Online advertising and marketing claims by providers of proton beam therapy: are they guideline-based?

New technology in prostate cancer and financial toxicity

The management of prostate cancer has significantly evolved over the last few decades with the emergence of new diagnostic and treatment technologies, which are typically more expensive than the previous alternatives. However, decision-making regarding which diagnostics and treatment to pursue is often influenced by perceived benefits, adverse effects, and physician recommendations, without considering the financial liability borne by patients. New technologies may exacerbate financial toxicity by replacing less costly alternatives, promoting unrealistic expectations, and expanding treatment to those who would have previously gone untreated. More judicious use of technologies with an understanding of the contexts in which they are most beneficial may help prevent avoidable financial toxicity to patients.

"I don't want to hear statistics, I want real life stories": Systematic review and thematic synthesis of patient and caregiver experiences of Proton Beam Therapy

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

Proton Beam Therapy (PBT) is an advanced form of radiotherapy, yet little evidence exists on patient experience to inform decision making and improve future care. We thematically synthesized the qualitative evidence of patient and caregivers' perceptions and experiences of PBT.

LITERATURE SEARCH

Five electronic databases were systematically searched, using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and keywords. Two reviewers independently screened search results for qualitative studies relating to patients' and caregivers' experiences of PBT. The search generated 4,020 records, of which nine were eligible. Study quality (assessed by CASP checklist) varied.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Qualitative results were analyzed using thematic synthesis. Three main themes were generated: decision making and perceptions, living in the PBT "bubble," and coping with the cancer treatment journey.

CONCLUSIONS

PBT is not yet widely accessible worldwide, which uniquely influences the patient experience. Our review uncovers areas PBT providers could target to improve patient-centered care; however, additional primary qualitative research is recommended.

Assessment of Proton Beam Therapy Use Among Patients With Newly Diagnosed Cancer in the US, 2004-2018

IMPORTANCE

Proton beam therapy (PBT) is a potentially superior technology to photon radiotherapy for tumors with complex anatomy, those surrounded by sensitive tissues, and childhood cancers.

OBJECTIVE

To assess patterns of use of PBT according to the present American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) clinical indications in the US.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Individuals newly diagnosed with cancer between 2004 and 2018 were selected from the National Cancer Database. Data analysis was performed from October 4, 2021, to February 22, 2022. ASTRO's Model Policies (2017) were used to classify patients into group 1, for which health insurance coverage for PBT treatment is recommended, and group 2, for which coverage is recommended only if additional requirements are met.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Use of PBT.

RESULTS

Of the 5 919 368 patients eligible to receive PBT included in the study, 3 206 902 were female (54.2%), and mean (SD) age at diagnosis was 62.6 (12.3) years. Use of PBT in the US increased from 0.4% in 2004 to 1.2% in 2018 (annual percent change [APC], 8.12%; P < .001) due to increases in group 1 from 0.4% in 2010 to 2.2% in 2018 (APC, 21.97; P < .001) and increases in group 2 from 0.03% in 2014 to 0.1% in 2018 (APC, 30.57; P < .001). From 2010 to 2018, among patients in group 2, PBT targeted to the breast increased from 0.0% to 0.9% (APC, 51.95%), and PBT targeted to the lung increased from 0.1% to 0.7% (APC, 28.06%) (P < .001 for both). Use of PBT targeted to the prostate decreased from 1.4% in 2011 to 0.8% in 2014 (APC, -16.48%; P = .03) then increased to 1.3% in 2018 (APC, 12.45; P < .001). Most patients in group 1 treated with PBT had private insurance coverage in 2018 (1039 [55.4%]); Medicare was the most common insurance type among those in group 2 (1973 [52.5%]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this study show an increase in the use of PBT in the US between 2004 to 2018; prostate was the only cancer site for which PBT use decreased temporarily between 2011 and 2014, increasing again between 2014 and 2018. These findings may be especially relevant for Medicare radiation oncology coverage policies.

General and Health-Related Internet Use Among Cancer Survivors in the United States: A 2013-2018 Cross-Sectional Analysis

BACKGROUND

A significant proportion of cancer survivors endorse ongoing health information needs and may use the internet to access information. We assessed patterns and predictors of general and health-specific internet use among cancer survivors.

METHODS

Using data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), which was administered in 2013 through 2018, for adults reporting a cancer diagnosis, sample weight-adjusted estimates defined prevalence and multivariable logistic regressions defined adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of general and health-specific internet use, adjusting for relevant sociodemographic covariates, including healthcare satisfaction as the primary independent variable. The analysis for health-specific internet use was also repeated including a sex (female vs male)*healthcare satisfaction (very satisfied/somewhat satisfied vs somewhat dissatisfied/very dissatisfied) interaction term.

RESULTS

Among 12,970 survivors of cancer, general and health-specific internet use increased from 2013 to 2018 (from 63.2% to 70.8% and from 46.8% to 52.2%, respectively; P<.05 for both). Survivors who were very dissatisfied with healthcare were more likely to use the internet for health information compared with those who were very satisfied (59.5% vs 48.0%; aOR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.20-2.64; P=.004). Younger age, female sex, higher educational attainment, and higher socioeconomic status were all associated with increased reported use of the internet for both general and health-specific purposes (P<.001 for all). There was a significant sex*healthcare satisfaction interaction (P=.009) such that for female survivors, healthcare dissatisfaction was associated with higher odds of health-specific internet use (61.4% vs 52.5%; P<.001; men, P=.97). No association was found between healthcare satisfaction and general internet use (P=.42).

CONCLUSIONS

The increasing proportion of survivors of cancer using the internet for health-specific information may be associated with self-reported dissatisfaction with healthcare. Efforts are needed to improve both access to the internet and the quality of cancer-relevant online health information, and to enhance patients' online health literacy.

Overall Survival After Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer With Proton Beam Therapy, External-Beam Photon Therapy, or Brachytherapy

With limited high-level evidence, we carried out a comparative effectiveness study for the effect of proton beam therapy (PBT) on overall survival compared to external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy (BT) among patients with localized prostate cancer using a national database. PBT was associated with a significant overall survival benefit compared to EBRT and had a similar performance as BT.

Trends, Quality, and Readability of Online Health Resources on Proton Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

Many patients weighing cancer treatment options may consider relatively novel options including proton radiation therapy (PRT) and turn to the Internet for online health resources (OHR). However, quality and readability of OHR for radiation oncology therapies has been shown to need improvement. Because the OHR that patients access can influence their treatment decisions, our study sought to understand the patterns of use, quality, and readability of OHR on PRT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

To validate the need to assess OHR on PRT, we assessed search patterns in the United States for the search phrase "proton therapy" using Google Trends. The Google search engine was then queried for websites with PRT information using 10 search phrases. The subsequent websites were analyzed for readability by the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level and a Composite Grade Level (CGL) metric comprised of 5 readability metrics. Quality was analyzed using the DISCERN instrument.

RESULTS

Search volume index for "proton therapy" increased by an average of 2.0% each year for the last 15 years (January 1, 2005 to June 1, 2019, P < .001). States that had a greater number of proton centers tended to have a greater relative search volume in Google (P < .001). Of the 45 unique websites identified, the mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level was 12.0 (range, 7.3-18.6) and the mean CGL was 12.4 (range, 7-18). In addition, 80% of PRT pages required greater than 11th grade CGL. The mean DISCERN score of all websites was 39.8 out of 75, which corresponds to "fair" quality OHR.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increasing interest in PRT OHR, in general, PRT websites require reading levels much higher than currently recommended, making PRT OHR less accessible to the average patient. Provision of high-quality PRT OHR at the appropriate reading level may increase comprehension of PRT, improve patient autonomy, and facilitate informed decision-making among radiation oncology patients.

Is there any benefit to particles over photon radiotherapy?

Particle, essentially, proton radiotherapy (RT) could provide some benefits over photon RT, especially in reducing the side effects of RT. We performed a systematic review to identify the performed randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and ongoing RCTs comparing particle RT with photon therapy. So far, there are no results available from phase 3 RCTs comparing particle RT with photon therapy. Furthermore, the results on side effects comparing proton and carbon ion beam RT with photon RT do vary. The introduction of new techniques in photon RT, such as image-guided RT (IGRT), intensity-modulated RT (IMRT), volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) and stereotactic body RT (SBRT) was already effective in reducing side effects. At present, the lack of evidence limits the indications for proton and carbon ion beam RTs and makes the particle RT still experimental.

Proton versus photon-based radiation therapy for prostate cancer: emerging evidence and considerations in the era of value-based cancer care

BACKGROUND

Advances in radiation technology have transformed treatment options for patients with localized prostate cancer. The evolution of three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) have allowed physicians to spare surrounding normal organs and reduce adverse effects. The introduction of proton beam technology and its physical advantage of depositing its energy in tissue at the end-of-range maximum may potentially spare critical organs such as the bladder and rectum in prostate cancer patients. Data thus far are limited to large, observational studies that have not yet demonstrated a definite benefit of protons over conventional treatment with IMRT. The cost of proton beam treatment adds to the controversy within the field.

METHODS

We performed an extensive literature review for all proton treatment-related prostate cancer studies. We discuss the history of proton beam technology, as well as its role in the treatment of prostate cancer, associated controversies, novel technology trends, a discussion of cost-effectiveness, and an overview of the ongoing modern large prospective studies that aim to resolve the debate between protons and photons for prostate cancer.

RESULTS

Present data have demonstrated that proton beam therapy is safe and effective compared with the standard treatment options for prostate cancer. While dosimetric studies suggest lower whole-body radiation dose and a theoretically higher relative biological effectiveness in prostate cancer compared with photons, no studies have demonstrated a clear benefit with protons.

CONCLUSIONS

Evolving trends in proton treatment delivery and proton center business models are helping to reduce costs. Introduction of existing technology into proton delivery allows further control of organ motion and addressing organs-at-risk. Finally, the much-awaited contemporary studies comparing photon with proton-based treatments, with primary endpoints of patient-reported quality-of-life, will help us understand the differences between proton and photon-based treatments for prostate cancer in the modern era.

Reddit and Radiation Therapy: A Descriptive Analysis of Posts and Comments Over 7 Years by Patients and Health Care Professionals

Purpose

Reddit is a social media platform that allows health care professionals (HPs) to anonymously interact with patients. We analyzed content about radiation therapy (RT) on Reddit.

Methods and Materials

Reddit.com/r/cancer was queried with 20 search terms related to RT: IMRT, 3D-CRT, SBRT, EBRT, XRT, radiation, radiotherapy, RT, radio, rad, rads, gamma, gamma knife, gammaknife, cyber knife, cyberknife, cyber, brachytherapy, brachy, and cobalt. The search aimed to identify all posts discussing RT. A random sample of posts and their top 3 comments was selected to generate qualitative thematic codes per author consensus, which were used to characterize all posts and their top 3 voted comments. Posts were analyzed for time to first reply, mention of any specific RT modality, whether a self-identified HP responded, and time to first highly voted comment by an HP.

Results

Exactly 190 posts about RT by 178 users were shared from February 2011 to May 2018, and 468 replies by 295 users were also analyzed. Twenty-nine of these users (9.8%) were HPs; however, 48 of 181 top comments were contributed by HPs compared with 45 of 288 non–top comments by HPs (odds ratio, 1.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-3.08; P < .004). The most common themes were treatment questions, chronology, and information; toxicities; and social support. The median time to first comment after posting was 64.0 minutes (95% CI, 53.0-82.0), and median time to first highly voted comment from an HP was 264.0 minutes (95% CI, 153.5-427.9; U = 4123.5; P < .0001 2-tailed). Fifty-three posts (27.9%) identified a specific RT modality, with proton therapy (7.4%), CyberKnife (5.3%), brachytherapy (4.2%), and whole brain radiation (4.2%) being the most common.

Conclusions

HPs did not reply often to RT posts and generally took longer to do so, but their replies were valued by users. Common themes included treatment questions, chronology, and treatment; toxicities; and social support. Proton therapy received notable attention.

Proton therapy for prostate cancer: A review of the rationale, evidence, and current state

Men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer have many curative treatment options including several different radiotherapeutic approaches. Proton radiation is one such radiation treatment modality and, due to its unique physical properties, offers the appealing potential of reduced side effects without sacrificing cancer control. In this review, we examine the intriguing dosimetric rationale and theoretical benefit of proton radiation for prostate cancer and highlight the results of preclinical modeling studies. We then discuss the current state of the clinical evidence for proton efficacy and toxicity, derived from both large claim-based datasets and prospective patient-reported data. The result is that the data are mixed, and clinical equipoise persists in this area. We place these studies into context by summarizing the economics of proton therapy and the changing practice patterns of prostate proton irradiation. Finally, we await the results of a large prospective randomized clinical trial currently accruing and also a large prospective pragmatic comparative study which will provide more rigorous evidence regarding the clinical and comparative effectiveness of proton therapy for prostate cancer.