|
1
|
Bonaparte I, Fragnoli F, Gregucci F, Carbonara R, Di Guglielmo FC, Surgo A, Davì V, Caliandro M, Sanfrancesco G, De Pascali C, Aga A, Indellicati C, Parabita R, Cuscito R, Cardetta P, Laricchia M, Antonicelli M, Ciocia A, Curci D, Guida P, Ciliberti MP, Fiorentino A. Improving Quality Assurance in a Radiation Oncology Using ARIA Visual Care Path. J Pers Med 2024; 14:416. [PMID: 38673043 PMCID: PMC11051245 DOI: 10.3390/jpm14040416] [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: 03/04/2024] [Revised: 04/07/2024] [Accepted: 04/11/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Errors and incidents may occur at any point within radiotherapy (RT). The aim of the present retrospective analysis is to evaluate the impact of a customized ARIA Visual Care Path (VCP) on quality assurance (QA) for the RT process. MATERIALS AND METHODS The ARIA VCP was implemented in June 2019. The following tasks were customized and independently verified (by independent checks from radiation oncologists, medical physics, and radiation therapists): simulation, treatment planning, treatment start verification, and treatment completion. A retrospective analysis of 105 random and unselected patients was performed, and 945 tasks were reviewed. Patients' reports were categorized based on treatment years period: 2019-2020 (A); 2021 (B); and 2022-2023 (C). The QA metrics included data for timeliness of task completion and data for minor and major incidents. The major incidents were defined as incorrect prescriptions of RT dose, the use of different immobilization systems during RT compared to the simulation, the absence of surface-guided RT data for patients' positioning, incorrect dosimetric QA for treatment plans, and failure to complete RT as originally planned. A sample size of approximately 100 was able to obtain an upper limit of 95% confidence interval below 5-10% in the case of zero or one major incident. RESULTS From June 2019 to December 2023, 5300 patients were treated in our RT department, an average of 1300 patients per year. For the purpose of this analysis, one hundred and five patients were chosen for the study and were subsequently evaluated. All RT staff achieved a 100% compliance rate in the ARIA VCP timely completion. A total of 36 patients were treated in Period A, 34 in Period B, and 35 in Period C. No major incidents were identified, demonstrating a major incident rate of 0.0% (95% CI 0.0-3.5%). A total of 26 out of 945 analyzed tasks (3.8%) were reported as minor incidents: absence of positioning photo in 32 cases, lack of patients' photo, and absence of plan documents in 4 cases. When comparing periods, incidents were statistically less frequent in Period C. CONCLUSIONS Although the present analysis has some limitations, its outcomes demonstrated that software for the RT workflow, which is fully integrated with both the record-and-verify and treatment planning systems, can effectively manage the patient's care path. Implementing the ARIA VCP improved the efficiency of the RT care path workflow, reducing the risk of major and minor incidents.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilaria Bonaparte
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Federica Fragnoli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Fabiana Gregucci
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Roberta Carbonara
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Fiorella Cristina Di Guglielmo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Alessia Surgo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Valerio Davì
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Morena Caliandro
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Giuseppe Sanfrancesco
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Christian De Pascali
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Alberto Aga
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Chiara Indellicati
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Rosalinda Parabita
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Rosilda Cuscito
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Pietro Cardetta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Maurizio Laricchia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Michele Antonicelli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Annarita Ciocia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Domenico Curci
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Pietro Guida
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Maria Paola Ciliberti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
| | - Alba Fiorentino
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miulli General Regional Hospital, 70021 Bari, Italy; (I.B.); (F.F.); (F.G.); (R.C.); (F.C.D.G.); (A.S.); (V.D.); (M.C.); (G.S.); (A.A.); (C.I.); (R.P.); (R.C.); (P.C.); (M.L.); (M.A.); (A.C.); (D.C.); (P.G.); (M.P.C.)
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, LUM University, 70010 Bari, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Corral J, Borras JM, Lievens Y. Utilisation of radiotherapy in lung cancer: A scoping narrative literature review with a focus on the introduction of evidence-based therapeutic approaches in Europe. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 45:100717. [PMID: 38226026 PMCID: PMC10788411 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2023.100717] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2023] [Accepted: 12/16/2023] [Indexed: 01/17/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose The aim of this study was to review the published studies on the utilisation of radiotherapy in lung cancer (both small and non-small cell lung cancer, SCLC and NSCLC) patients in European countries with a population-based perspective. Material and methods A literature search since January 2000 until December 2022 was carried out. Only English-published papers were included, and only European data was considered. PRISMA guidelines were followed. A scoping narrative review was undertaken due to the hetereogeneity of the published papers. Results 38 papers were included in the analysis, with the majority from the Netherlands (52.6%) and the UK (18.4%). Large variability is observed in the reported radiotherapy utilisation, around 40% for NSCLC in general and between 26 and 42% in stage I NSCLC. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) shows a wide range of utilisation across countries and over time, from 8 to 63%. Similary, in stage III lung cancer, chemoradiotherapy (CRT) utilisation varied considerably (11-70%). Eleven studies compared radiotherapy utilisation between older and younger age-groups, showing that younger patients receive more CRT, while the opposite applies for SBRT. An widespreadlack of data on relevant covariates such as comorbidty and health-services related variables is observed. Conclusion The actual utilisation of radiotherapy for lung cancer reported in patterns-of-care studies (POCs) is notably lower than the evidence-based optimal utilisation. Important variability is observed by country, time period, stage at diagnosis and age. A wider use of POCs should be promoted to improve our knowledge on the actual application of evidence-based treatment recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julieta Corral
- Catalonian Cancer Plan, Department of Health, Barcelona, Spain
- Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospitalet, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Josep M. Borras
- Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospitalet, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Barcelona, Spain
| | - Yolande Lievens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
- Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Vinod SK, Merie R, Harden S. Quality of Decision Making in Radiation Oncology. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2024:S0936-6555(24)00067-0. [PMID: 38342658 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2024.02.001] [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: 11/09/2023] [Revised: 01/04/2024] [Accepted: 02/01/2024] [Indexed: 02/13/2024]
Abstract
High-quality decision making in radiation oncology requires the careful consideration of multiple factors. In addition to the evidence-based indications for curative or palliative radiotherapy, this article explores how, in routine clinical practice, we also need to account for many other factors when making high-quality decisions. Foremost are patient-related factors, including preference, and the complex interplay between age, frailty and comorbidities, especially with an ageing cancer population. Whilst clinical practice guidelines inform our decisions, we need to account for their applicability in different patient groups and different resource settings. With particular reference to curative-intent radiotherapy, we explore decisions regarding dose fractionation schedules, use of newer radiotherapy technologies and multimodality treatment considerations that contribute to personalised patient-centred care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S K Vinod
- Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool Hospital, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool, NSW, Australia; South West Sydney Clinical Campuses, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| | - R Merie
- Icon Cancer Centre, Concord Repatriation General Hospital, Concord, NSW, Australia
| | - S Harden
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Abu Awwad D, Shafiq J, Delaney GP, Anacak Y, Bray F, Flores JA, Gondhowiardjo S, Minjgee M, Permata TBM, Pineda JC, Yusak S, Zubizarreta E, Yap ML. Current and projected gaps in the availability of radiotherapy in the Asia-Pacific region: a country income-group analysis. Lancet Oncol 2024; 25:225-234. [PMID: 38301690 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00619-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2023] [Revised: 11/21/2023] [Accepted: 11/23/2023] [Indexed: 02/03/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cancer incidence and mortality is increasing rapidly worldwide, with a higher cancer burden observed in the Asia-Pacific region than in other regions. To date, evidence-based modelling of radiotherapy demand has been based on stage data from high-income countries (HIC) that do not account for the later stage at presentation seen in many low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to estimate the current and projected demand and supply in megavoltage radiotherapy machines in the Asia-Pacific region, using a national income-group adjusted model. METHODS Novel LMIC radiotherapy demand and outcome models were created by adjusting previously developed models that used HIC cancer staging data. These models were applied to the cancer case mix (ie, the incidence of each different cancer) in each LMIC in the Asia-Pacific region to estimate the current and projected optimal radiotherapy utilisation rate (ie, the proportion of cancer cases that would require radiotherapy on the basis of guideline recommendations), and to estimate the number of megavoltage machines needed in each country to meet this demand. Information on the number of megavoltage machines available in each country was retrieved from the Directory of Radiotherapy Centres. Gaps were determined by comparing the projected number of megavoltage machines needed with the number of machines available in each region. Megavoltage machine numbers, local control, and overall survival benefits were compared with previous data from 2012 and projected data for 2040. FINDINGS 57 countries within the Asia-Pacific region were included in the analysis with 9·48 million new cases of cancer in 2020, an increase of 2·66 million from 2012. Local control was 7·42% and overall survival was 3·05%. Across the Asia-Pacific overall, the current optimal radiotherapy utilisation rate is 49·10%, which means that 4·66 million people will need radiotherapy in 2020, an increase of 1·38 million (42%) from 2012. The number of megavoltage machines increased by 1261 (31%) between 2012 and 2020, but the demand for these machines increased by 3584 (42%). The Asia-Pacific region only has 43·9% of the megavoltage machines needed to meet demand, ranging from 9·9-40·5% in LMICs compared with 67·9% in HICs. 12 000 additional megavoltage machines will be needed to meet the projected demand for 2040. INTERPRETATION The difference between supply and demand with regard to megavoltage machine availability has continued to widen in LMICs over the past decade and is projected to worsen by 2040. The data from this study can be used to provide evidence for the need to incorporate radiotherapy in national cancer control plans and to inform governments and policy makers within the Asia-Pacific region regarding the urgent need for investment in this sector. FUNDING The Regional Cooperative Agreement for Research, Development and Training Related to Nuclear Science and Technology for Asia and the Pacific (RCA) Regional Office (RCARP03).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dania Abu Awwad
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Jesmin Shafiq
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes, Research and Evaluation, Liverpool Hospital, Ingham Institute, University of New South Wales, Liverpool, NSW, Australia
| | - Geoffrey Paul Delaney
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes, Research and Evaluation, Liverpool Hospital, Ingham Institute, University of New South Wales, Liverpool, NSW, Australia
| | - Yavuz Anacak
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey
| | - Freddie Bray
- Cancer Surveillance Branch, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Jerickson Abbie Flores
- Jose R Reyes Memorial Medical Center, Manila, Philippines; AC Sacred Heart Medical Center, Pampanga, Philippines
| | - Soehartati Gondhowiardjo
- Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia; Department of Radiation Oncology, Cipto Mangunkusumo General Hospital, Jakarta, Indonesia; Indonesian Radiation Oncology Society, South Jakarta, Indonesia
| | | | - Tiara Bunga Mayang Permata
- Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia; Department of Radiation Oncology, Cipto Mangunkusumo General Hospital, Jakarta, Indonesia
| | | | | | - Eduardo Zubizarreta
- International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna International Centre, Vienna, Austria
| | - Mei Ling Yap
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes, Research and Evaluation, Liverpool Hospital, Ingham Institute, University of New South Wales, Liverpool, NSW, Australia; The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Barangaroo, NSW, Australia; Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centres, Western Sydney University, Campbelltown, NSW, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Maharaj KD, Dass J, Ibrahim M, Mahmood T, Rowshanfarzad P. Peripheral Doses Beyond Electron Applicators in Conventional C-Arm Linear Accelerators: A Systematic Literature Review. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2024; 23:15330338241239144. [PMID: 38515394 PMCID: PMC10958816 DOI: 10.1177/15330338241239144] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2023] [Revised: 02/02/2024] [Accepted: 02/22/2024] [Indexed: 03/23/2024] Open
Abstract
Background: This review investigates peripheral dose levels in electron beam treatments, comparing different manufacturers including Varian, Elekta, and Siemens. Accurate measurement of peripheral dose is vital for patient safety and precise radiation delivery in radiation therapy. Methods: This review followed PRISMA standards, conducting a comprehensive literature search from 1978 to July 2023. Emphasis was on identifying studies analyzing peripheral doses related to various electron beam energies, beam angle, field sizes, cutouts, and applicator combinations. Three major databases including PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched. Results: A total of 7 articles were included in this review. Strategies such as bolus materials, personalized cutouts, and optimal treatment procedures have all been developed to reduce peripheral radiation exposure and enhance patient safety. Ongoing research in this field is focused on further minimizing the risks associated with out-of-field radiation by improving dose delivery systems. Conclusion: The literature emphasizes importance of precision in electron beam radiation therapy, highlighting the critical need for managing peripheral doses and optimizing hardware to ensure patient safety. It advocates for the use of advanced tools and protocols to maintain a balance between effective treatment while protecting healthy tissues. Continuous research, careful treatment planning, and effective management of peripheral doses are essential.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kapil Dev Maharaj
- School of Physics, Mathematics and Computing, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Joshua Dass
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Mounir Ibrahim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Talat Mahmood
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Pejman Rowshanfarzad
- School of Physics, Mathematics and Computing, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia
- Centre for Advanced Technologies in Cancer Research (CATCR), Perth, Western Australia, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Muzumder S, Tripathy A, Alexander HN, Srikantia N. Hospital factors determining overall survival in cancer patients undergoing curative treatment. J Cancer Res Ther 2024; 20:17-24. [PMID: 38554293 DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_2_24] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/10/2024] [Indexed: 04/01/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In oncology, overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QoL) are key indicators. The factors that affect OS and QoL include tumor-related characteristics (stage and grade), patient-related factors (performance status and comorbidities), and cancer-directed therapy (CDT)-related aspects. In addition, external factors such as governance or policy (e.g., inaccessibility to CDT, increased distance to service, poor socioeconomic status, lack of insurance), and hospital-related factors (e.g., facility volume and surgeon volume) can influence OS and QoL. MATERIALS AND METHODS The primary objective of this narrative review was to identify hospital-related factors that affect OS and QoL in patients receiving curative CDT. The authors defined extrinsic factors that can be modified at the hospital level as "hospital-related" factors. Only factors supported by randomized controlled trials (RCT), systematic reviews (SR) and/or meta-analyses (MA), and population database (PDB) analyses that address the relationship between OS and hospital factors were considered. RESULTS The literature review found that high hospital or oncologist volume, adherence to evidence-based medicine (EBM), optimal time-to-treatment initiation (TTI), and decreased overall treatment time (OTT) increase OS in patients undergoing curative CDT. The use of case management strategies was associated with better symptom management and treatment compliance, but had a mixed effect on QoL. The practice of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in cancer patients did not result in an increase in OS. There was insufficient evidence to support the impact of factors such as teaching or academic centers, hospital infrastructure, and treatment compliance on OS and QoL. CONCLUSION The authors conclude that hospital policies should focus on increasing hospital and oncologist volume, adhering to EBM, optimizing TTI, and reducing OTT for cancer patients receiving curative treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandeep Muzumder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, St. John's Medical College and Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Mackenzie P, Vajdic C, Delaney G, Comans T, Agar M, Gabriel G, Barton M. Development of an age- and comorbidity- adjusted optimal radiotherapy utilisation rate for lung, rectal, prostate and cervical cancers. Radiother Oncol 2023; 188:109862. [PMID: 37619661 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109862] [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: 01/08/2023] [Revised: 08/17/2023] [Accepted: 08/18/2023] [Indexed: 08/26/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Optimal radiotherapy utilisation (RTU) modelling estimates the proportion of people with cancer who would benefit from radiotherapy. Assessment of comorbidities is an important component of the assessment of suitability for radiotherapy in addition to chronological age and life expectancy. Comorbidities have not been considered in previous optimal RTU models. We aimed to develop an age- and comorbidity- adjusted optimal RTU model for patients with lung, rectal, prostate, and cervical cancer, and compare them to actual RTU rates, with a particular focus on those aged 80+ years, METHODS: New South Wales (NSW) Cancer Registry data (2010-2014) linked to radiotherapy data (2010-2015) and hospitalisation data (2008-2015) were used to determine the number of patients diagnosed with lung, rectal, prostate and cervical cancer. The Cancer Specific C3 'all sites' comorbidity index was calculated from hospital diagnosis data for each patient to determine suitability for radiotherapy. The index was then incorporated into a tumour site-specific decision tree model. The actual RTU was also calculated using the linked datasets. RESULTS 14,696 patients were diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), 1839 with small cell lung cancer (SCLC), 5551 with rectal cancer, 30,935 with prostate cancer and 1216 with cervical cancer in New South Wales from 2010-2014. The proportion of patients aged 80+ years at cancer diagnosis was 25% (3603 patients), 15% (279 patients), 17% (943 patients), 12% (3745 patients), and 7% (88 patients) respectively. The age- and comorbidity- adjusted optimal RTU rates for patients aged 80+ years using the C3 index were 49% (NSCLC), 49% (SCLC), 43% (rectal), 51% (prostate) and 40% (cervical). The corresponding actual RTU rates for patients aged 80+ years were 25%, 32%, 27%, 16%, and 56%. CONCLUSION Even after adjusting for age and comorbidities, the actual radiotherapy utilisation rates were lower than optimal radiotherapy utilisation rates in patients aged 80+ years except for patients with cervical cancer. This warrants further assessment and research into reasons and solutions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Penny Mackenzie
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia; The Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Queensland, Australia.
| | - Claire Vajdic
- The Kirby Insitute, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Geoff Delaney
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Tracy Comans
- Centre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Australia
| | - Meera Agar
- The University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
| | - Gabriel Gabriel
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Michael Barton
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Laurent PA, Milic M, Quevrin C, Meziani L, Liu W, Morel D, Signolle N, Clémenson C, Levy A, Mondini M, Deutsch E. KRAS G12C inhibition using MRTX1257: a novel radio-sensitizing partner. J Transl Med 2023; 21:773. [PMID: 37907934 PMCID: PMC10619254 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-023-04619-0] [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: 03/11/2023] [Accepted: 10/11/2023] [Indexed: 11/02/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND KRAS activating mutations are considered the most frequent oncogenic drivers and are correlated with radio-resistance in multiple cancers including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and colorectal cancer. Although KRAS was considered undruggable until recently, several KRAS inhibitors have recently reached clinical development. Among them, MRTX849 (Mirati Therapeutics) showed encouraging clinical outcomes for the treatment of selected patients with KRASG12C mutated NSCLC and colorectal cancers. In this work, we explore the ability of MRTX1257, a KRASG12C inhibitor analogous to MRTX849, to radio-sensitize KRASG12C+/+ mutated cell lines and tumors. METHODS Both in vitro and in vivo models of radiotherapy (RT) in association with MRTX1257 were used, with different RAS mutational profiles. We assessed in vitro the radio-sensitizing effect of MRTX1257 in CT26 KRASG12C+/+, CT26 WT, LL2 WT and LL2 NRAS KO (LL2 NRAS-/-) cell lines. In vivo, we used syngeneic models of subcutaneous CT26 KRASG12C+/+ tumors in BALB/c mice and T cell deficient athymic nu/nu mice to assess both the radio-sensitizing effect of MRTX1257 and its immunological features. RESULTS MRTX1257 was able to radio-sensitize CT26 KRASG12C+/+ cells in vitro in a time and dose dependent manner. Moreover, RT in association with MRTX1257 in BALB/c mice bearing CT26 KRASG12C+/+ subcutaneous tumors resulted in an observable cure rate of 20%. However, no durable response was observed with similar treatment in athymic nude mice. The analysis of the immune microenvironment of CT26 KRASG12C+/+ tumors following RT and MRTX1257 showed an increase in the proportion of various cell subtypes including conventional CD4 + T cells, dendritic cells type 2 (cDC2) and inflammatory monocytes. Furthermore, the expression of PD-L1 was dramatically down-regulated within both tumor and myeloid cells, thus illustrating the polarization of the tumor microenvironment towards a pro-inflammatory and anti-tumor phenotype following the combined treatment. CONCLUSION This work is the first to demonstrate in vitro as in vivo the radio-sensitizing effect of MRTX1257, a potent KRASG12C inhibitor compatible with oral administration, in CT26 KRASG12C mutated cell lines and tumors. This is a first step towards the use of new combinatorial strategies using KRAS inhibitors and RT in KRASG12C mutated tumors, which are the most represented in NSCLC with 14% of patients harboring this mutational profile.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pierre-Antoine Laurent
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, 114 rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805, Villejuif, France
- INSERM U1030, Molecular Radiation Therapy and Therapeutic Innovation, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, University of Paris-Saclay, 114 rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805, Villejuif, France
- SIRIC SOCRATE, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Marina Milic
- INSERM U1030, Molecular Radiation Therapy and Therapeutic Innovation, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, University of Paris-Saclay, 114 rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805, Villejuif, France
- SIRIC SOCRATE, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Clément Quevrin
- INSERM U1030, Molecular Radiation Therapy and Therapeutic Innovation, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, University of Paris-Saclay, 114 rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805, Villejuif, France
- SIRIC SOCRATE, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Lydia Meziani
- INSERM U1030, Molecular Radiation Therapy and Therapeutic Innovation, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, University of Paris-Saclay, 114 rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805, Villejuif, France
- SIRIC SOCRATE, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Winchygn Liu
- INSERM U1030, Molecular Radiation Therapy and Therapeutic Innovation, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, University of Paris-Saclay, 114 rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805, Villejuif, France
- SIRIC SOCRATE, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Daphné Morel
- Drug Development Department (DITEP), Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Villejuif, France
| | - Nicolas Signolle
- Experimental and Translational Pathology Platform (PETRA), AMMICa, INSERM US23/UAR3655, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Villejuif, France
| | - Céline Clémenson
- INSERM U1030, Molecular Radiation Therapy and Therapeutic Innovation, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, University of Paris-Saclay, 114 rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805, Villejuif, France
- SIRIC SOCRATE, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Antonin Levy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, 114 rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805, Villejuif, France
- INSERM U1030, Molecular Radiation Therapy and Therapeutic Innovation, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, University of Paris-Saclay, 114 rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805, Villejuif, France
- SIRIC SOCRATE, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Michele Mondini
- INSERM U1030, Molecular Radiation Therapy and Therapeutic Innovation, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, University of Paris-Saclay, 114 rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805, Villejuif, France
- SIRIC SOCRATE, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Eric Deutsch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, 114 rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805, Villejuif, France.
- INSERM U1030, Molecular Radiation Therapy and Therapeutic Innovation, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, University of Paris-Saclay, 114 rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805, Villejuif, France.
- SIRIC SOCRATE, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.
| |
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Beckett M, Goethals L, Kraus RD, Denysenko K, Barone Mussalem Gentiles MF, Pynda Y, Abdel-Wahab M. Proximity to Radiotherapy Center, Population, Average Income, and Health Insurance Status as Predictors of Cancer Mortality at the County Level in the United States. JCO Glob Oncol 2023; 9:e2300130. [PMID: 37769217 PMCID: PMC10581634 DOI: 10.1200/go.23.00130] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2023] [Revised: 06/20/2023] [Accepted: 08/22/2023] [Indexed: 09/30/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Sufficient radiotherapy (RT) capacity is essential to delivery of high-quality cancer care. However, despite sufficient capacity, universal access is not always possible in high-income countries because of factors beyond the commonly used parameter of machines per million people. This study assesses the barriers to RT in a high-income country and how these affect cancer mortality. METHODS This cross-sectional study used US county-level data obtained from Center for Disease Control and Prevention and the International Atomic Energy Agency Directory of Radiotherapy Centres. RT facilities in the United States were mapped using Geographic Information Systems software. Univariate analysis was used to identify whether distance to a RT center or various socioeconomic factors were predictive of all-cancer mortality-to-incidence ratio (MIR). Significant variables (P ≤ .05) on univariate analysis were included in a step-wise backward elimination method of multiple regression analysis. RESULTS Thirty-one percent of US counties have at least one RT facility and 8.3% have five or more. The median linear distance from a county's centroid to the nearest RT center was 36 km, and the median county all-cancer MIR was 0.37. The amount of RT centers, linear accelerators, and brachytherapy units per 1 million people were associated with all-cancer MIR (P < .05). Greater distance to RT facilities, lower county population, lower average income per county, and higher proportion of patients without health insurance were associated with increased all-cancer MIR (R-squared, 0.2113; F, 94.22; P < .001). CONCLUSION This analysis used unique high-quality data sets to identify significant barriers to RT access that correspond to higher cancer mortality at the county level. Geographic access, personal income, and insurance status all contribute to these concerning disparities. Efforts to address these barriers are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Luc Goethals
- International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Visweshwar N, Rico JF, Ayala I, Jaglal M, Laber DA, Ammad-Ud-Din M, Sokol L, Sotomayor E, Manoharan A. Insights into the Impact of Hesitancy on Cancer Care and COVID-19. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:3115. [PMID: 37370725 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15123115] [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: 04/08/2023] [Revised: 05/17/2023] [Accepted: 05/30/2023] [Indexed: 06/29/2023] Open
Abstract
World Health Organization findings indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affected cancer diagnosis and management. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the optimal management of outpatient appointments, scheduled treatments, and hospitalizations for cancer patients because of hesitancy among patients and health-care providers. Travel restrictions and other factors likely affected medical, surgical, and radiation treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic. Cancer patients were more likely to be affected by severe illness and complications if they contracted COVID-19. A compromised immune system and comorbidities in cancer patients may have contributed to this increased risk. Hesitancy or reluctance to receive appropriate therapy or vaccination advice might have played a major role for cancer patients, resulting in health-care deficits. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on screening, entry into clinical trials, and hesitancy among patients and health-care professionals, limiting adjuvant and metastatic cancer treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nathan Visweshwar
- Department of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
| | - Juan Felipe Rico
- Department of Pediatric Hematology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
| | - Irmel Ayala
- Department of Pediatric Hematology, Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, USA
| | - Michael Jaglal
- Department of Satellite and Community Oncology and Hematology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
| | - Damian A Laber
- FACP Department of Satellite and Community Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
| | | | - Lubomir Sokol
- Department of Malignant Hematology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
| | | | - Arumugam Manoharan
- FRACP, FRCPA Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2217, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
11
|
Bierbaum M, Arnolda G, Braithwaite J, Rapport F. Clinician attitudes towards cancer treatment guidelines in Australia. BMC Res Notes 2023; 16:80. [PMID: 37194072 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-023-06356-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2023] [Accepted: 05/09/2023] [Indexed: 05/18/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) are designed to guide treatment decisions, yet adherence rates vary widely. To characterise perceived barriers and facilitators to cancer treatment CPG adherence in Australia, and estimate the frequency of previous qualitative research findings, a survey was distributed to Australian oncologists. RESULTS The sample is described and validated guideline attitude scores reported for different groups. Differences in mean CPG attitude scores across clinician subgroups and associations between frequency of CPG use and clinician characteristics were calculated; with 48 respondents there was limited statistical power to find differences. Younger oncologists (< 50 years) and clinicians participating in three or more Multidisciplinary Team Meetings were more likely to routinely or occasionally use CPGs. Perceived barriers and facilitators were identified. Thematic analysis was conducted on open-text responses. Results were integrated with previous interview findings and presented in a thematic, conceptual matrix. Most barriers and facilitators identified earlier were corroborated by survey results, with minor discordance. Identified barriers and facilitators require further exploration within a larger sample to assess their perceived impact on cancer treatment CPG adherence in Australia, as well as to inform future CPG implementation strategies. This research was Human Research Ethics Committee approved (2019/ETH11722 and 52019568810127, ID:5688).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mia Bierbaum
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, NSW, 2113, Australia.
| | - Gaston Arnolda
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, NSW, 2113, Australia
| | - Jeffrey Braithwaite
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, NSW, 2113, Australia
| | - Frances Rapport
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Macquarie Park, NSW, 2113, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
12
|
Nigam R, Field M, Harris G, Barton M, Carolan M, Metcalfe P, Holloway L. Automated detection, delineation and quantification of whole-body bone metastasis using FDG-PET/CT images. Phys Eng Sci Med 2023; 46:851-863. [PMID: 37126152 DOI: 10.1007/s13246-023-01258-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2022] [Accepted: 04/11/2023] [Indexed: 05/02/2023]
Abstract
Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with the metastatic spread of disease to the bone have high morbidity and mortality. Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy increases the progression free survival and overall survival of these patients with oligometastases. FDG-PET/CT, a functional imaging technique combining positron emission tomography (PET) with 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) and computer tomography (CT) provides improved staging and identification of treatment response. It is also associated with reduction in size of the radiotherapy tumour volume delineation compared with CT based contouring in radiotherapy, thus allowing for dose escalation to the target volume with lower doses to the surrounding organs at risk. FDG-PET/CT is increasingly being used for the clinical management of NSCLC patients undergoing radiotherapy and has shown high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of bone metastases in these patients. Here, we present a software tool for detection, delineation and quantification of bone metastases using FDG-PET/CT images. The tool extracts standardised uptake values (SUV) from FDG-PET images for auto-segmentation of bone lesions and calculates volume of each lesion and associated mean and maximum SUV. The tool also allows automatic statistical validation of the auto-segmented bone lesions against the manual contours of a radiation oncologist. A retrospective review of FDG-PET/CT scans of more than 30 candidate NSCLC patients was performed and nine patients with one or more metastatic bone lesions were selected for the present study. The SUV threshold prediction model was designed by splitting the cohort of patients into a subset of 'development' and 'validation' cohorts. The development cohort yielded an optimum SUV threshold of 3.0 for automatic detection of bone metastases using FDG-PET/CT images. The validity of the derived optimum SUV threshold on the validation cohort demonstrated that auto-segmented and manually contoured bone lesions showed strong concordance for volume of bone lesion (r = 0.993) and number of detected lesions (r = 0.996). The tool has various applications in radiotherapy, including but not limited to studies determining optimum SUV threshold for accurate and standardised delineation of bone lesions and in scientific studies utilising large patient populations for instance for investigation of the number of metastatic lesions that can be treated safety with an ablative dose of radiotherapy without exceeding the normal tissue toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Nigam
- Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, 2522, Australia.
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW, 2170, Australia.
- Illawarra Cancer Care Centre, Wollongong Hospital, Wollongong, NSW, 2500, Australia.
| | - M Field
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW, 2170, Australia
- Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool, NSW, 2170, Australia
- South Western Sydney Clinical Campus, School of Clinical Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - G Harris
- Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, NSW, 2050, Australia
| | - M Barton
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW, 2170, Australia
- Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool, NSW, 2170, Australia
- South Western Sydney Clinical Campus, School of Clinical Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - M Carolan
- Illawarra Cancer Care Centre, Wollongong Hospital, Wollongong, NSW, 2500, Australia
| | - P Metcalfe
- Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, 2522, Australia
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW, 2170, Australia
| | - L Holloway
- Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, 2522, Australia
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW, 2170, Australia
- Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool, NSW, 2170, Australia
- South Western Sydney Clinical Campus, School of Clinical Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Institute of Medical Physics, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2505, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Rodriguez-Berriguete G, Ranzani M, Prevo R, Puliyadi R, Machado N, Bolland HR, Millar V, Ebner D, Boursier M, Cerutti A, Cicconi A, Galbiati A, Grande D, Grinkevich V, Majithiya JB, Piscitello D, Rajendra E, Stockley ML, Boulton SJ, Hammond EM, Heald RA, Smith GC, Robinson HM, Higgins GS. Small-Molecule Polθ Inhibitors Provide Safe and Effective Tumor Radiosensitization in Preclinical Models. Clin Cancer Res 2023; 29:1631-1642. [PMID: 36689546 PMCID: PMC10102842 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-22-2977] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2022] [Revised: 12/19/2022] [Accepted: 01/19/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE DNA polymerase theta (Polθ, encoded by the POLQ gene) is a DNA repair enzyme critical for microhomology mediated end joining (MMEJ). Polθ has limited expression in normal tissues but is frequently overexpressed in cancer cells and, therefore, represents an ideal target for tumor-specific radiosensitization. In this study we evaluate whether targeting Polθ with novel small-molecule inhibitors is a feasible strategy to improve the efficacy of radiotherapy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN We characterized the response to Polθ inhibition in combination with ionizing radiation in different cancer cell models in vitro and in vivo. RESULTS Here, we show that ART558 and ART899, two novel and specific allosteric inhibitors of the Polθ DNA polymerase domain, potently radiosensitize tumor cells, particularly when combined with fractionated radiation. Importantly, noncancerous cells were not radiosensitized by Polθ inhibition. Mechanistically, we show that the radiosensitization caused by Polθ inhibition is most effective in replicating cells and is due to impaired DNA damage repair. We also show that radiosensitization is still effective under hypoxia, suggesting that these inhibitors may help overcome hypoxia-induced radioresistance. In addition, we describe for the first time ART899 and characterize it as a potent and specific Polθ inhibitor with improved metabolic stability. In vivo, the combination of Polθ inhibition using ART899 with fractionated radiation is well tolerated and results in a significant reduction in tumor growth compared with radiation alone. CONCLUSIONS These results pave the way for future clinical trials of Polθ inhibitors in combination with radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Marco Ranzani
- Artios Pharma, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Remko Prevo
- Department of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Rathi Puliyadi
- Department of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Nicole Machado
- Department of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Hannah R. Bolland
- Department of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Val Millar
- Target Discovery Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Daniel Ebner
- Target Discovery Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Marie Boursier
- Artios Pharma, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Aurora Cerutti
- Artios Pharma, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Diego Grande
- Artios Pharma, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Vera Grinkevich
- Artios Pharma, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Eeson Rajendra
- Artios Pharma, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | | | - Simon J. Boulton
- Artios Pharma, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, United Kingdom
- The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ester M. Hammond
- Department of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Robert A. Heald
- Artios Pharma, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Geoff S. Higgins
- Department of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
|
14
|
Zhao J, Wu X, Xing Y, Li Y, Chen Z. Technical note: A method to evaluate the effect of scanning beam delivery error on 3D dose and its utilization on carbon ion radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Med Phys 2023; 50:1228-1236. [PMID: 36416094 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16109] [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: 12/28/2021] [Revised: 11/02/2022] [Accepted: 11/09/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To establish a method for evaluating the effect of scanning ion beam delivery error on three-dimensional (3D) dose reconstructed on patients' CT based on log file. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study used the MATLAB program to reconstruct the 3D dose on the patient's CT based on the log file (Doselog ) for treatment delivery accuracy check. In addition, differences between the parameters in the log file and the treatment plan, such as the spot position, spot size, and particle number, were analyzed, as well as their effects on the dose distribution. The accuracy of the dose reconstruction algorithm was verified by comparing dose from TPS (DoseTPS ) and the dose recalculated based on the treatment plan (Doserec ). Twenty treatment plans of ten prostate cancer patients received carbon ion therapy, and their corresponding 160 log files were selected for analysis and treatment delivery accuracy check. The regions with dose higher than 10% of the maximum dose were selected and 2 mm/2% criteria were used for global gamma analysis. Multiple linear regression was used to evaluate the relation between dose deviation and delivery errors. RESULTS For the algorithm accuracy verification, the mean relative dose difference is 1.02% ± 0.12%. For prostate cancer patients treated in our facility using carbon ion radiotherapy, the average passing rate of the gamma analysis between the Doselog and the DoseTPS was 95.3%. The dose deviation caused by the difference in the spot position and the number of particles was smaller than that caused by the spot size deviation. CONCLUSION This study established a 3D dose verification method based on log files to evaluate the accuracy of daily delivered treatment doses. In our facility, the daily delivered dose accuracy of carbon ion therapy for prostate cancer was mainly affected by the spot size deviation in terms of the machine delivery part.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jun Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.,Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Clinical Research Center for Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai, China
| | - Xianwei Wu
- Department of Medical Physics, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology (20dz2261000), Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Proton and Heavy Ion Radiation Therapy, Shanghai, China
| | - Ying Xing
- Department of Medical Physics, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology (20dz2261000), Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Proton and Heavy Ion Radiation Therapy, Shanghai, China
| | - Yongqiang Li
- Department of Medical Physics, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology (20dz2261000), Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Proton and Heavy Ion Radiation Therapy, Shanghai, China
| | - Zhi Chen
- Department of Medical Physics, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology (20dz2261000), Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Proton and Heavy Ion Radiation Therapy, Shanghai, China.,Department of Health Technology and Informatics, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Chen R, Xu Q, Dong B, Hou Z, Zhang Q, Zhang Y, Liu X, Chen Y, Chen M. Characteristics of Global Radiation Therapy Trials Between 2017 and 2022: A Cross-Sectional Study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023:S0360-3016(22)03698-7. [PMID: 36623606 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.12.044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2022] [Revised: 12/20/2022] [Accepted: 12/27/2022] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Runzhe Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Qingqing Xu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Baiqiang Dong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
| | - Zan Hou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Qun Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Yuan Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Xu Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
| | - Yuanyuan Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
| | - Ming Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Sarria GR, Martinez DA, Li B, Castillo RD, Salgado A, Pinillos L, Felix A, Bobadilla I, Ferraris G, Castilho M, Carmona J, Leon B, Aviles L, Ricagni L, Isa N, Flores C, Giordano FA, Zubizarreta EH, Polo A, Sarria GJ. Leveling Up the Access to Radiation Therapy in Latin America: Economic Analysis of Investment, Equity, and Inclusion Opportunities Up to 2030. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 116:448-458. [PMID: 36549348 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.12.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2022] [Revised: 11/30/2022] [Accepted: 12/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Latin America faces a shortage in radiation therapy (RT) units and qualified personnel for timely and high-quality treatment of patients with cancer. Investing in equitable and inclusive access to RT over the next decade would prevent thousands of deaths. Measuring the investment gap and payoff is necessary for stakeholder discussions and capacity planning efforts. METHODS AND MATERIALS Data were collected from the International Atomic Energy Agency's Directory of Radiotherapy Centers, industry stakeholders, and individual surveys sent to national scientific societies. Nationwide data on available devices and personnel were compiled. The 10 most common cancers in 2020 with RT indication and their respective incidence rates were considered for gap calculations. The gross 2-year financial return on investment was calculated based on an average monthly salary across Latin America. A 10-year cost projection was calculated according to the estimated population dynamics for the period until 2030. RESULTS Eleven countries were included in the study, accounting for 557,213,447 people in 2020 and 561 RT facilities. Approximately 1,065,684 new cancer cases were diagnosed, and a mean density of 768,469 (standard deviation ±392,778) people per available unit was found. By projecting the currently available treatment fractions to determine those required in 2030, it was found that 62.3% and 130.8% increases in external beam RT and brachytherapy units are needed from the baseline, respectively. An overall regional investment of approximately United States (US) $349,650,480 in 2020 would have covered the existing demand. An investment of US $872,889,949 will be necessary by 2030, with the expectation of a 2-year posttreatment gross return on investment of more than US $2.1 billion from patients treated in 2030 only. CONCLUSIONS Investment in RT services is lagging in Latin America in terms of the population's needs. An accelerated outlay could save additional lives during the next decade, create a self-sustaining system, and reduce region-wide inequities in cancer care access. Cash flow analyses are warranted to tailor precise national-level intervention strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gustavo R Sarria
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bonn, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany; Rayos Contra Cancer, Inc, Nashville, Tennessee.
| | - David A Martinez
- Rayos Contra Cancer, Inc, Nashville, Tennessee; Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncosalud-Auna, Lima, Peru
| | - Benjamin Li
- Rayos Contra Cancer, Inc, Nashville, Tennessee; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | | | - Apolo Salgado
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Instituto Nacional del Cancer, Santiago de Chile, Chile
| | - Luis Pinillos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncosalud-Auna, Lima, Peru
| | - Armando Felix
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital de Oncologia Centro Medico Nacional Siglo XXI - IMSS, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - Ivan Bobadilla
- Radiotherapy Unit, Luis Carlos Sarmiento Angulo Cancer Treatment and Research Center - CTIC, Bogota, Colombia
| | - Gustavo Ferraris
- Radiotherapy Unit, Centro de Radioterapia Dean Funes, Cordoba, Argentina
| | - Marcus Castilho
- Radiotherapy Center, Hospital Felicio Rocho, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
| | - Jorge Carmona
- Radiotherapy Unit, Oncoserv, Santiago de los Caballeros, Dominican Republic
| | - Barbara Leon
- Radiotherapy Technical Unit, Hospital Carlos Andrade Marín, Quito, Ecuador
| | | | - Leandro Ricagni
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital de Clinicas, Montevideo, Uruguay
| | - Nicolas Isa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Clinica IRAM, Santiago de Chile, Chile
| | - Claudio Flores
- Department of Epidemiology and Applied Research, Auna Ideas, Lima, Peru
| | - Frank A Giordano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bonn, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | | | - Alfredo Polo
- Division of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Gustavo J Sarria
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncosalud-Auna, Lima, Peru; Department of Radiotherapy, Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru
| |
Collapse
|
|
17
|
Bierbaum M, Rapport F, Arnolda G, Delaney GP, Liauw W, Olver I, Braithwaite J. Clinical practice guideline adherence in oncology: A qualitative study of insights from clinicians in Australia. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0279116. [PMID: 36525435 PMCID: PMC9757567 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279116] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2022] [Accepted: 11/30/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The burden of cancer is large in Australia, and rates of cancer Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) adherence is suboptimal across various cancers. METHODS The objective of this study is to characterise clinician-perceived barriers and facilitators to cancer CPG adherence in Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect data from 33 oncology-focused clinicians (surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists and haematologists). Clinicians were recruited in 2019 and 2020 through purposive and snowball sampling from 7 hospitals across Sydney, Australia, and interviewed either face-to-face in hospitals or by phone. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim, and qualitative thematic analysis of the interview data was undertaken. Human research ethics committee approval and governance approval was granted (2019/ETH11722, #52019568810127). RESULTS Five broad themes and subthemes of key barriers and facilitators to cancer treatment CPG adherence were identified: Theme 1: CPG content; Theme 2: Individual clinician and patient factors; Theme 3: Access to, awareness of and availability of CPGs; Theme 4: Organisational and cultural factors; and Theme 5: Development and implementation factors. The most frequently reported barriers to adherence were CPGs not catering for patient complexities, being slow to be updated, patient treatment preferences, geographical challenges for patients who travel large distances to access cancer services and limited funding of CPG recommended drugs. The most frequently reported facilitators to adherence were easy accessibility, peer review, multidisciplinary engagement or MDT attendance, and transparent CPG development by trusted, multidisciplinary experts. CPGs provide a reassuring framework for clinicians to check their treatment plans against. Clinicians want cancer CPGs to be frequently updated utilising a wiki-like process, and easily accessible online via a comprehensive database, coordinated by a well-trusted development body. CONCLUSION Future implementation strategies of cancer CPGs in Australia should be tailored to consider these context-specific barriers and facilitators, taking into account both the content of CPGs and the communication of that content. The establishment of a centralised, comprehensive, online database, with living wiki-style cancer CPGs, coordinated by a well-funded development body, along with incorporation of recommendations into point-of-care decision support would potentially address many of the issues identified.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mia Bierbaum
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
- * E-mail:
| | - Frances Rapport
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
| | - Gaston Arnolda
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
- Centre for Research Excellence in Implementation Science in Oncology, Sydney, Australia
| | - Geoff P. Delaney
- Centre for Research Excellence in Implementation Science in Oncology, Sydney, Australia
- SWSLHD Cancer Services, Liverpool, Australia
| | - Winston Liauw
- Centre for Research Excellence in Implementation Science in Oncology, Sydney, Australia
- SESLHD Cancer Service, Kogarah, Australia
| | - Ian Olver
- School of Psychology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Jeffrey Braithwaite
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
- Centre for Research Excellence in Implementation Science in Oncology, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
18
|
Wilson BE, Oar A, Rodin D, Bray F, Ferlay J, Polo A, Borras JM, Bourque JM, Malik M, Ynoe de Moraes F, Lievens Y, Stevens LM, Zubizarreta E, Yap ML. Radiotherapy prioritization in 143 national cancer control plans: Correlation with radiotherapy machine availability, geography and income level. Radiother Oncol 2022; 176:83-91. [PMID: 36113775 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.09.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2022] [Revised: 08/24/2022] [Accepted: 09/04/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In 2015, the Global Task Force on Radiotherapy for Cancer Control (GTFRCC) called for 80% of National Cancer Control Plans (NCCP) to include radiotherapy by 2020. As part of the ongoing ESTRO Global Impact of Radiotherapy in Oncology (GIRO) project, we assessed whether inclusion of radiotherapy in NCCPs correlates with radiotherapy machine availability, national income, and geographic region. METHODS A previously validated checklist was used to determine whether radiotherapy was included in each country's NCCP. We applied the CCORE optimal radiotherapy utilisation model to the GLOBOCAN 2020 data to estimate the demand for radiotherapy and compared this to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Directory of Radiotherapy Centres (DIRAC) supply data, stratifying by income level and world region. World regions were defined according to the IAEA. FINDINGS Complete data (including GLOBOCAN 2020, DIRAC and NCCP) was available for 143 countries. Over half (55%, n = 79) included a radiotherapy-specific checklist item within the plan. Countries which included radiotherapy services planning in their NCCP had a higher median number of machines (1.68 vs 0.75 machines/1000 patients needing radiotherapy, p < 0.001). There was significant regional and income-level heterogeneity in the inclusion of radiotherapy-related items in NCCPs. Low-income and Asia-Pacific countries were least likely to include radiation oncology services planning in their NCCP (p = 0.06 and p = 0.003, respectively). Few countries in the Asia-Pacific (18.6%) had a plan to develop or maintain radiation services, compared to 57% of countries in Europe. INTERPRETATION Only 55% of current NCCPs included any information regarding radiotherapy, below the GTFRCC's target of 80%. Prioritisation of radiotherapy in NCCPs was correlated with radiotherapy machine availability. There was regional and income-level heterogeneity regarding the inclusion of specific radiotherapy checklist items in the NCCPs. Ongoing efforts are needed to promote the inclusion of radiotherapy in future iterations of NCCPs in order to improve global access to radiation treatment. FUNDING No direct funding was used in this research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brooke E Wilson
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes, Research and Evaluation, South-West Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Liverpool, NSW, Australia; Department of Oncology, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
| | - Andrew Oar
- Icon Cancer Centre, Gold Coast University Hospital, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia
| | - Danielle Rodin
- Global Cancer Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Freddie Bray
- Cancer Surveillance Branch, International Agency for Cancer Research, Lyon, France
| | - Jacques Ferlay
- Cancer Surveillance Branch, International Agency for Cancer Research, Lyon, France
| | - Alfredo Polo
- Applied Radiation Biology and Radiotherapy Section, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Josep M Borras
- Department of Clinical Sciences and IDIBELL, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Jean-Marc Bourque
- Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Radiation Oncology, Montreal University Hospital Centre, Montreal, Canada
| | - Monica Malik
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, India
| | | | - Yolande Lievens
- Radiation Oncology Department, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Lisa M Stevens
- Programme of Action for Cancer Therapy, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Eduardo Zubizarreta
- Applied Radiation Biology and Radiotherapy Section, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Mei Ling Yap
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes, Research and Evaluation, South-West Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Liverpool, NSW, Australia; Liverpool Cancer Centre and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre, Western Sydney University, Campbelltown, NSW, Australia; Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia; The George Institute for Global Health, UNSW Sydney, Newtown, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
19
|
van der Weijst L, Azria D, Berkovic P, Boisselier P, Briers E, Bultijnck R, Chang-Claude J, Choudhury A, Defraene G, Demontois S, Elliott RM, Ennis D, Faivre-Finn C, Franceschini M, Giandini T, Giraldo A, Gutiérrez-Enríquez S, Herskind C, Higginson DS, Kerns SL, Johnson K, Lambrecht M, Lang P, Ramos M, Rancati T, Rimner A, Rosenstein BS, De Ruysscher D, Salem A, Sangalli C, Seibold P, Sosa Fajardo P, Sperk E, Stobart H, Summersgill H, Surmont V, Symonds P, Taboada-Valladares B, Talbot CJ, Vega A, Veldeman L, Veldwijk MR, Ward T, Webb A, West CML, Lievens Y. The correlation between pre-treatment symptoms, acute and late toxicity and patient-reported health-related quality of life in non-small cell lung cancer patients: Results of the REQUITE study. Radiother Oncol 2022; 176:127-137. [PMID: 36195214 PMCID: PMC10404651 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.09.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2022] [Revised: 09/16/2022] [Accepted: 09/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE To investigate the association between clinician-scored toxicities and patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL), in early-stage (ES-) and locally-advanced (LA-) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving loco-regional radiotherapy, included in the international real-world REQUITE study. MATERIALS AND METHODS Clinicians scored eleven radiotherapy-related toxicities (and baseline symptoms) with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4. HRQoL was assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer core HRQoL questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30). Statistical analyses used the mixed-model method; statistical significance was set at p = 0.01. Analyses were performed for baseline and subsequent time points up to 2 years after radiotherapy and per treatment modality, radiotherapy technique and disease stage. RESULTS Data of 435 patients were analysed. Pre-treatment, overall symptoms, dyspnea, chest wall pain, dysphagia and cough impacted overall HRQoL and specific domains. At subsequent time points, cough and dysphagia were overtaken by pericarditis in affecting HRQoL. Toxicities during concurrent chemo-radiotherapy and 3-dimensional radiotherapy had the most impact on HRQoL. Conversely, toxicities in sequential chemo-radiotherapy and SBRT had limited impact on patients' HRQoL. Stage impacts the correlations: LA-NSCLC patients are more adversely affected by toxicity than ES-NSCLC patients, mimicking the results of radiotherapy technique and treatment modality. CONCLUSION Pre-treatment symptoms and acute/late toxicities variously impact HRQoL of ES- and LA-NSCLC patients undergoing different treatment approaches and radiotherapy techniques. Throughout the disease, dyspnea seems crucial in this association, highlighting the additional effect of co-existing comorbidities. Our data call for optimized radiotherapy limiting toxicities that may affect patients' HRQoL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lotte van der Weijst
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
| | - David Azria
- Federation Universitaire d'oncologie radiothérapie d'Occitanie Méditerranée, Univ Montpellier, IRCM Inserm U1194, ICM, Montpellier, France
| | - Patrick Berkovic
- Department of Radiotherapy-oncology, Leuvens Kanker Instituut, UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Pierre Boisselier
- Federation Universitaire d'oncologie radiothérapie d'Occitanie Méditerranée, Univ Montpellier, IRCM Inserm U1194, ICM, Montpellier, France
| | | | - Renée Bultijnck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Jenny Chang-Claude
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; University Cancer Center Hamburg, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany
| | - Ananya Choudhury
- Translational Radiobiology Group, Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Christie Hospital, United Kingdom
| | - Gilles Defraene
- Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Department of Oncology, KULEUVEN, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Sylvian Demontois
- Federation Universitaire d'oncologie radiothérapie d'Occitanie Méditerranée, Univ Montpellier, IRCM Inserm U1194, ICM, Montpellier, France
| | - Rebecca M Elliott
- Translational Radiobiology Group, Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Christie Hospital, United Kingdom
| | - Dawn Ennis
- Royal Derby Hospital, Derby DE22 3NE, United Kingdom
| | - Corinne Faivre-Finn
- University of Manchester, UK, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom
| | - Marzia Franceschini
- Unit of Radiation Oncology 2, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Tommaso Giandini
- Unit of Medical Physics, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Alexandra Giraldo
- Radiation Oncology Department, Vall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari, Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Sara Gutiérrez-Enríquez
- Hereditary Cancer Genetics Group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Carsten Herskind
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Daniel S Higginson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Sarah L Kerns
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York, NY, United States
| | - Kerstie Johnson
- Leicester Cancer Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
| | - Maarten Lambrecht
- Department of Radiotherapy-oncology, Leuvens Kanker Instituut, UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Philippe Lang
- Federation Universitaire d'oncologie radiothérapie d'Occitanie, ICG CHU Caremeau, Nîmes, France
| | - Mónica Ramos
- Radiation Oncology Department, Vall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari, Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Tiziana Rancati
- Prostate Cancer Program, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Andreas Rimner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Barry S Rosenstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Department of Genetics and Genomic Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
| | - Dirk De Ruysscher
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), Maastricht University Medical Center, GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Ahmed Salem
- University of Manchester, UK, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom; Department of Basic Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Hashemite University, Zarqa, Jordan
| | - Claudia Sangalli
- Unit of Radiation Oncology 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Petra Seibold
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Paloma Sosa Fajardo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago, SERGAS.Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Elena Sperk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | | | - Holly Summersgill
- Translational Radiobiology Group, Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Christie Hospital, United Kingdom
| | - Veerle Surmont
- Department of Respiratory Medicine, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Paul Symonds
- Leicester Cancer Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
| | - Begoña Taboada-Valladares
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago, SERGAS.Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Christopher J Talbot
- Leicester Cancer Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
| | - Ana Vega
- Fundación Pública Galega de Medicina Xenómica, Grupo de Medicina Xenómica (USC), Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Biomedical Network on Rare Diseases (CIBERER), Spain
| | - Liv Veldeman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Marlon R Veldwijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Tim Ward
- Trustee Pelvic Radiation Disease Association, NCRI CTRad Consumer, United Kingdom
| | - Adam Webb
- Department of Genetics and Genome Biology, University of Leicester, United Kingdom
| | - Catharine M L West
- Translational Radiobiology Group, Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Christie Hospital, United Kingdom
| | - Yolande Lievens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
|
20
|
Hande V, Chan J, Polo A. Value of Geographical Information Systems in Analyzing Geographic Accessibility to Inform Radiotherapy Planning: A Systematic Review. JCO Glob Oncol 2022; 8:e2200106. [PMID: 36122318 PMCID: PMC9812498 DOI: 10.1200/go.22.00106] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Vulnerable populations face geographical barriers in accessing radiotherapy (RT) facilities, resulting in heterogeneity of care received and cancer burden faced. We aimed to explore the current use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) in access to RT and use these findings to create sustainable solutions against barriers for access in low- and middle-income countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic review using the PRISMA search strategy was done for studies using GIS to explore outcomes among patients with cancer. Included studies were reviewed and classified into three umbrella categories of how GIS has been used in studying access to RT. RESULTS Forty articles were included in the final review. Thirty-eight articles were set in high-income countries and two in upper-middle-income countries. Included studies were published from 2000 to 2020, and were comprised of patients with all-cancers combined, breast, colon, skin, lung, prostate, ovarian, and rectal carcinoma patients. Studies were categorized under three groups on the basis of how they used GIS in their analyses: to describe geographic access to RT, to associate geographic access to RT with outcomes, and for RT planning. Most studies fell under multiple categories. CONCLUSION Although this field is relative nascent, there is a wide array of functions possible through GIS for RT planning, including identifying high-risk populations, improving access in high-need areas, and providing valuable information for future resource allocation. GIS should be incorporated in future studies, especially set in low- and middle-income countries, which evaluate access to RT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Varsha Hande
- Applied Radiation Biology and Radiotherapy Section, Division of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Jessica Chan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada,Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Alfredo Polo
- Applied Radiation Biology and Radiotherapy Section, Division of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria,Alfredo Polo, MD, PhD, Applied Radiation Biology and Radiotherapy Section, Division of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna International Centre, PO Box 100, 1400 Vienna, Austria; e-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
|
21
|
Mackenzie P, Vajdic C, Delaney G, Comans T, Agar M, Gabriel G, Barton M. Development of an age- and comorbidity adjusted- optimal radiotherapy utilisation rate for women with breast cancer. J Geriatr Oncol 2022; 13:844-849. [PMID: 35514015 DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2022.04.003] [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: 12/16/2021] [Revised: 03/07/2022] [Accepted: 04/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Optimal radiotherapy utilisation (RTU) modelling estimates the proportion of people with cancer who would benefit from radiotherapy. Older adults with cancer may have comorbidities that can impact physiological reserve and affect radiotherapy recommendations. These have not been considered in previous models. We aimed to develop an age- and comorbidity-adjusted optimal RTU model for breast cancer. METHODS New South Wales (NSW) Cancer Registry data (2010-2014) linked to radiotherapy data (2010-2015) and hospitalisation data (2008-2015) was used to determine the number of women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in four pre-specified age groups. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), Cancer-Specific C3 'all sites' index and the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) were derived for each woman from diagnostic codes in hospital records. Women were deemed unfit, and thus unsuitable candidates for radiotherapy, if the comorbidity indices were as follows: CCI ≥2; C3 score ≥ 3; and HFRS ≥5. The proportions of women suitable for radiotherapy in each age group were then incorporated into a breast cancer decision tree model. The actual RTU was also calculated using the linked datasets. RESULTS 23,601 women were diagnosed with breast cancer in NSW from 2010 to 2014 and 2526 were aged 80+ years. The overall comorbidity adjusted- RTU for women of all ages was 85·9% (CCI), 83·7% (C3) and 81·9% (HFRS). The optimal comorbidity adjusted- RTU for women aged 80+ was 76·1% (CCI), 70·1% (C3) and 61·8% (HFRS). The actual RTU for women aged 80+ years was 24.7%. CONCLUSION The vast majority of older Australian women with breast cancer are fit for radiotherapy. The overall optimal RTU is only slightly reduced when adjusted for age and comorbidities and was similar using each of the three indices examined. Our data suggest radiotherapy is markedly underutilised for older women with breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Penny Mackenzie
- Icon Cancer Centre, St Andrew's Hospital, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia; The University of New South Wales, Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, Sydney, Australia.
| | - Claire Vajdic
- Cancer Epidemiology Research Unit, Centre for BIG Data Research in Health, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Geoff Delaney
- The University of New South Wales, Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, Sydney, Australia; Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - Tracy Comans
- Centre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Australia
| | - Meera Agar
- Centre for Improving Palliative, Aged and Chronic Care through Clinical Research and Translation, The University of Technology, Sydney, Australia; Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - Gabriel Gabriel
- The University of New South Wales, Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, Sydney, Australia
| | - Michael Barton
- The University of New South Wales, Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, Sydney, Australia; Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
22
|
Dodkins J, Hopman WM, Wells JC, Lievens Y, Malik RA, Pramesh CS, Gyawali B, Hammad N, Mukherji D, Sullivan R, Parkes J, Booth CM, Aggarwal A. Is Clinical Research Serving the Needs of the Global Cancer Burden? An Analysis of Contemporary Global Radiation Therapy Randomized Controlled Trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 113:500-508. [PMID: 35151802 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.01.053] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2021] [Revised: 01/18/2022] [Accepted: 01/28/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the cornerstone of delivering sustained improvements in cancer outcome. To inform radiation therapy research policy and prioritization, we analyze the radiation therapy RCT landscape including comparison with trials of systemic therapies over the same period, with a specific focus on funding and disparities across income settings. METHODS AND MATERIALS This retrospective cohort study identified all phase 3 RCTs evaluating anticancer therapies published from 2014 to 2017. RCTs were classified according to anticancer modality and country of origin. Descriptive statistics were used to compare key characteristics of radiation therapy RCT studies according to study design characteristics, tumor types evaluated, types of intervention appraised, treatment intent and main funding sources. RESULTS The study cohort included 694 RCTs of which 64 were radiation therapy RCTs (9%) compared with 601 systemic therapy RCTs (87%). Among all radiation therapy RCTs, 47% of them focused on 2 areas of evaluation: (1) combining radiation therapy with systemic agents (25%) and (2) changes in dose fractionation (22%). The most common cancers studied were head and neck (22%), lung (22%), and breast (14%), with cervical cancer trials representing only 3% of the cohort. Among the radiation therapy RCTs, 33% of them met their primary endpoint, and 62% assessed interventions in the curative setting compared with 31% in systemic therapy RCTs. For their country locations, 77% of radiation therapy RCTs took place in high-income countries, 13% in low-and-middle-income countries, and 11% in both high-income and low-and-middle-income countries. For funding, 17% of radiation therapy RCTs received funding from industry compared with 79% of systemic therapy RCTs. CONCLUSIONS This study highlights the need for greater investment in radiation therapy RCTs and the need to look at the disparities in conducting RCTs globally. The study emphases the urgent need for more capacity building for cancer clinical trials in low-and-middle-income countries and more sustainable funding sources.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanna Dodkins
- Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
| | | | | | - Yolande Lievens
- Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - R A Malik
- University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| | - C S Pramesh
- Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Parel, Mumbai, India
| | | | | | | | | | - Jeannette Parkes
- University of Cape Town and Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa
| | | | - Ajay Aggarwal
- Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; King's College, London, United Kingdom; London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
|
23
|
Lotte VDW, Barrera E. Miguel A, David A, Patrick B, Pierre B, Erik B, Renée B, Patricia CC, Jenny CC, Ananya C, Gilles D, Sylvian D, Dunning Alison M, Elliott Rebecca M, Dawn E, Corinne FF, Marzia F, Sara GE, Carsten H, Higginson Daniel S, Kerns Sarah L, Kerstie J, Meritxell M, Maarten L, Mónica R, Tiziana R, Andreas R, Rosenstein Barry S, Ruysscher Dirk D, Ahmed S, Claudia S, Petra S, Paloma SF, Elena S, Hilary S, Holly S, Veerle S, Paul S, Begoña TL, Talbot Christopher J, Riccardo V, Ana V, Liv V, Veldwijk Marlon R, Tim W, Adam W, West Catharine M, Yolande L. Overview of health-related quality of life and toxicity of non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving curative-intent radiotherapy in a real-life setting (the REQUITE study). Lung Cancer 2022; 166:228-241. [PMID: 35334417 PMCID: PMC9698940 DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2022.03.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2021] [Revised: 02/08/2022] [Accepted: 03/08/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Radiotherapy-induced toxicity may negatively impact health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This report investigates the impact of curative-intent radiotherapy on HRQoL and toxicity in early stage and locally-advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with radiotherapy or chemo-radiotherapy enrolled in the observational prospective REQUITE study. MATERIALS AND METHODS HRQoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire up to 2 years post radiotherapy. Eleven toxicities were scored by clinicians using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4. Toxicity scores were calculated by subtracting baseline values. Mixed model analyses were applied to determine statistical significance (p ≤ 0.01). Meaningful clinical important differences (MCID) were determined for changes in HRQoL. Analysis was performed on the overall data, different radiotherapy techniques, multimodality treatments and disease stages. RESULTS Data of 510 patients were analysed. There was no significant change in HRQoL or its domains, except for deterioration in cognitive functioning (p = 0.01). Radiotherapy technique had no significant impact on HRQoL. The addition of chemotherapy was significantly associated with HRQoL over time (p <.001). Overall toxicity did not significantly change over time. Acute toxicities of radiation-dermatitis (p =.003), dysphagia (p =.002) and esophagitis (p <.001) peaked at 3 months and decreased thereafter. Pneumonitis initially deteriorated but improved significantly after 12 months (p =.011). A proportion of patients experienced meaningful clinically important improvements and deteriorations in overall HRQoL and its domains. In some patients, pre-treatment symptoms improved gradually. CONCLUSIONS While overall HRQoL and toxicity did not change over time, some patients improved, whereas others experienced acute radiotherapy-induced toxicities and deteriorated HRQoL, especially physical and cognitive functioning. Patient characteristics, more so than radiotherapy technique and treatment modality, impact post-radiotherapy toxicity and HRQoL outcomes. This stresses the importance of considering the potential impact of radiotherapy on individuals' HRQoL, symptoms and toxicity in treatment decision-making.
Collapse
|
|
24
|
Viani GA, Gouveia AG, Bratti VF, Pavoni JF, Sullivan R, Hopman WM, Booth CM, Aggarwal A, Hanna TP, Moraes FY. Prioritising locations for radiotherapy equipment in Brazil: a cross-sectional, population-based study and development of a LINAC shortage index. Lancet Oncol 2022; 23:531-539. [DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(22)00123-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2021] [Revised: 02/17/2022] [Accepted: 02/18/2022] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
|
|
25
|
Pham TT, Whelan B, Oborn BM, Delaney GP, Vinod S, Brighi C, Barton M, Keall P. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) guided proton therapy: A review of the clinical challenges, potential benefits and pathway to implementation. Radiother Oncol 2022; 170:37-47. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.02.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2021] [Revised: 02/09/2022] [Accepted: 02/25/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
|
26
|
Cihoric N, Badra EV, Stenger-Weisser A, Aebersold DM, Pavic M. Toward Data-Driven Radiation Oncology Using Standardized Terminology as a Starting Point: Cross-sectional Study. JMIR Form Res 2022; 6:e27550. [PMID: 35044315 PMCID: PMC8811690 DOI: 10.2196/27550] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2021] [Revised: 09/05/2021] [Accepted: 09/18/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The inability to seamlessly exchange information across radiation therapy ecosystems is a limiting factor in the pursuit of data-driven clinical practice. The implementation of semantic interoperability is a prerequisite for achieving the full capacity of the latest developments in personalized and precision medicine, such as mathematical modeling, advanced algorithmic information processing, and artificial intelligence approaches. Objective This study aims to evaluate the state of terminology resources (TRs) dedicated to radiation oncology as a prerequisite for an oncology semantic ecosystem. The goal of this cross-sectional analysis is to quantify the state of the art in radiation therapy specific terminology. Methods The Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) was searched for the following terms: radio oncology, radiation oncology, radiation therapy, and radiotherapy. We extracted 6509 unique concepts for further analysis. We conducted a quantitative analysis of available source vocabularies (SVs) and analyzed all UMLS SVs according to the route source, number, author, location of authors, license type, the lexical density of TR, and semantic types. Descriptive data are presented as numbers and percentages. Results The concepts were distributed across 35 SVs. The median number of unique concepts per SV was 5 (range 1-5479), with 14% (5/35) of SVs containing 94.59% (6157/6509) of the concepts. The SVs were created by 29 authors, predominantly legal entities registered in the United States (25/35, 71%), followed by international organizations (6/35, 17%), legal entities registered in Australia (2/35, 6%), and the Netherlands and the United Kingdom with 3% (1/35) of authors each. Of the total 35 SVs, 16 (46%) did not have any restrictions on use, whereas for 19 (54%) of SVs, some level of restriction was required. Overall, 57% (20/35) of SVs were updated within the last 5 years. All concepts found within radiation therapy SVs were labeled with one of the 29 semantic types represented within UMLS. After removing the stop words, the total number of words for all SVs together was 56,219, with a median of 25 unique words per SV (range 3-50,682). The total number of unique words in all SVs was 1048, with a median of 19 unique words per vocabulary (range 3-406). The lexical density for all concepts within all SVs was 0 (0.02 rounded to 2 decimals). Median lexical density per unique SV was 0.7 (range 0.0-1.0). There were no dedicated radiation therapy SVs. Conclusions We did not identify any dedicated TRs for radiation oncology. Current terminologies are not sufficient to cover the need of modern radiation oncology practice and research. To achieve a sufficient level of interoperability, of the creation of a new, standardized, universally accepted TR dedicated to modern radiation therapy is required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikola Cihoric
- Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Eugenia Vlaskou Badra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Anna Stenger-Weisser
- Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.,Luzerner Kantonsspital, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - Daniel M Aebersold
- Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Matea Pavic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
|
27
|
Provincial variations in radiotherapy utilization as a measure of access: a pan-Canadian study. Radiother Oncol 2021; 167:122-126. [PMID: 34942281 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.12.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2021] [Revised: 12/08/2021] [Accepted: 12/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Access to radiotherapy (RT) is a key component of a cancer control strategy. However, radiotherapy utilization (RTU) rates fall short of desired benchmarks in certain Canadian provinces. We aimed to describe provincial variations in RTU across Canada. MATERIALS AND METHODS We calculated radiotherapy utilization ratios (RTUR) for each Canadian province from 2016 (RT case counts divided by incidence counts), by cancer type (all cancers, lung, breast, rectal, prostate) and treatment intent (curative, palliative) where data were available. Data were extracted from each provincial RT data repository, cancer registry and/or RT department. We compared RTURs descriptively across provinces and to Ontario benchmarks, and calculated an estimated national RTUR. In provinces with capacity for data linkage, RTURs were compared to a linked (patient-specific) method of calculating utilization, by linking each incident case to whether RT was received within 1 year of diagnosis (RTU-1yr). RESULTS Excluding three provinces that included re-treatments, all-cancer RTURs ranged from 0.31 in Manitoba to 0.40 in Nova Scotia. The national all-cancer RTUR was 0.35, which was comparable to Ontario benchmarks (0.34). Larger variations were seen by cancer type, with an absolute difference in RTURs of 28% for lung cancers, 27% for breast cancers, 21% for rectal cancers, and 18% for prostate cancers. RTURs for nearly all provinces were below established Ontario benchmarks for each cancer type, except prostate cancer. RTURs over-estimated RTU-1yr by at most 5%, except for prostate cancers where they over-estimated RTU-1yr by up to 15%. CONCLUSIONS RTU varies by province in Canada, and most notably by cancer subsite. More granular data at the regional level and by healthcare facility is required to further tailor strategies aimed at improving RT access. RTURs also serve as a reasonable surrogate for linked RTU, and both methods can contribute meaningfully to measure RTU depending on the context and data availability.
Collapse
|
|
28
|
Brain Linac-Based Radiation Therapy: "Test Drive" of New Immobilization Solution and Surface Guided Radiation Therapy. J Pers Med 2021; 11:jpm11121351. [PMID: 34945823 PMCID: PMC8709255 DOI: 10.3390/jpm11121351] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2021] [Revised: 12/03/2021] [Accepted: 12/07/2021] [Indexed: 01/17/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM To test inter-fraction reproducibility, intrafraction stability, technician aspects, and patient/physician's comfort of a dedicated immobilization solution for Brain Linac-based radiation therapy (RT). METHODS A pitch-enabled head positioner with an open-face mask were used and, to evaluate inter- and intrafraction variations, 1-3 Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) were performed. Surface Guided Radiation Therapy (SGRT) was used to evaluate intrafraction variations at 3 time points: initial (i), final (f), and monitoring (m) (before, end, and during RT). Data regarding technician mask aspect were collected. RESULTS Between October 2019 and April 2020, 69 patients with brain disease were treated: 45 received stereotactic RT and 24 conventional RT; 556 treatment sessions and 863 CBCT's were performed. Inter-fraction CBCT mean values were longitudinally 0.9 mm, laterally 0.8 mm, vertically 1.1 mm, roll 0.58°, pitch 0.59°, yaw 0.67°. Intrafraction CBCT mean values were longitudinally 0.3 mm, laterally 0.3 mm, vertically 0.4 mm, roll 0.22°, pitch 0.33°, yaw 0.24°. SGRT intrafraction mean values were: i_, m_, f_ longitudinally 0.09 mm, 0.45 mm, 0.31 mm; i_, m_, f_ laterally 0.07 mm, 0.36 mm, 0.20 mm; i_, m_, f_ vertically 0.06 mm, 0.31 mm, 0.22 mm; i_, m_, f_ roll 0.025°, 0.208°, 0.118°; i_, m_, f_ pitch 0.036°, 0.307°, 0.194°; i_, m_, f_ yaw 0.039°, 0.274°, 0.189°. CONCLUSIONS This immobilization solution is reproducible and stable. Combining CBCT and SGRT data confirm that 1 mm CTV-PTV margin for Linac-based SRT was adequate. Using open-face mask and SGRT, for conventional RT, radiological imaging could be omitted.
Collapse
|
|
29
|
Borras JM, Corral J, Aggarwal A, Audisio R, Espinas JA, Figueras J, Naredi P, Panteli D, Pourel N, Prades J, Lievens Y. Innovation, value and reimbursement in radiation and complex surgical oncology: Time to rethink. Eur J Surg Oncol 2021; 48:967-977. [PMID: 34479744 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2021.08.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2021] [Accepted: 08/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Complex surgery and radiotherapy are the central pillars of loco-regional oncology treatment. This paper describes the reimbursement schemes used in radiation and complex surgical oncology, reports on literature and policy reviews. MATERIAL AND METHODS A systematic review of the literature of the reimbursement models has been carried out separately for radiotherapy and complex cancer surgery based on PRISMA guidelines. Using searches of PubMed and grey literature, we identified articles from scientific journals and reports published since 2000 on provider payment or reimbursement systems currently used in radiation oncology and complex cancer surgery, also including policy models. RESULTS Most European health systems reimburse radiotherapy using a budget-based, fee-for-service or fraction-based system; while few reimburse services according to an episode-based model. Also, the reimbursement models for cancer surgery are mostly restricted to differences embedded in the DRG system and adjustments applied to the fees, based on the complexity of each surgical procedure. There is an enormous variability in reimbursement across countries, resulting in different incentives and different amounts paid for the same therapeutic strategy. CONCLUSION A reimbursement policy, based on the episode of care as the basic payment unit, is advocated for. Innovation should be tackled in a two-tier approach: one defining the common criteria for reimbursement of proven evidence-based interventions; another for financing emerging innovation with uncertain definitive value. Relevant clinical and economic data, also collected real-life, should support reimbursement systems that mirror the actual cost of evidence-based practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Josep M Borras
- University of Barcelona, Spain; Catalonian Cancer Plan, Department of Health, Spain; Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Spain.
| | - Julieta Corral
- Catalonian Cancer Plan, Department of Health, Spain; Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ajay Aggarwal
- Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospital NHS Trust, United Kingdom
| | - Riccardo Audisio
- Department of Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Josep Alfons Espinas
- Catalonian Cancer Plan, Department of Health, Spain; Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Josep Figueras
- European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, Belgium
| | - Peter Naredi
- Department of Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Dimitra Panteli
- Department of Health Care Management, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Joan Prades
- Catalonian Cancer Plan, Department of Health, Spain; Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Yolande Lievens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital & Ghent University, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
|
30
|
Innovation, value and reimbursement in radiation and complex surgical oncology: time to rethink. Radiother Oncol 2021; 169:114-123. [PMID: 34461186 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2021] [Revised: 08/04/2021] [Accepted: 08/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Complex surgery and radiotherapy are the central pillars of loco-regional oncology treatment. This paper describes the reimbursement schemes used in radiation and complex surgical oncology, reports on literature and policy reviews. MATERIAL AND METHODS A systematic review of the literature of the reimbursement models has been carried out separately for radiotherapy and complex cancer surgery based on PRISMA guidelines. Using searches of PubMed and grey literature, we identified articles from scientific journals and reports published since 2000 on provider payment or reimbursement systems currently used in radiation oncology and complex cancer surgery, also including policy models. RESULTS Most European health systems reimburse radiotherapy using a budget-based, fee-for-service or fraction-based system; while few reimburse services according to an episode-based model. Also, the reimbursement models for cancer surgery are mostly restricted to differences embedded in the DRG system and adjustments applied to the fees, based on the complexity of each surgical procedure. There is an enormous variability in reimbursement across countries, resulting in different incentives and different amounts paid for the same therapeutic strategy. CONCLUSION A reimbursement policy, based on the episode of care as the basic payment unit, is advocated for. Innovation should be tackled in a two-tier approach: one defining the common criteria for reimbursement of proven evidence-based interventions; another for financing emerging innovation with uncertain definitive value. Relevant clinical and economic data, also collected real-life, should support reimbursement systems that mirror the actual cost of evidence-based practice.
Collapse
|
|
31
|
Williams GR, Manjunath SH, Butala AA, Jones JA. Palliative Radiotherapy for Advanced Cancers: Indications and Outcomes. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2021; 30:563-580. [PMID: 34053669 DOI: 10.1016/j.soc.2021.02.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) is well-tolerated, effective treatment for pain, bleeding, obstruction, and other symptoms/complications of advanced cancer. It is an important component of multidisciplinary management. It should be considered even for patients with poor prognosis, because it can offer rapid symptomatic relief. Furthermore, expanding indications for treatment of noncurable disease have shown that PRT can extend survival for select patients. For those with good prognosis, advanced PRT techniques may improve the therapeutic ratio, maximizing tumor control while limiting toxicity. PRT referral should be considered for any patient with symptomatic or asymptomatic sites of disease where local control is desired.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Graeme R Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, 2nd Floor West, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Leonard Davis Institute of Healthcare Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| | - Shwetha H Manjunath
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, 2nd Floor West, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | - Anish A Butala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, 2nd Floor West, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | - Joshua A Jones
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, 2nd Floor West, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
32
|
Kassick M, Abdel-Wahab M. Efforts to improve radiation oncology collaboration worldwide. Lancet Oncol 2021; 22:751-753. [PMID: 34087121 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(21)00215-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2021] [Accepted: 04/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Megan Kassick
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna 1400, Austria; Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - May Abdel-Wahab
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna 1400, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|
|
33
|
Lee J, Kim WC, Yoon WS, Rim CH. Implications of Radiotherapy Utilization in Korea from 2010 to 2019. J Korean Med Sci 2021; 36:e117. [PMID: 33975394 PMCID: PMC8111041 DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2021] [Accepted: 03/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study was to assess the rate of radiotherapy (RT) utilization according to the modality in South Korea to identify the implications of contemporary RT patterns. METHODS We collected information from claims and reimbursement records of the National Health Insurance Service from 2010 to 2019. We classified the location of each institution as capital (Seoul, Incheon, and Gyeonggi-do) and non-capital areas. RESULTS The rate of RT utilization in total cancer patients nationwide was 24.5% in 2010, which consistently has increased to 36.1% in 2019 (annual increase estimate [AIE], 4.5%). There was an abrupt increase in patients receiving intensity-modulated RT (IMRT), with an AIE of 33.5%, and a steady decline in patients receiving three-dimensional conformal RT (3DCRT), with an AIE of -7.1%. The commonest RT modality was IMRT (44.5%), followed by 3DCRT and stereotactic RT (SRT) (37.2% and 13.5%) in 2019. An increasing trend of advanced RT (such as IMRT and SRT) utilization was observed regardless of the region, although the AIE in the capital areas was slightly higher than that in non-capital areas. CONCLUSION The utilization of overall RT application and especially of advanced modalities remarkably increased from 2010 to 2019. We also found gaps in their AIEs between capital and non-capital areas. We should ensure that advanced RT is accessible to all cancer patients across South Korea.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeongshim Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Woo Chul Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea
| | - Won Sup Yoon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea
| | - Chai Hong Rim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
|
34
|
Slevin F, Hanna C, Appelt A, Muirhead R. Launch of the National Rectal Cancer Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy Guidance. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2021; 33:209-213. [PMID: 33341331 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2020.11.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2020] [Accepted: 11/17/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- F Slevin
- University of Leeds, Leeds, UK; Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
| | - C Hanna
- Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, UK
| | - A Appelt
- University of Leeds, Leeds, UK; Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - R Muirhead
- Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
35
|
Sitas F, Hawari F, Dresler C, Stewart B, Togawa K, Zain ZM, Warren G. Call for papers: Special supplement – Tobacco cessation after a cancer diagnosis. Cancer Epidemiol 2021. [DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2021.101884] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
|
|
36
|
López-Torrecilla J, González Sanchis D, Granero Cabañero D, García Miragall E, Almendros Blanco P, Hernandez Machancoses A, Brualla González L, Pastor Peidro J, Gordo Partearroyo JC, Rosello Ferrando J. Pattern of care in radiotherapy at a University Hospital in Spain: the RENORT project. Clin Transl Oncol 2021; 23:1657-1665. [PMID: 33586123 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-021-02564-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2020] [Accepted: 01/28/2021] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE RENORT is a novel data mining application developed to extract relevant clinical data from oncology information systems (OIS; ARIA and Mosaiq) used in radiation oncology (RO). METHODS/PATIENTS We used RENORT to extract demographic and clinical data from the OIS of all patients treated at the RO Department at the General Hospital of Valencia during the year 2019. RESULTS A total of 1158 treatments were performed. The female/male ratio was 39.3%/60.7%, with a mean age of 66 years. The mean waiting time between the treatment decision/proposal to the first visit was 10.1 days. Mean duration of the treatment preparation process was 21 days. Most patients (90.4%) completed treatment within the prescribed time ± 7 days. The most common sites/treatment types were: metastatic/palliative treatments (n = 300; 25.9%), breast (209; 18.0%), genitourinary (195; 16.8%), digestive (116; 10.0%), thoracic (104; 9.0%), head and neck (62; 5.4%), and skin cancer (51; 4.4%). The distribution according to treatment intent was as follows: palliative (n = 266; 23.0%), adjuvant curative (335; 28.9%), radical without adjuvant treatment (229; 19.8%), radical with concomitant treatment (188; 16.2%), curative neoadjuvant (70; 6.0%), salvage radiotherapy (61; 5.3%); and reirradiation (9; 0.8%). The most common treatment techniques were IMRT/VMAT with IGRT (n = 468; 40.4%), 3D-CRT with IGRT (421; 36.4%), SBRT (127; 11.0%), 2DRT (57; 4.9%), and SFRT (56; 4.8%). A mean of 15.9 fractions were administered per treatment. Hypofractionated schemes were used in 100% of radical intent breast and prostate cancer treatments. CONCLUSIONS The RENORT application facilitates data retrieval from oncology information systems to allow for a comprehensive determination of the real role of radiotherapy in the treatment of cancer patients. This application is valuable to identify patterns of care and to assess treatment efficacy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J López-Torrecilla
- Department of Radiation Oncology-ERESA, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Av. Tres Cruces, 2, 46014, Valencia, Spain. .,Servicio Oncología Radioterápica-ERESA, Hospital General Valencia, Av. Tres Cruces, 2, 46014, Valencia, Spain.
| | - D González Sanchis
- Department of Radiation Oncology-ERESA, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Av. Tres Cruces, 2, 46014, Valencia, Spain
| | - D Granero Cabañero
- Radiotherapy Physics Department-ERESA, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Av. Tres Cruces, 2, 46014, Valencia, Spain
| | - E García Miragall
- Department of Radiation Oncology-ERESA, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Av. Tres Cruces, 2, 46014, Valencia, Spain
| | - P Almendros Blanco
- Department of Radiation Oncology-ERESA, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Av. Tres Cruces, 2, 46014, Valencia, Spain
| | - A Hernandez Machancoses
- Department of Radiation Oncology-ERESA, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Av. Tres Cruces, 2, 46014, Valencia, Spain
| | - L Brualla González
- Radiotherapy Physics Department-ERESA, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Av. Tres Cruces, 2, 46014, Valencia, Spain
| | - J Pastor Peidro
- Department of Radiation Oncology-ERESA, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Av. Tres Cruces, 2, 46014, Valencia, Spain
| | - J C Gordo Partearroyo
- Department of Radiation Oncology-ERESA, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Av. Tres Cruces, 2, 46014, Valencia, Spain
| | - J Rosello Ferrando
- Radiotherapy Physics Department-ERESA, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Av. Tres Cruces, 2, 46014, Valencia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
|
37
|
Corradini S, Niyazi M, Verellen D, Valentini V, Walsh S, Grosu AL, Lauber K, Giaccia A, Unger K, Debus J, Pieters BR, Guckenberger M, Senan S, Budach W, Rad R, Mayerle J, Belka C. X-change symposium: status and future of modern radiation oncology-from technology to biology. Radiat Oncol 2021; 16:27. [PMID: 33541387 PMCID: PMC7863262 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01758-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2020] [Accepted: 01/28/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Future radiation oncology encompasses a broad spectrum of topics ranging from modern clinical trial design to treatment and imaging technology and biology. In more detail, the application of hybrid MRI devices in modern image-guided radiotherapy; the emerging field of radiomics; the role of molecular imaging using positron emission tomography and its integration into clinical routine; radiation biology with its future perspectives, the role of molecular signatures in prognostic modelling; as well as special treatment modalities such as brachytherapy or proton beam therapy are areas of rapid development. More clinically, radiation oncology will certainly find an important role in the management of oligometastasis. The treatment spectrum will also be widened by the rational integration of modern systemic targeted or immune therapies into multimodal treatment strategies. All these developments will require a concise rethinking of clinical trial design. This article reviews the current status and the potential developments in the field of radiation oncology as discussed by a panel of European and international experts sharing their vision during the "X-Change" symposium, held in July 2019 in Munich (Germany).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefanie Corradini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
| | - Maximilian Niyazi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany
| | - Dirk Verellen
- Department of Radiotherapy, Iridium Network, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Vincenzo Valentini
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Hematology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A.Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica S. Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Anca-L Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center, Medical Faculty, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Kirsten Lauber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany
| | - Amato Giaccia
- Division of Radiation and Cancer Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, USA
| | - Kristian Unger
- Integrative Biology Group, Helmholtz Zentrum Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Bradley R Pieters
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Suresh Senan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Roland Rad
- Center for Translational Cancer Research (TranslaTUM), TU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Julia Mayerle
- Department of Internal Medicine II, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
38
|
Mackenzie P, Vajdic C, Delaney G, Gabriel G, Agar M, Comans T, Barton M. Factors affecting radiotherapy utilisation in geriatric oncology patients in NSW, Australia. Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol 2021; 16:17-23. [PMID: 33385070 PMCID: PMC7769853 DOI: 10.1016/j.tipsro.2020.09.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2020] [Revised: 09/14/2020] [Accepted: 09/16/2020] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Background and Purpose Large non-age-specific radiotherapy utilisation rate (RTU) studies have demonstrated that actual RTU is below the optimal recommended utilisation rate for both curative and palliative intent radiotherapy indications. The optimal utilisation rate for the geriatric oncology cohort of patients has not yet been determined. The purpose of this research was to examine the actual RTU for patients treated in New South Wales (NSW), Australia as a function of increasing age, and the relationship between RTU and tumour site, travelling distance and socio-economic status. Materials & Methods NSW Central Cancer Registry data (2009-2011) were linked to the NSW Radiotherapy Dataset (2009-2012). RTU was calculated for patients aged <80 years and ≥80 years. RTU was defined as the proportion of patients receiving at least a single course of radiotherapy within 12 months of a cancer diagnosis. Results 110,645 patients were diagnosed with cancer, of whom 27,721 received at least one course of radiotherapy. The overall RTU was 25%. RTU for patients aged <80 years was 28% compared to 14% for patients aged 80+ years (p < 0.001). On both univariate and multivariate analysis, increasing age, residential address in disadvantaged socioeconomic areas and increasing distance to the nearest radiotherapy department were associated with a reduction in RTU. Conclusion Geriatric oncology patients are less likely to receive radiotherapy than their younger counterparts. Some of the reduction in RTU may be justifiable on the basis of limited life expectancy and co-morbidity. Further research is required to determine the co-morbidity adjusted optimal RTU in older patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Penny Mackenzie
- St Andrew's Hospital, Icon Cancer Care, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia.,Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | | | - Geoff Delaney
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Gabriel Gabriel
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Meera Agar
- University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
| | | | - Michael Barton
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
39
|
Fabian A, Krug D, Alkatout I. Radiotherapy and Its Intersections with Surgery in the Management of Localized Gynecological Malignancies: A Comprehensive Overview for Clinicians. J Clin Med 2020; 10:E93. [PMID: 33383960 PMCID: PMC7796321 DOI: 10.3390/jcm10010093] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2020] [Revised: 12/22/2020] [Accepted: 12/24/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Surgery, including minimally invasive surgery, and radiotherapy are key modalities in the treatment of gynecological malignancies. The aim of this review is to offer the multidisciplinary care team a comprehensive summary of the intersections of surgery and radiotherapy in the local treatment of gynecological malignancies. Recent advances in radiotherapy are highlighted. Relevant publications were identified through a review of the published literature. Ovarian, endometrial, cervical, vaginal, and vulvar cancer were included in the search. Current guidelines are summarized. The role of radiotherapy in adjuvant as well as definitive treatment of these entities is synthesized and put into context with surgery, focusing on survival and quality of life. Although these outcomes have improved recently, further research must be focused on the number of life years lost, and the potential morbidity encountered by patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander Fabian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, 24105 Kiel, Germany;
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, 24105 Kiel, Germany;
| | - Ibrahim Alkatout
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, 24105 Kiel, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
40
|
Jacob SA, Do V, Wilson BE, Ng WL, Barton MB. The value of first-line chemotherapy and targeted therapy in the treatment of breast cancer. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2020; 30:e13352. [PMID: 33146449 DOI: 10.1111/ecc.13352] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2020] [Revised: 08/19/2020] [Accepted: 08/24/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To investigate the value (survival benefit and cost) of first-line chemotherapy and targeted therapy in breast cancer at a population level. METHODS Based on guideline recommendations, a model of optimal utilisation was constructed for first-line chemotherapy and targeted therapy in breast cancer, calculating the survival benefit and average cost of all regimens recommended for each treatment indication at 5 years and at 10 years. RESULTS Survival benefits from chemotherapy and targeted therapy differ markedly depending on the treatment indications. The cost per life-year gained at 5 years is $38,044 for stages I and II, $33,749 for stage III and $ 151,668 for patients presenting with stage IV breast cancer. The cost per life-year gained at 10 years is $ 13,587 for early breast cancer. The most expensive chemotherapy indication in breast cancer is the treatment of metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer costing $330,978 per LYG for a survival benefit of 11% at 5 years falling to zero survival benefit at 10 years. CONCLUSION There are large differences in value between the different indications for first-course chemotherapy and targeted therapy in the treatment of breast cancer that should be considered when pricing cancer drugs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susannah A Jacob
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Viet Do
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Radiation Oncology, Liverpool Hospital Cancer Therapy Centre, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Brooke E Wilson
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Medical Oncology, Liverpool Hospital Cancer Therapy Centre, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Weng L Ng
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Medical Oncology, Liverpool Hospital Cancer Therapy Centre, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Michael B Barton
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Radiation Oncology, Liverpool Hospital Cancer Therapy Centre, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
41
|
Duffton A, Li W, Forde E. The Pivotal Role of the Therapeutic Radiographer/Radiation Therapist in Image-guided Radiotherapy Research and Development. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2020; 32:852-860. [PMID: 33087296 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2020.09.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2020] [Revised: 08/21/2020] [Accepted: 09/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
The ability to personalise radiotherapy to fit the individual patient and their diagnosis has been realised through technological advancements. There is now more opportunity to utilise these technologies and deliver precision radiotherapy for more patients. Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) has enabled users to safely and accurately plan, treat and verify complex cases; and deliver a high dose to the target volume, while minimising dose to normal tissue. Rapid changes in IGRT have required a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach, carefully deciding optimum protocols to achieve clinical benefit. Therapeutic radiographer/radiation therapists (RTTs) play a pivotal role in this MDT. There is already a great deal of evidence that illustrates the contribution of RTTs in IGRT development; implementation; quality assurance; and maintaining training and competency programmes. Often this has required the RTT to undertake additional roles and responsibilities. These publications show how the profession has evolved, expanding the scope of practice. There are now more opportunities for RTT-led IGRT research. This is not only undertaken in the more traditional aspects of practice, but in recent times, more RTTs are becoming involved in imaging biomarkers research and radiomic analysis. The aim of this overview is to describe the RTT contribution to the ongoing development of IGRT and to showcase some of the profession's involvement in IGRT research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Duffton
- Department of Radiotherapy, Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, UK.
| | - W Li
- University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - E Forde
- Applied Radiation Therapy Trinity, Discipline of Radiation Therapy, Trinity College Dublin, The University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
|
42
|
Borras JM, Font R, Solà J, Macia M, Tuset V, Arenas M, Eraso A, Verges R, Farré N, Pedro A, Mollà M, Algara M, Solé JM, Mira M, Espinàs JA. Impact of non-adherence to radiotherapy on 1-year survival in cancer patients in Catalonia, Spain. Radiother Oncol 2020; 151:200-205. [PMID: 32771615 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2020] [Revised: 07/23/2020] [Accepted: 08/01/2020] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aims to assess the effects of non-adherence to external beam radiation therapy in cancer patients receiving treatment with a curative. METHODS This retrospective cohort study collected health records data for all cancer patients treated with external beam radiotherapy with curative intent in 2016 in Catalonia, Spain. Adherence was defined as having received at least 90% of the total dose prescribed. A logistic regression model was used to assess factors related to non-adherence, and its association with one-year survival was evaluated using Cox regression. RESULTS The final sample included 8721 patients (mean age 63.6 years): breast cancer was the most common tumour site (38.1%), followed by prostate and colon/rectum. Treatment interruptions prolonged the total duration of therapy in 70.7% of the patients, and 1.0% were non-adherent. Non-adherence was associated with advanced age, female gender, and some localization of primary tumour (head and neck, urinary bladder, and haematological cancers). The risk of death in non-adherent patients was higher than in adherent patients (hazard ratio [HR] 1.63, 95% confidence interval 0.97-2.74), after adjusting for the potential confounding effect of age, gender, tumour site and comorbidity. CONCLUSION Non-adherence to radiotherapy, as measured by the received dose, is very low in our setting, and it may have an impact on one-year survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Josep M Borras
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Barcelona and Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Spain.
| | - Rebeca Font
- Cancer Strategy, Department of Health, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Judit Solà
- Cancer Strategy, Department of Health, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Miquel Macia
- Radiation Oncology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Hospital Duran i Reynals, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain
| | - Victòria Tuset
- Radiation Oncology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain
| | - Meritxell Arenas
- Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Universitari Sant Joan de Reus, Spain; Faculty of Medicine, University of Rovira i Virgili, Spain
| | - Arantxa Eraso
- Radiation Oncology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Hospital Trueta, Girona, Spain
| | - Ramona Verges
- Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Universitari de la Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Nuria Farré
- Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Agustin Pedro
- Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Meritxell Mollà
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Spain
| | - Manel Algara
- Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital del Mar, Radiation Oncology Research Group, IMIM and Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
| | - Josep M Solé
- Radiation Oncology Department, Consorci Sanitari Terrassa- Hospital General Catalunya- Hospital Manresa, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Moises Mira
- Radiation Oncology Department, H.U. Arnau de Vilanova, Lleida, Spain
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
43
|
Cancer, COVID-19 and the precautionary principle: prioritizing treatment during a global pandemic. NATURE REVIEWS. CLINICAL ONCOLOGY 2020. [PMID: 32242095 DOI: 10.1038/s41571-020-0362-6)] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/05/2022]
Abstract
During the COVID-19 global pandemic, the cancer community faces many difficult questions. We will first discuss safety considerations for patients with cancer requiring treatment in SARS-CoV-2 endemic areas. We will then discuss a general framework for prioritizing cancer care, emphasizing the precautionary principle in decision making.
Collapse
|
|
44
|
Lievens Y, Borras JM, Grau C. Provision and use of radiotherapy in Europe. Mol Oncol 2020; 14:1461-1469. [PMID: 32293084 PMCID: PMC7332207 DOI: 10.1002/1878-0261.12690] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2019] [Revised: 01/07/2020] [Accepted: 04/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiation therapy is one of the core components of multidisciplinary cancer care. Although ~ 50% of all European cancer patients have an indication for radiotherapy at least once in the course of their disease, more than one out of four cancer patients in Europe do not receive the radiotherapy they need. There are multiple reasons for this underutilisation, with limited availability of the necessary resources – in terms of both trained personnel and equipment – being a major underlying cause of suboptimal access to radiotherapy. Moreover, large variations across European countries are observed, not only in available radiotherapy equipment and personnel per inhabitant or per cancer patient requiring radiotherapy, but also in workload. This variation is in part determined by the country's gross national income. Radiation therapy and technology are advancing quickly; hence, recommendations supporting resource planning and investment should reflect this dynamic environment and account for evolving treatment complexity and fractionation schedules. The forecasted increase in cancer incidence, the rapid introduction of innovative cancer treatments and the more active involvement of patients in the healthcare discussion are all factors that should be taken under consideration. In this continuously changing oncology landscape, reliable data on the actual provision and use of radiotherapy, the optimal evidence‐based demand and the future needs are crucial to inform cancer care planning and address and overcome the current inequalities in access to radiotherapy in Europe.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yolande Lievens
- Department of Radiation OncologyGhent University Hospital and Ghent UniversityBelgium
| | - Josep M. Borras
- Department of Clinical SciencesIDIBELLUniversity of BarcelonaSpain
| | - Cai Grau
- Department of Oncology and Danish Center for Particle TherapyAarhus University HospitalDenmark
| |
Collapse
|
|
45
|
Chan J, Friborg J, Zubizarreta E, van Eck JW, Hanna TP, Bourque JM, Gaudet M, Dennis K, Olson R, Coleman CN, Petersen AJ, Grau C, Abdel-Wahab M, Brundage M, Slotman B, Polo A. Examining geographic accessibility to radiotherapy in Canada and Greenland for indigenous populations: Measuring inequities to inform solutions. Radiother Oncol 2020; 146:1-8. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.01.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2019] [Revised: 01/22/2020] [Accepted: 01/27/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
|
|
46
|
Hanna TP, Evans GA, Booth CM. Cancer, COVID-19 and the precautionary principle: prioritizing treatment during a global pandemic. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2020; 17:268-270. [PMID: 32242095 PMCID: PMC7117554 DOI: 10.1038/s41571-020-0362-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 271] [Impact Index Per Article: 67.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
During the COVID-19 global pandemic, the cancer community faces many difficult questions. We will first discuss safety considerations for patients with cancer requiring treatment in SARS-CoV-2 endemic areas. We will then discuss a general framework for prioritizing cancer care, emphasizing the precautionary principle in decision making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy P Hanna
- Department of Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. .,Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
| | - Gerald A Evans
- Department of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Christopher M Booth
- Department of Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.,Department of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.,Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
|
47
|
Kim E, Jang WI, Kim MS, Paik EK, Kim HJ, Yoo HJ, Yang K, Cho CK. Clinical utilization of radiation therapy in Korea, 2016. JOURNAL OF RADIATION RESEARCH 2020; 61:249-256. [PMID: 31913473 PMCID: PMC7246057 DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rrz095] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2019] [Revised: 11/18/2019] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
Radiotherapy (RT) is one of the primary cancer treatment modalities. To estimate the actual utilization of RT and infrastructure in Korea, the current study was performed. Data from 2012 to 2016 were extracted from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. In addition, a nationwide survey was conducted to collect the statistics of RT facilities, equipment and human resources in Korea. The total number of patients treated with RT was 72 563 in 2016. The five cancers that were most commonly treated with RT in 2016 were breast, lung, colorectal, liver and prostate cancer. According to analyses of specific treatment modalities, the number of patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) and proton therapy increased from 6670, 6306 and 50 in 2012 to 21584, 9048 and 703 in 2016, respectively. Ninety radiation oncology centers were working in 2015 and there were a total of 213 megavoltage teletherapy machines. In 2015, 310 patients were treated per megavoltage RT machine, 246 patients per radiation oncologist, 501 patients per medical physicist and 111 patients per radiotherapy technologist. In conclusion, the number of patients who underwent RT in Korea has increased steadily from 2012 to 2016. The IMRT utilization rate remarkably increased in 2016, and the number of patients treated with advanced treatment modalities such as IMRT, SRT and proton therapy is expected to increase.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eunji Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences, Seoul, Korea
| | - Won Il Jang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences, Seoul, Korea
| | - Mi-Sook Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences, Seoul, Korea
| | - Eun Kyung Paik
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hee Jin Kim
- External Strategy Team, Strategic Planning Office, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hyung Jun Yoo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kwangmo Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences, Seoul, Korea
| | - Chul Koo Cho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
48
|
|
|
49
|
Volume de-escalation in radiation therapy: state of the art and new perspectives. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2020; 146:909-924. [PMID: 32072318 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-020-03152-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2020] [Accepted: 02/10/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE New RT techniques and data emerging from follow-up for several tumor sites suggest that treatment volume de-escalation may permit to minimize therapy-related side effects and/or obtain better clinical outcomes. Here, we summarize the main evidence about volume de-escalation in RT. METHOD The relevant literature from PubMed was reviewed in this article. The ClinicalTrials.gov database was searched for clinical trials related to the specific topic. RESULTS In Lymphoma, large-volume techniques (extended- and involved-field RT) are being successfully replaced by involved-site RT and involved-node RT. In head and neck carcinoma, spare a part of elective neck is controversial. In early breast cancer, partial breast irradiation has been established as a treatment option in low-risk patients. In pancreatic cancer stereotactic body radiotherapy may be used to dose escalation. Stereotactic radiosurgery should be the treatment choice for patients with oligometastatic brain disease and a life expectancy of more than 3 months, and it should be considered an alternative to WBRT for patients with multiple brain metastases. CONCLUSION Further clinical trials are necessary to improve the identification of suitable patient cohorts and the extent of possible volume de-escalation that does not compromise tumor control.
Collapse
|
|
50
|
How public health services pay for radiotherapy in Europe: an ESTRO–HERO analysis of reimbursement. Lancet Oncol 2020; 21:e42-e54. [DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(19)30794-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2019] [Revised: 11/01/2019] [Accepted: 11/04/2019] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
|