Comparative effectiveness research in radiation oncology: assessing technology

Efficacy and cost of high-frequency IGRT in elderly stage III non-small-cell lung cancer patients

Background

High-frequency image-guided radiotherapy (hfIGRT) is ubiquitous but its benefits are unproven. We examined the cost effectiveness of hfIGRT in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

We selected stage III NSCLC patients ≥66 years old who received definitive radiation therapy from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results-Medicare database. Patients were stratified by use of hfIGRT using Medicare claims. Predictors for hfIGRT were calculated using a logistic model. The impact of hfIGRT on lung toxicity free survival (LTFS), esophageal toxicity free survival (ETFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), and cost of treatment was calculated using Cox regressions, propensity score matching, and bootstrap methods.

Results

Of the 4,430 patients in our cohort, 963 (22%) received hfIGRT and 3,468 (78%) did not. By 2011, 49% of patients were receiving hfIGRT. Predictors of hfIGRT use included treatment with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) (OR = 7.5, p < 0.01), recent diagnosis (OR = 51 in 2011 versus 2006, p < 0.01), and residence in regions where the Medicare intermediary allowed IMRT (OR = 1.50, p < 0.01). hfIGRT had no impact on LTFS (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.86–1.09), ETFS (HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.93–1.18), CSS (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.84–1.04), or OS (HR 0.95; 95% CI 0.87–1.04). Mean radiotherapy and total medical costs six months after diagnosis were $17,330 versus $15,024 (p < 0.01) and $71,569 versus $69,693 (p = 0.49), respectively.

Conclusion

hfIGRT did not affect clinical outcomes in elderly patients with stage III NSCLC but did increase radiation cost. hfIGRT deserves further scrutiny through a randomized controlled trial.

Diffusion of innovation in radiation oncology in the United States

Objective:

To develop an instrument for quantifying innovation and assess the diffusion of innovation in radiation oncology (RO) in the United States.

Methods:

Primary data were collected for using total population convenience sampling. Innovation Score and Innovation Utilization Score were determined using 20 indicators. 240 medical physicists (MPs) practicing in RO in the United States completed a custom Internet-based survey.

Results:

Centers with no academic affiliation are trailing behind in innovation in total (MD = 1.65, 95% C I[0.38,2.917], p = 0.011, d = 0.351), in patient treatment (MD = 0.39, 95% CI [0.021,0.76], p = 0.038, d = 0.282), and workflow innovation (MD = 7.09, 95% CI [0.78,13.39], p = 0.028, d = 0.330). Centers with no academic affiliation are trailing behind in innovation utilization in total (MD = 0.46, 95% CI [0.05,0.86], p = 0.028, d = 0.188). Rural center are trailing behind in patient positioning in innovation (MD = 0.31, 95% CI [0.011,0.612], p = 0.042, d = 0.293) and innovation utilization (MD = 16.22, 95% CI [0.73,31.72], p = 0.04, d = 0.608). Rural centers are trailing behind in innovative treatments (MD = 0.62, 95% CI [0.23,1.00], p = 0.002, d = 0.457). Motivation (r_s = 0.224, p = 0.002) and appreciation (r_s = 0.215, p = 0.003) were statistically significant personal factors influencing innovation utilization.

Conclusions:

There is a wide range of innovation across RO centers in the United States. RO centers in the United States are not practicing as innovative as reasonably achievable.

Advances in knowledge:

This work quantified how innovative RO in the United States is and results provide guidance on how to improve it in the future.

Magnetic resonance-guided radiation therapy: A review

Magnetic resonance-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) is a promising approach to improving clinical outcomes for patients treated with radiation therapy. The roles of image guidance, adaptive planning and magnetic resonance imaging in radiation therapy have been increasing over the last two decades. Technical advances have led to the feasible combination of magnetic resonance imaging and radiation therapy technologies, leading to improved soft-tissue visualisation, assessment of inter- and intrafraction motion, motion management, online adaptive radiation therapy and the incorporation of functional information into treatment. MRgRT can potentially transform radiation oncology by improving tumour control and quality of life after radiation therapy and increasing convenience of treatment by shortening treatment courses for patients. Multiple groups have developed clinical implementations of MRgRT predominantly in the abdomen and pelvis, with patients having been treated since 2014. While studies of MRgRT have primarily been dosimetric so far, an increasing number of trials are underway examining the potential clinical benefits of MRgRT, with coordinated efforts to rigorously evaluate the benefits of the promising technology. This review discusses the current implementations, studies, potential benefits and challenges of MRgRT.

Proton therapy- the modality of choice for future radiation therapy management of Prostate Cancer?

BACKGROUND

Proton Therapy (PR) is an emerging treatment for prostate cancer (Pca) patients. However, limited and conflicting data exists regarding its ability to result in fewer bladder and rectal toxicities compared to Photon Therapy (PT), as well as its cost efficiency and plan robustness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic literature search was performed to acquire eligible studies published between 2007 and 2018. Studies comparing bladder and rectal dosimetry or Gastrointestinal (GI) and Genitourinary (GU) toxicities between PR and PT, the plan robustness of PR relative to motion and its cost efficiency for Pca patients were assessed.

RESULTS

28 studies were eligible for inclusion in this review. PR resulted in improved bladder and rectal dosimetry but did not manifest as improved GI/GU toxicities clinically compared to PT. PR plans were considered robust when specific corrections, techniques, positioning or immobilisation devices were applied. PR is not cost effective for intermediate risk Pca patients; however PR may be cost effective for younger or high risk Pca patients.

CONCLUSION

PR offers improved bladder and rectal dosimetry compared to PT but this does not specifically translate to improved GI/GU toxicities clinically. The robustness of PR plans is acceptable under specific conditions. PR is not cost effective for all Pca patients.

Effectiveness of image-guided radiotherapy for rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy: A population-based propensity score-matched analysis

AIM

The effects of image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT, an advanced RT technology) have been debated in the literature. We compared the outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients treated with neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (NCCRT; with vs without IGRT) in a large population-based propensity score (PS)-matched analysis.

METHODS

We identified LARC patients diagnosed between 2007 and 2015 via the Taiwan cancer registry (TCR) and constructed a PS-matched cohort to balance observable potential confounders. Outcomes (R0 resection, overall survival, incidence of local regional recurrence [ILRR], rectal cancer mortality [IRCM], other cancer mortality [IOCM] and cardiovascular mortality [ICVM]) were obtained from TCR and the national death registry. We compared the hazard ratio (HR) of death and other endpoints between IGRT and non-IGRT groups. We performed supplementary analysis (SA) to evaluate the robustness of these results in a subgroup, taking an additional potential confounder into account.

RESULTS

Our study population comprised of 586 patients that were balanced with regard to observed covariables. There was no significant difference in HR for death (0.99; 95% confidence interval 0.70-1.39; P = 0.94) between IGRT and non-IGRT groups. There were also no significant differences in R0 resection, ILRR, IRCM, IOCM or ICVM. The results of our SA were consistent with these findings.

CONCLUSION

For LARC patients treated with NCCRT, the treatment outcome was not significantly different among patients treated with and without IGRT. Further study is needed to clarify these results with consideration to additional potential confounding factors and toxicity profiles at endpoints.

Clinical predictors of radiation-induced lymphopenia in patients receiving chemoradiation for glioblastoma: clinical usefulness of intensity-modulated radiotherapy in the immuno-oncology era

Background

Immunotherapy is currently being examined as a treatment modality for glioblastoma. Maintaining an optimal total lymphocyte count (TLC) after radiotherapy (RT) and using temozolomide may be beneficial in optimizing immunotherapy. However, conventional temozolomide-based chemoradiation is known to induce immunosuppressive effects, including lymphopenia. Therefore, this study aimed to identify potential clinical predictors of acute severe lymphopenia (ASL) in patients receiving chemoradiation for glioblastoma.

Methods

We identified patients with glioblastoma treated with RT plus temozolomide from 2006 to 2017. ASL was defined as a TLC of < 500/μL within 3 months after initiating RT. Independent predictors of ASL were determined using logistic regression.

Results

A total of 336 patients were evaluated. Three-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) were used in 186 (55.4%) and 150 patients (44.6%), respectively. TLC decreased during RT and remained persistently low during the 1-year follow-up, whereas the levels of other blood cell types recovered. In total, 118 patients (35.1%) developed ASL. During a median follow-up of 19.3 months, patients with ASL showed significantly worse overall survival than did those without ASL (median, 18.2 vs. 22.0 months; P = .028). Multivariable analysis revealed that increased planning target volume (PTV) was independently associated with increased ASL incidence (hazard ratio [HR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–1.03; P = .042), while IMRT was independently associated with decreased ASL incidence (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.27–0.87; P = .015). A propensity-matched comparison showed that the incidence of ASL was lower with IMRT than with 3D-CRT (20% vs. 37%; P = .005).

Conclusions

IMRT and low PTV were significantly associated with decreased ASL incidence after RT plus temozolomide for glioblastoma. An IMRT-based strategy is necessary to enhance treatment outcomes in the immune-oncology era.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13014-019-1256-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Comparative effectiveness of image-guided radiotherapy for non-operated localized esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy: A population-based propensity score matched analysis

Background

Although concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) coupled with image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) is associated with a theoretical benefit in non-operated localized esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (NOL-ESCC) patients, there is currently no clinical evidence to support this.

Results

The study population in the primary analysis comprised 866 patients who were well balanced in terms of their co-variables. The HR for mortality when group A was compared with group B was 0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.7–0.95). SA revealed that the result was moderately sensitive.

Materials and Methods

Eligible patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2013 were identified in the Taiwan Cancer Registry. A propensity score-matched cohort was constructed [1:1 in groups A (with IGRT) and B (without IGRT)] to balance any observable potential confounders. The hazard ratio (HR) for mortality was compared between groups A and B during the follow-up period. Sensitivity analyses (SA) were performed to evaluate the robustness of the findings regarding the selection of confounders and a potential unobserved confounder.

Conclusions

The current results provide the first clinical evidence that CCRT coupled with IGRT is associated with better overall survival when compared with CCRT without IGRT in NOL-ESCC patients. However, this study should be interpreted with caution given its non-randomized nature and the moderate sensitivity of the data. Further studies are needed to clarify this finding.

Cost-effectiveness of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Markov Modeling Study

Purpose To assess the cost-effectiveness of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) versus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for patients with inoperable localized hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are eligible for both SBRT and RFA. Materials and Methods A decision-analytic Markov model was developed for patients with inoperable, localized HCC who were eligible for both RFA and SBRT to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the following treatment strategies: (a) SBRT as initial treatment followed by SBRT for local progression (SBRT-SBRT), (b) RFA followed by RFA for local progression (RFA-RFA), (c) SBRT followed by RFA for local progression (SBRT-RFA), and (d) RFA followed by SBRT for local progression (RFA-SBRT). Probabilities of disease progression, treatment characteristics, and mortality were derived from published studies. Outcomes included health benefits expressed as discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs in U.S. dollars, and cost-effectiveness expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the robustness of the findings. Results In the base case, SBRT-SBRT yielded the most QALYs (1.565) and cost $197 557. RFA-SBRT yielded 1.558 QALYs and cost $193 288. SBRT-SBRT was not cost-effective, at $558 679 per QALY gained relative to RFA-SBRT. RFA-SBRT was the preferred strategy, because RFA-RFA and SBRT-RFA were less effective and more costly. In all evaluated scenarios, SBRT was preferred as salvage therapy for local progression after RFA. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY gained, RFA-SBRT was preferred in 65.8% of simulations. Conclusion SBRT for initial treatment of localized, inoperable HCC is not cost-effective. However, SBRT is the preferred salvage therapy for local progression after RFA. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Cost and effectiveness of image-guided radiotherapy for non-operated localized lung cancer: a population-based propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) is a novel technology to enhance RT delivery accuracy. However, the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness are less clear. The aim of our study is to compare the cost and effectiveness of conventional fractionated RT for non-operated localized lung cancer delivered with vs. without IGRT via this population-based propensity score (PS) matched analysis.

METHODS

We identified eligible patients diagnosed within 2007-2010 through a comprehensive population-based database containing cancer, death registries, and reimbursement data in Taiwan. The primary duration of interest (DOI) was 2 years within diagnosis. Effectiveness was measured as survival whereas direct medical cost was measured from the payers' perspective. In supplementary analysis (SA), we estimated the cost-effectiveness in consider of out-of-pocket (OOP) payment and 4 years as DOI.

RESULTS

Our study population constituted 124 patients. Within 2 years, both the mean cost (2014 USD) and survival (life-year, LY) were higher for IGRT ($60,774 vs. $60,554; 1.43 vs. 1.37). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) when IGRT was compared to non-IGRT was 3,667 (USD/LY). The chance for IGRT to be cost-effective was around 68% & 70% at willingness-to-pay threshold 50,000 USD/LY and 150,000 USD/LY respectively. IGRT remained cost-effective in SA.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide the first empirical evidence that when compared to non-IGRT, IGRT was potentially cost-effective.

Comparative effectiveness of intensity-modulated versus 3D conformal radiation therapy among medicare patients with stage III lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

The clinical benefit of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) compared to 3D conformal radiation (3D-RT) has not been well established for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Using SEER-Medicare, we identified Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with stage III NSCLC who received potentially curative (≥ 25 fractions) thoracic IMRT or 3D-RT from 2002-2009. Overall survival and number of hospital days within 90 days of radiation were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard and negative binomial regression models, respectively. Propensity score adjustment was used to control for clinical and demographic variables associated with outcomes.

RESULTS

IMRT comprised an increasing proportion of conformal thoracic radiation for NSCLC, rising from 3.0% in 2002 to 26.8% in 2009. Use of IMRT varied significantly by year of diagnosis, facility type, and geographic region and was more likely to be used among patients receiving chemotherapy or with higher comorbidity scores. Among patients receiving potentially curative treatment, there was no difference in overall survival (propensity adj HR .99, p = 0.83) or number of hospital days in the 90 days following radiation start (propensity adj HR 1.15, p = 0.23).

CONCLUSIONS

When radiation is used to treat locally advanced NSCLC, IMRT is increasingly preferred to 3D-RT. However, among patients receiving potentially curative radiation there was no significant difference in overall survival or time spent hospitalized following treatment.

Wide Variation in the Diffusion of a New Technology: Practice-Based Trends in Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) Use in the State of Michigan, With Implications for IMRT Use Nationally

IMRT use grew significantly across the state of Michigan over time, with four-fold variability among centers, which was related to facility characteristics.

Evaluating competing and emerging technologies for stereotactic body radiotherapy and other advanced radiotherapy techniques

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) refers to the precise irradiation of an image-defined extracranial lesion, using a high total radiation dose delivered in a small number of fractions. A significant proportion of SBRT treatment has been successfully delivered using conventional gantry-based linear accelerators with appropriate image guidance and motion management techniques, although a number of specialist systems are also available. Evaluating the competing SBRT technologies is difficult due to frequent refinements to all major platforms. Comparison of geometric accuracy or treatment planning performance can be hard to interpret and may not provide much useful information. Nevertheless, a general specification overview can provide information that may help radiotherapy providers decide on an appropriate system for their centre. A number of UK randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that better radiotherapy techniques yield better results. RCTs should play an important part in the future evaluation of SBRT, especially where there is a smaller volume of existing data, and where outcomes from conventional radiotherapy are very good. RCT comparison of SBRT with surgery is more difficult due to the radically different treatment arms, although successful recruitment can be possible if the lessons from previous failed trials are learned. The evaluation of new technology poses a number of challenges to the conventional RCT methodology, and there may be situations where it is genuinely not possible, with careful observational studies or decision modelling being more appropriate. Further development in trial design may have an important role in providing clinical evidence in a more timely manner.

Considerations for observational research using large data sets in radiation oncology

The radiation oncology community has witnessed growing interest in observational research conducted using large-scale data sources such as registries and claims-based data sets. With the growing emphasis on observational analyses in health care, the radiation oncology community must possess a sophisticated understanding of the methodological considerations of such studies in order to evaluate evidence appropriately to guide practice and policy. Because observational research has unique features that distinguish it from clinical trials and other forms of traditional radiation oncology research, the International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics assembled a panel of experts in health services research to provide a concise and well-referenced review, intended to be informative for the lay reader, as well as for scholars who wish to embark on such research without prior experience. This review begins by discussing the types of research questions relevant to radiation oncology that large-scale databases may help illuminate. It then describes major potential data sources for such endeavors, including information regarding access and insights regarding the strengths and limitations of each. Finally, it provides guidance regarding the analytical challenges that observational studies must confront, along with discussion of the techniques that have been developed to help minimize the impact of certain common analytical issues in observational analysis. Features characterizing a well-designed observational study include clearly defined research questions, careful selection of an appropriate data source, consultation with investigators with relevant methodological expertise, inclusion of sensitivity analyses, caution not to overinterpret small but significant differences, and recognition of limitations when trying to evaluate causality. This review concludes that carefully designed and executed studies using observational data that possess these qualities hold substantial promise for advancing our understanding of many unanswered questions of importance to the field of radiation oncology.