Increasing Demand on Human Capital and Resource Utilization in Radiation Therapy: The Past Decade

The impact of advancing the standard of care in radiotherapy on operational treatment resources

PURPOSE

To demonstrate the impact of implementing hypofractionated prescription regimens and advanced treatment techniques on institutional operational hours and radiotherapy personnel resources in a multi-institutional setting. The study may be used to describe the impact of advancing the standard of care with modern radiotherapy techniques on patient and staff resources.

METHODS

This study uses radiation therapy data extracted from the radiotherapy information system from two tertiary care, university-affiliated cancer centers from 2012 to 2021. Across all patients in the analysis, the average fraction number for curative and palliative patients was reported each year in the decade. Also, the institutional operational treatment hours are reported for both centers. A sub-analysis for curative intent breast and lung radiotherapy patients was performed to contextualize the impact of changes to imaging, motion management, and treatment technique.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2021, Center 1 had 42 214 patient plans and Center 2 had 43 252 patient plans included in the analysis. Averaged over both centers across the decade, the average fraction number per patient decreased from 6.9 to 5.2 (25%) and 21.8 to 17.2 (21%) for palliative and curative patients, respectively. The operational treatment hours for both institutions increased from 8 h 15 min to 9 h 45 min (18%), despite a patient population increase of 45%.

CONCLUSION

The clinical implementation of hypofractionated treatment regimens has successfully reduced the radiotherapy workload and operational treatment hours required to treat patients. This analysis describes the impact of changes to the standard of care on institutional resources.

The future of cancer care in the UK-time for a radical and sustainable National Cancer Plan

Cancer affects one in two people in the UK and the incidence is set to increase. The UK National Health Service is facing major workforce deficits and cancer services have struggled to recover after the COVID-19 pandemic, with waiting times for cancer care becoming the worst on record. There are severe and widening disparities across the country and survival rates remain unacceptably poor for many cancers. This is at a time when cancer care has become increasingly complex, specialised, and expensive. The current crisis has deep historic roots, and to be reversed, the scale of the challenge must be acknowledged and a fundamental reset is required. The loss of a dedicated National Cancer Control Plan in England and Wales, poor operationalisation of plans elsewhere in the UK, and the closure of the National Cancer Research Institute have all added to a sense of strategic misdirection. The UK finds itself at a crossroads, where the political decisions of governments, the cancer community, and research funders will determine whether we can, together, achieve equitable, affordable, and high-quality cancer care for patients that is commensurate with our wealth, and position our outcomes among the best in the world. In this Policy Review, we describe the challenges and opportunities that are needed to develop radical, yet sustainable plans, which are comprehensive, evidence-based, integrated, patient-outcome focused, and deliver value for money.

Resource Allocations for Common Radiation Oncology Procedures

PURPOSE

Radiation Oncology is a complex, resource-intensive discipline. The complexity of the radiation oncology treatment process has increased significantly in recent years with the introduction of more advanced imaging, planning, and treatment delivery technology and enhanced use of multidisciplinary care paths. We conducted a multi-institutional study to estimate the average time by functional unit for a wide range of modern radiation oncology treatment regimens.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Structured process mapping was performed for 24 treatment categories, and average time estimates for 6 functional groups were obtained for each process step through consultation with the full clinical team at each institution. Six geographically dispersed institutions participated in the study. Significant effort was invested in aggregate data analysis and clarification of assumptions.

RESULTS

The findings show significant variability in the resources expended for many treatment categories as well as the distribution of workload between functional units. Major factors in the variability include the rate of adoption of hypofractionation in external beam therapy, adoption of automation tools and standardization, and the transition to multimodality image-based planning in brachytherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The data obtained from this study may be useful in designing institution-specific staffing models appropriate to the scope of radiation therapy services provided at each institution.

Analysis of workload generated in the two years following first consultation by each new cancer patient: studying the past to plan the future of cancer care

Introduction

Prevalence of cancer patients is dramatically increasing. We aimed at quantifying the oncology workload generated by each new cancer patient in the two years following first consultation.

Methods

In this record-based retrospective study, we retrieved data of all newly diagnosed patients treated at the Oncology Department of Udine Academic Hospital between 01.01.2012 and 31.12.2017. We calculated mean number and standard deviation of the activity type generated by each new cancer patient during the following 2 years.

Results

Seven thousand four hundred fifty-two cancer patients generated a total of 85,338 clinical episodes. The two-years mean number of oncology episodes generated was 11.31 (i.e., for every 1,000 new cancer patients, 11,310 oncology activities are generated overall in the following two-year lapse). Patients with advanced disease generated the highest workload (24.3; SD 18.8) with a statistically significant difference compared to adjuvant and follow-up patients (p < 0.001). The workload generated in the period 0–6 and 0–12 months was significantly higher than in the following months (p < 0.001) and it was also higher for patients initially designated to treatment (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

This is the first study reporting on the mean oncology workload generated during the 2 years following first consultation. Workload is the highest for patient with advanced disease, especially in the first months and in patients in active treatment. A detailed analysis of workloads in oncology is feasible and could be crucial for planning a sustainable framework for cancer care in the next future.

Diagnosis, Prevention, and Treatment of Radiotherapy-Induced Xerostomia: A Review

In patients with head and neck cancer, irradiation (IR)-sensitive salivary gland (SG) tissue is highly prone to damage during radiotherapy (RT). This leads to SG hypofunction and xerostomia. Xerostomia is defined as the subjective complaint of dry mouth, which can cause other symptoms and adversely affect the quality of life. In recent years, diagnostic techniques have constantly improved with the emergence of more reliable and valid questionnaires as well as more accurate equipment for saliva flow rate measurement and imaging methods. Preventive measures such as the antioxidant MitoTEMPO, botulinum toxin (BoNT), and growth factors have been successfully applied in animal experiments, resulting in positive outcomes. Interventions, such as the new delivery methods of pilocarpine, edible saliva substitutes, acupuncture and electrical stimulation, gene transfer, and stem cell transplantation, have shown potential to alleviate or restore xerostomia in patients. The review summarizes the existing and new diagnostic methods for xerostomia, along with current and potential strategies for reducing IR-induced damage to SG function. We also aim to provide guidance on the advantages and disadvantages of the diagnostic methods. Additionally, most prevention and treatment methods remain in the stage of animal experiments, suggesting a need for further clinical research, among which we believe that antioxidants, gene transfer, and stem cell transplantation have broad prospects.

Prospective clinical evaluation of integrating a radiation anatomist for contouring in routine radiation treatment planning

Purpose

A radiation anatomist was trained and integrated into clinical practice at a multi-site academic center. The primary objective of this quality improvement study was to determine whether a radiation anatomist improves the quality of organ-at-risk (OAR) contours, and secondarily to determine the impact on efficiency in the treatment planning process.

Methods and Materials

From March to August 2020, all patients undergoing computed tomography–based radiation planning at 2 clinics at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center were assigned using an “every other” process to either (1) OAR contouring by a radiation anatomist (intervention) or (2) contouring by the treating physician (standard of care). Blinded dosimetrists reported OAR contour quality using a 3-point scoring system based on a common clinical trial protocol deviation scale (1, acceptable; 2, minor deviation; and 3, major deviation). Physicians reported time spent contouring for all cases. Analyses included the Fisher exact test and multivariable ordinal logistic regression.

Results

There were 249 cases with data available for the primary endpoint (66% response rate). The mean OAR quality rating was 1.1 ± 0.4 for the intervention group and 1.4 ± 0.7 for the standard of care group (P < .001), with subset analysis showing a significant difference for gastrointestinal cases (n = 49; P <.001). Time from simulation to contour approval was reduced from 3 days (interquartile range [IQR], 1-6 days) in the control group to 2 days (IQR, 1-5 days) in the intervention group (P = .007). Both physicians and dosimetrists self-reported decreased time spent contouring in the intervention group compared with the control group, with a decreases of 8 minutes (17%; P < .001) and 5 minutes (50%; P = .002), respectively. Qualitative comments most often indicated edits required to bowel contours (n = 14).

Conclusions

These findings support improvements in both OAR contour quality and workflow efficiency with implementation of a radiation anatomist in routine practice. Findings could also inform development of autosegmentation by identifying disease sites and specific OARs contributing to low clinical efficiency. Future research is needed to determine the potential effect of reduced physician time spent contouring OARs on burnout.

Validation of an established deep learning auto-segmentation tool for cardiac substructures in 4D radiotherapy planning scans

•

Cardiotoxicity is a common complication of lung cancer radiotherapy.

•

Segmentation of cardiac substructures is time-consuming and challenging.

•

Deep learning segmentation tools can perform this task in 3D and 4D scans.

•

Performance is high when assessed geometrically, dosimetrically and clinically.

•

Auto-segmentation tools may accelerate clinical workflows and enable research.

Background

Emerging data suggest that dose-sparing several key cardiac regions is prognostically beneficial in lung cancer radiotherapy. The cardiac substructures are challenging to contour due to their complex geometry, poor soft tissue definition on computed tomography (CT) and cardiorespiratory motion artefact. A neural network was previously trained to generate the cardiac substructures using three-dimensional radiotherapy planning CT scans (3D-CT). In this study, the performance of that tool on the average intensity projection from four-dimensional (4D) CT scans (4D-AVE), now commonly used in lung radiotherapy, was evaluated.

Materials and Methods

The 4D-AVE of n=20 patients completing radiotherapy for lung cancer 2015–2020 underwent manual and automated cardiac substructure segmentation. Manual and automated substructures were compared geometrically and dosimetrically. Two senior clinicians also qualitatively assessed the auto-segmentation tool’s output.

Results

Geometric comparison of the automated and manual segmentations exhibited high levels of similarity across parameters, including volume difference (11.8% overall) and Dice similarity coefficient (0.85 overall), and were consistent with 3D-CT performance. Differences in mean (median 0.2 Gy, range −1.6–0.3 Gy) and maximum (median 0.4 Gy, range −2.2–0.9 Gy) doses to substructures were generally small. Nearly all structures (99.5 %) were deemed to be appropriate for clinical use without further editing.

Conclusions

Cardiac substructure auto-segmentation using a deep learning-based tool trained on a 3D-CT dataset was feasible on the 4D-AVE scan, meaning this tool is suitable for use on 4D-CT radiotherapy planning scans. Application of this tool would increase the practicality of routine clinical cardiac substructure delineation, and enable further cardiac radiation effects research.

A systems-based operational assessment of external beam radiotherapy

PURPOSE

Advanced technologies have led to improvements in modern radiotherapy over the years. However, adoption of advanced technologies can present challenges to existing clinical operations and negatively impact safety. The purpose of this work is to perform an assessment of modern radiotherapy for the operational objectives of safety, efficiency, and financial viability.

METHODS

This work focuses on external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). The operational assessment included department management, treatment planning, treatment delivery, and associated workflows for three equipment configurations of Ethos, Halcyon, and TrueBeam with the ARIA information system, Eclipse treatment planning, and IDENTIFY surface guidance. Systems-theoretic process analysis (STPA) was used to analyze the related workflows. Control actions, unsafe contexts of those control actions, and associated causal scenarios that can lead to unsafe radiation and non-radiation physical injury (safety objective), reduced treatment capacity (efficiency objective), and costs that exceed budget (financial viability objective) were identified.

RESULTS

The number of control actions (and causal scenarios) were 18 (254), 18 (267), and 20 (267) for the equipment configurations of Halcyon, TrueBeam, and Ethos, respectively. The extent that safety, efficiency, and financial viability were impacted is similar across the different equipment configurations but there were some noteworthy differences related to information transfer and workflow bottlenecks potentially impacting access to care. Seventy five percent of the scenarios across all three configurations were related to safety. Overall, 29% of the scenarios impacted more than one operational objective and 48% were related to human decisions during the process of care. Planned or unplanned process changes were responsible for 8% of the causal scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

Broad-based clinical improvements may be realized by addressing causal scenarios that impact multiple objectives. Redesigning the roles and responsibilities of the clinical team and some aspects of the radiotherapy workflow may be helpful to fully realize the benefits of advanced technologies. Radiotherapy may benefit from additional tools to improve the consistency between decisions and actions when system or process changes occur. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The changing radiation oncology landscape in New Zealand

INTRODUCTION

This paper outlines the New Zealand (NZ) responses to the biennial facilities surveys of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiation Oncologists (RANZCR), Faculty of Radiation Oncology (FRO) from 2011 to 2019.

METHODS

The facilities survey is conducted by the FRO Economics and Workforce Committee (FROEWC) and focuses on equipment, treatment activities and staffing.

RESULTS

The number of facilities increased by two to 10, both in the private sector. The total number of linear accelerators (linacs) increased by four; one in public and three in private. The majority of linacs were over 8 years old (62.5%). Treatment courses have increased by 19% and fraction numbers by 13.7%. Courses per linac have remained relatively constant. There was growth in IMRT, orthovoltage, high dose rate brachytherapy and paediatric treatments. There was a slow increase in number of radiation oncologists and trainees. The number of radiation therapists was unchanged with a 20% increase in treatment courses per radiation therapist. Physicist numbers have increased but 61.4% of physicists are overseas-trained and vacancies persist.

CONCLUSION

The survey results indicate a rapidly changing radiation oncology landscape in NZ between 2011 and 2019. The challenges of increases in cancer numbers, treatment courses and complexity of treatments and a need to focus on quality standards against a set of minimal increase in machine numbers, ageing machines, static or slowly increasing staffing numbers and heavy reliance on overseas staffing require a national review of radiation oncology services to ensure a sustainable future.