Access to innovative radiotherapy: how to make it happen from an economic perspective?

Impact of patient information format on the experience of cancer patients treated with radiotherapy

Introduction

Radiotherapy (RT) stands as one of the main cancer treatments. The impact of RT and cancer treatment can have a physical and psychological impact on patients and their carers. To gain patient's trust, and ensure they feel valued, information should be provided before, during, and after RT. Patient and public involvement (PPI) has been lacking, and increased engagement with PPI groups could improve this. This rapid review aims to analyse the literature, and describe and report patient perception, experience, and satisfaction regarding the information received concerning their course of RT.

Methods

To allow the synthesis of results, a pragmatic decision was made to use a rapid review approach to analyse the literature, providing more timely information to inform future work. This rapid review utilised systematic review methods and was conducted according to a pre-defined protocol including clear inclusion criteria (PROSPERO registration: CRD42023415916).Electronic databases CINAHL, AMED, Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched using a comprehensive search for published studies from January 2012 to November 2023. Two independent reviewers applied the eligibility criteria. Evidence from literature was extracted and transcribed into qualitative data and Braun and Clarke's six-step thematic analysis (TA) was employed to determine themes by one reviewer and checked by a second [26]. Due to the heterogeneity of the included literature, the analysis of this review is presented primarily through narrative synthesis.

Results

Sixty eight articles met the inclusion criteria for this review. Emerging themes included; a desire for information based on patient characteristics, information format, patient preparedness, timing e.g. timing of information and changing priorities over time, health care professional (HCP) involvement, barriers to information, and motivators for better information delivery.

Conclusions

Several factors can influence a patient's desire for information, from whom and when they receive it, to what format they would prefer to receive it. There is benefit to be gained in employing PPI and patient advocacy to inform future studies that aim to further understand the themes that emerged from this review. Such studies can therefore inform HCPs in providing patient-specific information and support by utilising multiple teaching strategies available to them.

Twenty Years of Advancements in a Radiotherapy Facility: Clinical Protocols, Technology, and Management

BACKGROUND

Hypo-fractionation can be an effective strategy to lower costs and save time, increasing patient access to advanced radiation therapy. To demonstrate this potential in practice within the context of temporal evolution, a twenty-year analysis of a representative radiation therapy facility from 2003 to 2022 was conducted. This analysis utilized comprehensive data to quantitatively evaluate the connections between advanced clinical protocols and technological improvements. The findings provide valuable insights to the management team, helping them ensure the delivery of high-quality treatments in a sustainable manner.

METHODS

Several parameters related to treatment technique, patient positioning, dose prescription, fractionation, equipment technology content, machine workload and throughput, therapy times and patients access counts were extracted from departmental database and analyzed on a yearly basis by means of linear regression.

RESULTS

Patients increased by 121 ± 6 new per year (NPY). Since 2010, the incidence of hypo-fractionation protocols grew thanks to increasing Linac technology. In seven years, both the average number of fractions and daily machine workload decreased by -0.84 ± 0.12 fractions/year and -1.61 ± 0.35 patients/year, respectively. The implementation of advanced dose delivery techniques, image guidance and high dose rate beams for high fraction doses, currently systematically used, has increased the complexity and reduced daily treatment throughput since 2010 from 40 to 32 patients per 8 h work shift (WS8). Thanks to hypo-fractionation, such an efficiency drop did not affect NPY, estimating 693 ± 28 NPY/WS8, regardless of the evaluation time. Each newly installed machine was shown to add 540 NPY, while absorbing 0.78 ± 0.04 WS8. The COVID-19 pandemic brought an overall reduction of 3.7% of patients and a reduction of 0.8 fractions/patient, to mitigate patient crowding in the department.

CONCLUSIONS

The evolution of therapy protocols towards hypo-fractionation was supported by the use of proper technology. The characteristics of this process were quantified considering time progression and organizational aspects. This strategy optimized resources while enabling broader access to advanced radiation therapy. To truly value the benefit of hypo-fractionation, a reimbursement policy should focus on the patient rather than individual treatment fractionation.

A systematic literature review of definitions and classification systems for radiotherapy innovation: A first step towards building a value-based assessment tool for radiation oncology

INTRODUCTION

Timely access to radiotherapy innovations remains suboptimal, partly because there is no commonly agreed appraisal system suitable for the broad range of radiotherapy interventions. The Health Economics in Radiation Oncology (HERO) programme of ESTRO therefore engaged in building a radiotherapy-specific value-based framework. We report on a first step towards that aim, documenting the available definitions and classification systems for radiotherapy interventions.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was carried out in Pubmed and Embase, following PRISMA methodology and using search terms on 'innovation', 'radiotherapy', 'definition' and 'classification'. Data were extracted from articles that met prespecified inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Out of 13,353 articles, 25 met the inclusion criteria, resulting in the identification of 7 definitions of innovation and 15 classification systems applicable to radiation oncology. Iterative appraisal divided the classification systems into two groups. A first group of 11 systems categorized innovations according to the perceived magnitude of innovation, typically 'minor' versus 'major'. The remaining 4 systems categorised innovations according to radiotherapy-specific characteristics, such as the type of radiation equipment or radiobiological properties. Here, commonly used terms as 'technique' or 'treatment' were found to be used in different meanings.

DISCUSSION

There is no widely accepted definition or classification system for radiotherapy innovations. The data however suggest that unique properties of radiotherapy interventions can be used to categorise innovations in radiation oncology. Still, there remains a need for clear terminology denoting radiotherapy-specific characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Building on this review, the ESTRO-HERO project will define what is required for a radiotherapy-specific value-based assessment tool.

Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Radiation Oncology: A Bibliometric Analysis and Critical Review

The promotion of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) is being increasingly pursued in health care, both in general and within radiation oncology. Because bibliometrics is a powerful tool to reveal the scientific literature on a specific topic during a certain timespan, a systematic bibliometric analysis of the documents published on EDI in radiation oncology was performed, aiming at exploring common patterns in research and emerging trends, tracking collaborations and networks, and anticipating future directions in clinical research. Standard descriptive statistics and bibliometric techniques were used in the analysis. A collaboration network and thematic map were generated from the data. Four domains were represented: (1) motor themes, including themes well developed and important for the structuring of the research field; (2) niche themes, representing the isolated topics that do not share important external links with other themes; (3) emerging themes, referring to still weakly developed topics; and (4) basic themes, including the essential topics. EDI in the profession of radiation oncology is essential to ensure that the workforce delivering radiation oncology care both draws from the full talent pool of human capital and delivers the highest quality science and clinical care to all patients. The burgeoning literature on EDI in radiation oncology suggests that a large and growing cohort of scholars within radiation oncology are dedicated to addressing these important challenges.

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)

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.

Innovation, value and reimbursement in radiation and complex surgical oncology: Time to rethink

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.

Innovation, value and reimbursement in radiation and complex surgical oncology: time to rethink

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.

Global Radiotherapy: Current Status and Future Directions-White Paper

Recognizing the increase in cancer incidence globally and the need for effective cancer control interventions, several organizations, professional bodies, and international institutions have proposed strategies to improve treatment options and reduce mortality along with minimizing overall incidence. Despite these efforts, an estimated 9.6 million deaths in 2018 was attributed to this noncommunicable disease, making it the second leading cause of death worldwide. Left unchecked, this will further increase in scale, with an estimated 29.5 million new cases and 16.3 million deaths occurring worldwide in 2040. Although it is known and generally accepted that cancer services must include radiotherapy, such access is still very limited in many parts of the world, especially in low- and middle-income countries. After thorough review of the current status of radiotherapy including programs worldwide, as well as achievements and challenges at the global level, the International Atomic Energy Agency convened an international group of experts representing various radiation oncology societies to take a closer look into the current status of radiotherapy and provide a road map for future directions in this field. It was concluded that the plethora of global and regional initiatives would benefit further from the existence of a central framework, including an easily accessible repository through which better coordination can be done. Supporting this framework, a practical inventory of competencies needs to be made available on a global level emphasizing the knowledge, skills, and behavior required for a safe, sustainable, and professional practice for various settings. This white paper presents the current status of global radiotherapy and future directions for the community. It forms the basis for an action plan to be developed with professional societies worldwide.

Value-based radiotherapy: A new chapter of the ESTRO-HERO project

Radiotherapy interventions are rapidly evolving and improving, holding promise for better patient outcomes, yet at the possible detriment of higher societal costs. The ESTRO-HERO value-based radiotherapy project aims to develop a framework defining and assessing the value of radiotherapy innovations, to support clinical implementation and equitable access, within a sustainable healthcare system.

Provision and use of radiotherapy in Europe

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.

Radiotherapy Quality Assurance for Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

The impact of radiotherapy (RT) quality assurance (QA) has been demonstrated by numerous studies and is particularly important for head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment due to the complexity of RT target volumes in this region and the multiple adjacent organs at risk. The RT planning process includes many critical steps including interpretation of diagnostic imaging, image fusion, target volume delineation (tumor, lymph nodes, and organs at risk), and planning. Each step has become highly complex, and precise and rigorous QA throughout the planning process is essential. The ultimate aim is to precisely deliver radiation dose to the target, maximizing the tumor dose and minimizing the dose to surrounding organs at risk, in order to improve the therapeutic index. It is imperative that RT QA programs should systematically control all aspects of the RT planning pathway and include regular end-to-end tests and external audits. However, comprehensive QA should not be limited to RT and should, where possible, also be implemented for surgery, systemic therapy, pathology, as well as other aspects involved in the interdisciplinary treatment of HNC.

The financial impact of SBRT for oligometastatic disease: A population-level analysis in Belgium

INTRODUCTION

There is a steady rise in Stereotactic Body RadioTherapy (SBRT) utilization in oligometastatic disease (OMD). This may generate important financial consequences for radiotherapy budgets. The National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance of Belgium (NIHDI) initiated a coverage with evidence development (CED) project for innovative radiotherapy, including SBRT, in 2011. A cost calculation and budget estimation for SBRT in the OMD setting was carried out.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Predictive growth scenarios for future uptake of SBRT for OMD in Belgium were developed using demographics and CED data. The provider cost of SBRT for OMD in Belgium was calculated using the Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TD-ABC) model developed by ESTRO-HERO, alimented with national data on resources, treatments and operational parameters, and compared to the new reimbursement. Combining these, the future financial impact of this novel treatment indication for healthcare providers and payers in Belgium was evaluated.

RESULTS

The number of 428 OMDs treated with SBRT in Belgium in 2017 is expected to increase between 484 and 2073 courses annually by 2025. A provider cost of €4360 per SBRT was calculated (range: €3488-€5654), whereas the reimbursement covers between €4139 and €4654. Large variations in potential extra provider costs by 2025 ensue from the different scenarios, ranging between €1,765,993 and €9,038,754. Provider costs and reimbursement show good agreement.

CONCLUSION

Although the financial impact of SBRT for OMD in Belgium is forecasted to remain acceptable, even in extreme scenarios, further clinical trials and real-life clinical and financial monitoring with prospective data gathering are necessary to refine the data.

Practice-changing radiation therapy trials for the treatment of cancer: where are we 150 years after the birth of Marie Curie?

As we mark 150 years since the birth of Marie Curie, we reflect on the global advances made in radiation oncology and the current status of radiation therapy (RT) research. Large-scale international RT clinical trials have been fundamental in driving evidence-based change and have served to improve cancer management and to reduce side effects. Radiation therapy trials have also improved practice by increasing quality assurance and consistency in treatment protocols across multiple centres. This review summarises some of the key RT practice-changing clinical trials over the last two decades, in four common cancer sites for which RT is a crucial component of curative treatment: breast, lung, urological and lower gastro-intestinal cancer. We highlight the global inequality in access to RT, and the work of international organisations, such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the United Kingdom National Cancer Research Institute Clinical and Translational Radiotherapy Research Working Group (CTRad), that aim to improve access to RT and facilitate radiation research. We discuss some emerging RT technologies including proton beam therapy and magnetic resonance linear accelerators and predict likely future directions in clinical RT research.

Economic data for particle therapy: Dealing with different needs in a heterogeneous landscape

BACKGROUND

In the light of scarce resources to be allocated for cancer care and a steady stream of costly innovations in all modalities applied to treat cancer, particle therapy needs to demonstrate its cost-utility balance to allow its positioning in the context of competing modalities. In the continuous evolving particle therapy landscape, the timely availability of appropriate economic data is crucial.

METHODS

Economic data collection and compilation for particle therapy needs to follow health economic standards. Costing related analyses particularly need attention as clinical outcome data follow international standards to provide comparability. Among others, perspective, time horizons and cost categories are critical.

RESULTS

In this report from the "Health Economics Work Package" of the European Particle Therapy Network, the approaches commonly applied in health economic assessments are described and tailored to the specific needs of particle therapy. Data collection for cost calculation, economic evaluation and budget impact analysis are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The presented data are intended to serve as a guidance for economic data collection, bearing in mind that in each specific case, the heterogeneous requirements of national health systems will need to be considered and assessments adapted accordingly.

Radiation Therapy Research: A Global Analysis 2001-2015

Radiation therapy is a core modality of cancer treatment; however, concerns have been expressed regarding its underutilization and its lack of prioritization as a research domain relative to other cancer treatment modalities, despite its rapid technical evolution. It is therefore important to understand, from a public policy perspective, the evolution of global radiation therapy research, to identify strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities. This study used a bibliometric approach to undertake a quantitative analysis of global radiation therapy research published between 2001 and 2015 and available in the Web of Science (Wos) database, with particular focus on the 25 leading research-active countries. A total of 62,550 radiation therapy research articles from 127 countries, published in 2531 international journals, were analyzed. The United States was responsible for 32.3% of these outputs, followed by Japan (8.0%) and Germany (7.7%). Nearly half of all publications related to preparation and delivery of radiation therapy, combined-modality regimens, and dose fractionation studies. Health services research, palliative care, and quality of life studies represented only 2%, 5%, and 4% of all research outputs, respectively. Countries varied significantly in their commitment to different research domains, and trial-related publications represented only 5.1% of total output. Research impact was analyzed according to 3 different citation scores, with research outputs from Denmark, The Netherlands, and the United States consistently the highest ranked. Globally, radiation therapy publication outputs continue to increase but lag behind other spheres of cancer management. The types of radiation therapy research undertaken appear to be regionally patterned, and there is a clear disconcordance between the volume of research output from individual countries and its citation impact. Greater support for radiation therapy research in low- and middle-income countries is required, including international collaboration. The study findings are expected to provide the requisite knowledge to guide future radiation therapy research programs.