact of COVID-19 on the field of gynecologic oncology has been profound. In addition to directly impacting the diagnosis and treatment of women with cancer, it has also challenged the very ethics with which we practice medicine. The equitable distribution of resources is paramount to upholding the Hippocratic Oath which we all invoke. The COVID-19 pandemic has stripped this oath down to its very core, forcing all medical practitioners to scrutinize who gets what resources and when. As the pandemic continues to unfold, the question remains — in the setting of a strained and overburdened healthcare system, how do we maximize beneficence to one group of patients, while maintaining non-maleficence to others? As gynecologic oncologists, we are responsible for advocating for our patients to ensure that the quality of their cancer care is not compromised, while also not overutilizing resources that are sorely needed for the care of COVID-19 victims, and not making them more likely to succumb to COVID-19 by the very nature of the treatment we provide. The effects of the pandemic are far-reaching and broad, and many of these are yet to be determined. Future studies are needed to analyze how the above-utilized strategies in GYN cancer care during the pandemic will impact the long-term outcomes of our patients.

Patterns of care and outcomes of radiotherapy or hormone therapy in patients with medically inoperable endometrial adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE

The optimal treatment for medically inoperable endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma is unknown. The goal of this study was to evaluate the patterns of care and efficacy of radiotherapy (RT) or hormone therapy (HT) in the treatment of these patients.

METHODS

We performed a query of the National Cancer Database (NCDB) of patients with medically inoperable endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the endometrium diagnosed between 2004 and 2016 and treated with either RT or HT. A multivariate Cox regression model and propensity weighted analyses were used to evaluate overall survival after controlling for confounding variables. A multinomial logistic regression model was used to assess predictors of RT or HT use.

RESULTS

A total of 1036 patients were included in this cohort, and 73% (n = 759) were treated with RT alone. Patients who received definitive HT compared to RT were more likely to be older, diagnosed in the earlier years of this analysis, treated at lower-case volume centers, diagnosed with high-grade disease, or located outside of metropolitan areas. On multivariate analysis, treatment with HT alone versus RT alone was associated with significantly worse overall survival in the multivariate Cox model but not on propensity score weighted analysis. Interaction effect testing revealed that older patients and those treated at lower-volume centers had improved survival with RT compared to HT.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified factors associated with the receipt of RT or HT in medically inoperable endometrial cancer patients. Treatment with RT correlated with improved survival compared to HT in older patients and those treated at lower-volume centers.

Non-anesthetist-administered moderate sedation with midazolam and fentanyl for outpatient MRI-aided hybrid intracavitary and interstitial brachytherapy in cervix cancer: a single-institution experience

Purpose

The aim of the study was to determine the feasibility of interstitial brachytherapy under non-anesthetist-administered moderate sedation, to identify factors influencing the insertion, and the total procedural time.

Material and methods

A total of 47 insertions with hybrid intracavitary and interstitial applicators were performed in 23 patients from March 2017 to March 2020. Moderate sedation was achieved with intravenous midazolam and fentanyl administered by non-anesthetist. Insertion time and procedural time was recorded. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to evaluate the impact of different factors on insertion and procedural time.

Results

A total of 238 needles (range, 2-8 per insertion) were implanted, with an average insertion depth of 30 mm (range, 20-40 mm). The mean doses for midazolam and fentanyl were 3 mg (standard deviation [SD] = 1) and 53.3 mcg (SD = 23.9) per insertion, respectively. The median insertion time was 30 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] = 22-40), and the median total procedural time was 4.3 hours (IQR = 3.6-5.2). First time insertion, insertions performed before 2019, and higher midazolam dose were associated with significantly longer insertion time, whereas longer insertion time, MRI-based planning, and insertions performed before 2019 were associated with significantly longer total procedural time.

Conclusions

Outpatient interstitial brachytherapy with non-anesthetist-administered sedation is achievable and well-tolerated. This method may significantly lessen the burden on hospital resources and has the potential to be cost-effective.

Impact of the Coronavirus Disease of 2019 Pandemic on Radiation Oncology Clinical Decision Making in a High-Prevalence Environment

PURPOSE

This study aimed to define how the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected the role, timing, and delivery of radiation therapy (RT) in a high-prevalence region at the height of the initial U.S. outbreak.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We performed a retrospective review of all patients seen at 3 radiation oncology departments within the Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Barnabas Health system in New Jersey during the initial COVID-19 surge. The primary endpoints were to define and quantify COVID-related, radiation-specific care changes, and identify predictive factors of experiencing COVID-related care changes.

RESULTS

A total of 545 patients with cancer were seen during the study period, 99 of whom (18.1%) experienced ≥1 COVID-related care change. RT delays were the most common, accounting for 51.5% of all care changes. Physician-directed delays accounted for 41.2% of RT delays, and patient fears, COVID testing, and access barriers were responsible for 27.5%, 17.6%, and 13.7%, respectively. Patient age (P = .040), intent of treatment (P = .047), and cancer type (P < .001) were significantly associated with experiencing a COVID-related care change, as we found that older, curative intent and patients with rectal cancer were more likely to experience care changes. On multivariate analysis, patient age remained significant when controlling for treatment intent and cancer type.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides a perspective on how care was adapted to protect patients with cancer during a pandemic while maximizing disease control. The positive correlation between age and likelihood of care changes may reflect extra precaution taken with older patients given their vulnerability to severe COVID illness. The lower observed likelihood of COVID-related care changes among patients undergoing palliative RT may reflect either the more urgent needs addressed by palliative RT or simply be logistical, because palliative radiation is often delivered in short courses with less exposure risk. Assessing adaptations others have implemented and monitoring how they affect patient outcomes will be crucial.

The Case for Brachytherapy: Why It Deserves a Renaissance

The recent global events related to the coronavirus disease of 2019 pandemic have significantly changed the medical landscape and led to a shift in oncologic treatment perspectives. There is a renewed focus on preserving treatment outcomes while maintaining medical accessibility and decreasing medical resource utilization. Brachytherapy, which is a vital part of the treatment course of many cancers (particularly prostate and gynecologic cancers), has the ability to deliver hypofractionated radiation and thus shorten treatment time. Studies in the early 2000s demonstrated a decline in brachytherapy usage despite data showing equivalent or even superior treatment outcomes for brachytherapy in disease sites, such as the prostate and cervix. However, newer data suggest that this trend may be reversing. The renewed call for shorter radiation courses based on data showing equivalent outcomes will likely establish hypofractionated radiation as the standard of care across multiple disease sites. With shifting reimbursement, brachytherapy represents the pinnacle in hypofractionated, conformal radiation therapy, and with extensive long-term data in support of the treatment modality brachytherapy is primed for a renaissance.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Brachytherapy During the Pandemic: A Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Barnabas Health Multisite Experience

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate whether the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in treatment delays in patients scheduled for or undergoing brachytherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted across 4 affiliated sites after local institutional review board approval. The eligibility criteria were defined as all patients with cancer whose treatment plan included brachytherapy during the COVID-19 pandemic from February 24, 2020 to June 30, 2020. Treatment delays, cancellations, alterations of fractionation regimens, and treatment paradigm changes were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 47 patients were eligible for the analysis. Median patient age at the time of treatment was 62 years (interquartile range, 56-70 years). Endometrial, cervical, and prostate cancers were the most common sites included in this analysis. Three patients (6.4%) with cervical cancer were diagnosed with COVID-19 during the course of their treatment. Interruptions of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), cancellations of EBRT, cancellations of brachytherapy, and treatment delays due to COVID occurred in 5 (10.6%), 3 (6.4%), 8 (17%), and 9 (19%) patients, respectively. The mean and median number of days delayed for patients who experienced treatment interruptions were 16.3 days (standard deviation: 13.9 days) and 14 days (interquartile range, 5.75-23.75 days), respectively. For patients with cervical cancer, the mean and median overall treatment times defined as the time from the start of EBRT to the end of brachytherapy were 56 and 49 days, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the challenges the health care system faced during the pandemic, most patients with cancer were safely treated with minor treatment delays and interruptions. Long-term follow up is needed to assess the impact of COVID-19 and treatment interruptions on oncologic outcomes.

Management of cervical cancer during the corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19) era

COVID-19 pandemic has had a catastrophic impact on the society, economy and heath-care system all over the globe with virus showing no signs of losing potency. As the situation appears to worsen, extra burden on other specialities like oncology seems to increase. Specific recommendations are necessary for management of cervical cancer in the current context. All concerned specialities must work together in the best interest of the patient. Attempts should be made at managing cervical cancer while limiting the viral spread among the patients and health-care workers without the loss of opportunity. Surgical intervention for early cervical cancer should be postponed or alternative modalities be considered. In a locally advanced disease, concurrent chemoradiation is the treatment of choice. In addition, the following under mentioned suggestions aim to discuss ways of minimizing infection spread, workload rationalization and providing guidance for management of cervical cancer in the presence of COVID-19 infection.

Brachytherapy care during the COVID-19 pandemic: Practice statement from a cancer center in Wuhan, China

Purpose

COVID-19 broke out in late 2019 and rapidly spread around the world and became a pandemic. This highly contagious disease affects routine health care services and patients with cancer who are susceptible to it. Delivering brachytherapy on time is critical for patients with cancer to get better prognosis. The purpose of this study is to present workflow and standard for radiation centers to deliver brachytherapy and avoid cross-infection during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods and Materials

This study combined previous literature and guidelines of precaution with clinical experience in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

A workflow covering patients' screening, health care workers’ precaution, training, and other aspects of the whole brachytherapy procedure was established.

Conclusions

From the reopening of radiation center to mid-May in 2020, there is no hospital infection of COVID-19 in patients or health care workers. This recommendation is effective and helpful to other cancer centers.

COVID-19, Brachytherapy, and Gynecologic Cancers: a Moroccan Experience

The treatment of gynecological cancers is the main activity of brachytherapy units. However, during COVID-19 pandemic, precautions should be done in order to reduce the spread of the virus while maintaining all chances to recovery for all patients (Radiother Oncol 148, 227-228, 2020). Despite the extent of the pandemic in our country, limited data are available to establish recommendations with a sufficient level of evidence (Radiother Oncol 148, 227-228, 2020). More recently, the American Brachytherapy Society published some clarifications in this regard and international expert consensus recommendations of radiation therapy for gynecologic malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic were published (https://www.americanbrachytherapy.org/about-abs/abs-news/abs-statement-on-coronavirus/, Gynecol Oncol 15, 2020). In this commentary, we sought to share the procedures adopted for the management of gynecological cancer patients during COVID-19 pandemic in our brachytherapy unit.