MRI-Guided Radiation Therapy-An Emerging and Disruptive Process of Care: Healthcare Economic and Policy Considerations

MRI-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) is an emerging, innovative technology that provides opportunities to transform and improve the current clinical care process in radiation oncology. As with many new technologies in radiation oncology, careful evaluation from a healthcare economic and policy perspective is required for its successful implementation. In this review article, we describe the current evidence surrounding MRgRT, framing it within the context of value within the healthcare system. Additionally, we highlight areas in which MRgRT may disrupt the current process of care, and discuss the evidence thresholds and timeline required for the widespread adoption of this promising technology.

Trends in medical care utilization in patients with cancer: An analysis of real-world data in a tertiary hospital in Korea, 2014-2019

BACKGROUND

Rising costs of cancer treatments challenge even areas with universal health coverage. There's a need to assess current medical care utilization trends among patients with cancer to guide public health policy, resource allocation, and set informed healthcare goals.

METHODS

We analyzed the latest trends in medical care utilization by cancer patients in four areas-drugs, radiation therapy (RT), surgery, and diagnostic procedures-using clinical databases extracted from electronic medical records of a tertiary hospital in Korea between 2014 and 2019. Compound adjusted growth rates (CAGR) were computed to capture the annual growth over the study period.

RESULTS

A total of 74,285 cancer patients were identified, with 40.3% (29,962), 14.2% (10,577), 31.1% (23,066), and 92.6% (68,849) of patients having received at least one anticancer agent, RT, surgery, and diagnostic procedure, respectively, over the period. We observed a 1.7-fold increase in the use of targeted · immune-oncology agents (from 6.8% to 11.6%) and a 21-fold increase (from 3.0% in 2014 to 65.7%) in intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) use over the period. In contrast, we observed a continuous decrease in the proportion of patients who underwent surgical treatment from 12.2% in 2014 to 10.9% in 2019. This decrease was particularly noticeable in patients with colon cancer (from 28.5% to 24.2%) and liver cancer (from 4.1% to 2.9%).

CONCLUSION

From 2014 to 2019, there was a significant rise in the use of targeted · immune-oncology agents and IMRT, alongside a decline in surgeries. While targeted · immune-oncology agents and IMRT may offer promising outcomes, their financial impact and potential for overuse necessitate careful oversight and long-term cost-effectiveness studies.

Different meaning of the mean heart dose between 3D-CRT and IMRT for breast cancer radiotherapy

Background

Previous studies in 2D and in 3D conformal radiotherapy concludes that the maximal heart distance and the mean heart dose (MHD) are considered predictive of late cardiac toxicities. As the use of inverse-planned intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is increasing worldwide, we hypothesized that this 3D MHD might not be representative of heart exposure after IMRT for breast cancer (BC).

Methods

Patients with left-sided BC and unfavorable cardiac anatomy received IMRT. Their treatment plan was compared to a virtual treatment plan for 3D conformal radiotherapy with similar target volume coverage (study A). Then, a second 3D conformal treatment plan was generated to achieve equivalent individual MHD obtained by IMRT. Then the heart and left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery exposures were analyzed (study B). Last, the relationship between MHD and the heart volume or LAD coronary artery volume receiving at least 30Gy, 40Gy and 45Gy in function of each additional 1Gy to the MHD was assessed (study C).

Results

A significant decrease of heart and LAD coronary artery exposure to high dose was observed with the IMRT compared with the 3D conformal radiotherapy plans that both ensured adequate target coverage (study A). The results of study B and C showed that 3D MHD was not representative of similar heart substructure exposure with IMRT, especially in the case of high dose exposure.

Conclusions

The mean heart dose is not a representative dosimetric parameter to assess heart exposure following IMRT. Equivalent MHD values following IMRT and 3DRT BC treatment do not represent the same dose distribution leading to extreme caution when using this parameter for IMRT plan validation.

Quality and Safety Considerations in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy: An ASTRO Safety White Paper Update

PURPOSE

This updated report on intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is part of a series of consensus-based white papers previously published by the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) addressing patient safety. Since the first white papers were published, IMRT went from widespread use to now being the main delivery technique for many treatment sites. IMRT enables higher radiation doses to be delivered to more precise targets while minimizing the dose to uninvolved normal tissue. Due to the associated complexity, IMRT requires additional planning and safety checks before treatment begins and, therefore, quality and safety considerations for this technique remain important areas of focus.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

ASTRO convened an interdisciplinary task force to assess the original IMRT white paper and update content where appropriate. Recommendations were created using a consensus-building methodology, and task force members indicated their level of agreement based on a 5-point Likert scale, from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." A prespecified threshold of ≥75% of raters who select "strongly agree" or "agree" indicated consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

This IMRT white paper primarily focuses on quality and safety processes in planning and delivery. Building on the prior version, this consensus paper incorporates revised and new guidance documents and technology updates. IMRT requires an interdisciplinary team-based approach, staffed by appropriately trained individuals as well as significant personnel resources, specialized technology, and implementation time. A comprehensive quality assurance program must be developed, using established guidance, to ensure IMRT is performed in a safe and effective manner. Patient safety in the delivery of IMRT is everyone's responsibility, and professional organizations, regulators, vendors, and end-users must work together to ensure the highest levels of safety.

Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of 3D-Conformal Radiation Therapy Versus Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) in a Prospective Multicenter Cohort of Patients With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Simple intensity modulation of radiation therapy reduces acute toxicity compared with 2-dimensional techniques in adjuvant breast cancer treatment, but it remains unknown whether more complex or inverse-planned intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) offers an advantage over forward-planned, 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Using prospective data regarding patients receiving adjuvant whole breast radiation therapy without nodal irradiation at 23 institutions from 2011 to 2018, we compared the incidence of acute toxicity (moderate-severe pain or moist desquamation) in patients receiving 3DCRT versus IMRT (either inverse planned or, if forward-planned, using ≥5 segments per gantry angle). We evaluated associations between technique and toxicity using multivariable models with inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting, adjusting for treatment facility as a random effect.

RESULTS

Of 1185 patients treated with 3DCRT and conventional fractionation, 650 (54.9%) experienced acute toxicity; of 774 treated with highly segmented forward-planned IMRT, 458 (59.2%) did; and of 580 treated with inverse-planned IMRT, 245 (42.2%) did. Of 1296 patients treated with hypofractionation and 3DCRT, 432 (33.3%) experienced acute toxicity; of 709 treated with highly segmented forward-planned IMRT, 227 (32.0%) did; and of 623 treated with inverse-planned IMRT, 164 (26.3%) did. On multivariable analysis with inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting, the odds ratio for acute toxicity after inverse-planned IMRT versus 3DCRT was 0.64 (95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.91) with conventional fractionation and 0.41 (95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.65) with hypofractionation.

CONCLUSIONS

This large, prospective, multicenter comparative effectiveness study found a significant benefit from inverse-planned IMRT compared with 3DCRT in reducing acute toxicity of breast radiation therapy. Future research should identify the dosimetric differences that mediate this association and evaluate cost-effectiveness.

Worsening racial disparities in utilization of intensity modulated radiotherapy

Purpose

The benefits of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) compared with standard 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy have been demonstrated in many cancer sites and include decreased acute and late toxicity, improved quality of life, and opportunities for dose escalation. Limited literature suggests non-white patients may have lower utilization of IMRT. We hypothesized that as the use of IMRT has increased in recent years, racial inequities have persisted and disproportionately affect non-Hispanic Black (NHB) patients. We aim to evaluate temporal trends in IMRT utilization focusing on disparities among minoritized populations.

Methods and Materials

The National Cancer Database was queried to identify the 10 disease sites with the highest total number of cancer patients treated with definitive intent IMRT in 2017, the most recent year for which data are available. Exclusions included stage IV, age <18 years, unknown insurance status, unknown race, and palliative intent radiation. Race and ethnicity variables were combined and classified as non-Hispanic White, Hispanic, NHB, Asian, Native American/Eskimo, and Hawaiian/Pacific Islander. Multivariable logistic regression for IMRT utilization was performed for each disease site for both early (2004-2010) and contemporary (2011-2017) cohorts, adjusting for clinical and demographic covariates.

Results

Among the 10 selected disease sites, 1,010,292 patients received radiation therapy as part of definitive treatment between 2004 and 2017. Overall IMRT utilization rates increased from 22.0% in 2004 to 57.8% in 2017. After adjustment and compared with non-Hispanic White patients, NHB patients were significantly less likely to receive IMRT in 1 of 10 disease sites in the 2004 to 2010 cohort, and 5 of 10 disease sites in the 2011 to 2017 cohort.

Conclusions

Despite greater awareness of racial disparities in cancer care and outcomes, this study demonstrates worsening disparities in the use of IMRT, particularly for NHB patients. These differences may exacerbate racial disparities in cancer outcomes; therefore, identification of underlying drivers of differential IMRT utilization is warranted.

Patient Perceptions in a Nonblinded Randomized Trial of Radiation Therapy Technologies: A Novel Survey Study Exploring Therapeutic Misconception

PURPOSE

Therapeutic misconception is the tendency for a clinical trial participant to overlook the scientific objective of a clinical trial and instead believe that an experimental intervention is intended for personal therapeutic benefit. We sought to evaluate this tendency in the setting of a clinical trial of a new radiation therapy technology.

METHODS

Patients with left-sided, node positive breast cancer enrolled in a randomized clinical trial evaluating intensity modulated radiation therapy with deep inspiration breath hold (IMRT-DIBH) versus 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT). Patients who enrolled completed surveys at baseline, after randomization, and upon completion of radiation therapy to evaluate expectations, satisfaction, and experiences.

RESULTS

Forty women participated in the survey study, with 20 in each arm. Most participants endorsed the perception that participation in the trial might result in better treatment than the current standard treatment (77%) and more medical attention than being off trial (54%). At baseline, most women (74%) believed that a new treatment technology is superior than an established one. Before randomization, 43% of participants believed IMRT-DIBH would be more effective than standard treatment with 3DCRT, none believed that 3DCRT would be more effective, 23% believed that they would be the same, and 34% did not know. None believed that IMRT-DIBH would cause worse long-term side effects, whereas 37% thought that 3DCRT would. Most (71%) reported that they would choose to be treated with IMRT-DIBH; none would have elected 3DCRT if given a choice. Nearly half (44%) in the 3DCRT arm wished that they had been assigned to the IMRT-DIBH arm; none in the IMRT-DIBH arm expressed a wish for crossover.

CONCLUSIONS

Most participants reported the perception that trial participation would result in better treatment and more medical attention than off trial, hallmarks of therapeutic misconception. Our observations provide empirical evidence of a fixed belief in the superiority of new technology and highlight the importance of adjusting expectations through informed consent to mitigate therapeutic misconception.

Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy in Breast Cancer Patients Following the Release of a Choosing Wisely Recommendation

In 2013, the American Society for Radiation Oncology recommended against the routine use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in breast cancer patients. We evaluated trends in the use of IMRT before and after the release of the recommendation. Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare data, we identified 13 457 breast cancer patients diagnosed between 2012 and 2015 who received breast-conserving surgery and postsurgery, whole-breast, IMRT, or three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy. We find that the use of IMRT decreased by 4.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.6 to 5.6; two-sided P < .001) percentage points in hospital-based clinics. In freestanding radiotherapy clinics, which had baseline rates of IMRT use that were more than 20 percentage points higher than in hospital-based clinics, use of IMRT declined by 6.1 (95% CI = 3.5 to 8.7; two-sided P < .001) percentage points. Use of IMRT declined following the release of the recommendation, but a large share of patients treated in freestanding clinics continue to receive IMRT.

Recent trends in intensity-modulated radiation therapy use in Korea

Purpose

We aimed to analyze the trend in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) use in Korea from 2011 to 2018.

Materials and Methods

We collected data from the Health and Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) big data based on the National Health Insurance Service claims and reimbursements records using primary treatment planning codes (HD 041) for IMRT from 2011 to 2018. We analyzed the changing patterns in clinical application to specific tumor sites and regional differences in IMRT utilization.

Results

The use of IMRT has exhibited an 18-fold steep rise from 1,921 patients in 2011 to 34,759 in 2018. With regard to IMRT in 2018, 70% of patients (24,248/34,759) were treated in metropolitan areas (Seoul, Incheon, and Gyeonggi Province). IMRT was most commonly used to treat breast, lung, and prostate cancers in 2018. Among these, the use of IMRT for breast cancer shows the most remarkable increase from 2016 when the National Health Insurance began to cover IMRT for all solid tumors.

Conclusion

The use of IMRT is steadily increasing to treat cancer and is concentrated in metropolitan areas.

Association Between Reimbursement Incentives and Physician Practice in Oncology: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

Significant controversy exists regarding whether physicians factor personal financial considerations into their clinical decision making. Within oncology, several reimbursement policies may incentivize physicians to increase health care use.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the financial incentives presented by oncology reimbursement policies affect physician practice patterns.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Studies evaluating an association between reimbursement incentives and changes in reimbursement policy on oncology care delivery were reviewed. Articles were identified systematically by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Proquest Health Management, Econlit, and Business Source Premier. English-language articles focused on the US health care system that made empirical estimates of the association between a measurement of physician reimbursement/compensation and a measurement of delivery of cancer treatment services were included. The Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tool was used to assess risk of bias. There were no date restrictions on the publications, and literature searches were finalized on February 14, 2018.

FINDINGS

Eighteen studies were included. All were observational cohort studies, and most had a moderate risk of bias. Heterogeneity of reimbursement policies and outcomes precluded meta-analysis; therefore, a qualitative synthesis was performed. Most studies (15 of 18 [83%]) reported an association between reimbursement and care delivery consistent with physician responsiveness to financial incentives, although such an association was not identified in all studies. Findings consistently suggested that self-referral arrangements may increase use of radiotherapy and that profitability of systemic anticancer agents may affect physicians' choice of drug. Findings were less conclusive as to whether profitability of systemic anticancer therapy affects the decision of whether to use any systemic therapy.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

To date, this study is the first systematic review of reimbursement policy and clinical care delivery in oncology. The findings suggest that some oncologists may, in certain circumstances, alter treatment recommendations based on personal revenue considerations. An implication of this finding is that value-based reimbursement policies may be a useful tool to better align physician incentives with patient need and increase the value of oncology care.

Retrospective analysis of breast radiotherapy treatment plans: Curating the 'non-curated'

INTRODUCTION

This paper provides a demonstration of how non-curated data can be retrospectively cleaned, so that existing repositories of radiotherapy treatment planning data can be used to complete bulk retrospective analyses of dosimetric trends and other plan characteristics.

METHODS

A non curated archive of 1137 radiotherapy treatment plans accumulated over a 12-month period, from five radiotherapy centres operated by one institution, was used to investigate and demonstrate a process of clinical data cleansing, by: identifying and translating inconsistent structure names; correcting inconsistent lung contouring; excluding plans for treatments other than breast tangents and plans without identifiable PTV, lung and heart structures; and identifying but not excluding plans that deviated from the local planning protocol. PTV, heart and lung dose-volume metrics were evaluated, in addition to a sample of personnel and linac load indicators.

RESULTS

Data cleansing reduced the number of treatment plans in the sample by 35.7%. Inconsistent structure names were successfully identified and translated (e.g. 35 different names for lung). Automatically separating whole lung structures into left and right lung structures allowed the effect of contralateral and ipsilateral lung dose to be evaluated, while introducing some small uncertainties, compared to manual contouring. PTV doses were indicative of prescription doses. Breast treatment work was unevenly distributed between oncologists and between metropolitan and regional centres.

CONCLUSION

This paper exemplifies the data cleansing and data analysis steps that may be completed using existing treatment planning data, to provide individual radiation oncology departments with access to information on their own patient populations. Clearly, the well-planned and systematic recording of new, high quality data is the preferred solution, but the retrospective curation of non-curated data may be a useful interim solution, for radiation oncology departments where the systems for recording of new data have yet to be designed and agreed.

Equipment, staffing, and provision of radiotherapy in Lombardy, Italy: Results of three surveys performed between 2012 and 2016

INTRODUCTION:

Several efforts are being implemented at the European level to measure provision of up-to-date radiation treatments across the continent.

METHODS:

A snapshot survey involving all radiation oncology centers within Lombardy, Italy, was performed in 2012 and repeated in 2014 and 2016, in cooperation with regional governmental officers. Centers were asked to provide detailed information concerning all individual patients being treated on the index day, and to report data on available local resources.

RESULTS:

We observed an increase in the number of centers and of megavoltage units (MVU) (from 76 to 87, i.e., 8.7 MVU per million inhabitants in 2016). Mean number of MVU per center was 2.5. Average age of MVU increased from 5.3 to 7.5 years and patients on the waiting list also increased. Conformal 3D radiotherapy (RT) treatments decreased from 56% to 42% and were progressively replaced by intensity-modulated RT treatments (from 39% to 49%). Waiting times were overall satisfactory. Radiation oncologists treated on average 152 and radiation therapists 100 RT courses per year. Average reimbursement per course was €4,879 (range €2,476-€8,014).

CONCLUSIONS:

The methodology of snapshot survey proved feasible and provided valuable information about radiation oncology provision and accessibility in Lombardy.

Provider variability in intensity modulated radiation therapy utilization among Medicare beneficiaries in the United States

BACKGROUND

In this study, we sought to examine the variation in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) use among radiation oncology providers.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The Medicare Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File was queried for radiation oncologists practicing during 2014. Healthcare Common Procedural Coding System code 77301 was designated as IMRT planning with metrics including number of total IMRT plans, rate of IMRT utilization, and number of IMRT plans per distinct beneficiary.

RESULTS

Of 2759 radiation oncologists, the median number of total IMRT plans was 26 (mean, 33.4; standard deviation, 26.2; range, 11-321) with a median IMRT utilization rate of 36% (mean, 43%; standard deviation, 25%; range, 4% to 100%) and a median number of IMRT plans per beneficiary of 1.02 (mean, 1.07; range, 1.00-3.73). On multivariable analysis, increased IMRT utilization was associated with male sex, academic practice, technical fee billing, freestanding practice, practice in a county with 21 or more radiation oncologists, and practice in the southern United States (P < .05). The top 1% of users (28 providers) billed a mean 181 IMRT plans with an IMRT utilization rate of 66% and 1.52 IMRT plans per beneficiary. Of these 28 providers, 24 had billed technical fees, 25 practiced in freestanding clinics, and 20 practiced in the South.

CONCLUSIONS

Technical fee billing, freestanding practice, male sex, and location in the South were associated with increased IMRT use. A small group of outliers shared several common demographic and practice-based characteristics.

The big data effort in radiation oncology: Data mining or data farming?

Although large volumes of information are entered into our electronic health care records, radiation oncology information systems and treatment planning systems on a daily basis, the goal of extracting and using this big data has been slow to emerge. Development of strategies to meet this goal is aided by examining issues with a data farming instead of a data mining conceptualization. Using this model, a vision of key data elements, clinical process changes, technology issues and solutions, and role for professional societies is presented. With a better view of technology, process and standardization factors, definition and prioritization of efforts can be more effectively directed.