Radiation Oncology Practice: Adjusting to a New Reimbursement Model

Practical Implications of the American Society for Radiation Oncology Radiation Oncology Case Rate Program Proposal for Radiation Oncologists

The American Society for Radiation Oncology has proposed the Radiation Oncology Case Rate Program (ROCR) to advocate for fair reimbursement for radiation oncologists. ROCR would replace Medicare fee-for-service with a case rate payment for each of the 15 most common cancer types treated with external beam or stereotactic radiation therapy. This topic discussion attempts to provide a concise overview of the practical implications for radiation oncologists should the ROCR payment program be legislated by Congress and subsequently implemented by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. This topic discussion covers the practical changes to billing and reimbursement, the Health Equity Achievement in Radiation Therapy payment, the Quality of Care requirement, and the available tool to calculate the effect of the ROCR based on an individual practice's case mix.

Increasing Use of Shorter-Course Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

Importance

Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the noninferiority of shorter radiotherapy (RT) courses (termed hypofractionation) compared with longer RT courses in patients with localized prostate cancer. Although shorter courses are associated with cost-effectiveness, convenience, and expanded RT access, their adoption remains variable.

Objective

To identify the current practice patterns of external beam RT for prostate cancer in the US.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study obtained data from the National Cancer Database, which collects hospital registry data from more than 1500 accredited US facilities on approximately 72% of US patients with cancer. Patients were included in the sample if they had localized prostate adenocarcinoma that was diagnosed between 2004 and 2020 and underwent external beam RT with curative intent. Analyses were conducted between February and March 2023.

Exposures

Radiotherapy schedules, which were categorized as ultrahypofractionation (≤7 fractions), moderate hypofractionation (20-30 fractions), and conventional fractionation (31-50 fractions).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Longitudinal pattern in RT fractionation schedule was the primary outcome. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate the variables associated with shorter RT courses. Covariables included age, National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group, rurality, race, facility location, facility type, median income, insurance type or status, and Charlson-Deyo Comorbidity Index.

Results

A total of 313 062 patients with localized prostate cancer (mean [SD] age, 68.8 [7.7] years) were included in the analysis. There was a temporal pattern of decline in the proportion of patients who received conventional fractionation, from 76.0% in 2004 to 36.6% in 2020 (P for trend <.001). From 2004 to 2020, use of moderate hypofractionation increased from 22.0% to 45.0% (P for trend <.001), and use of ultrahypofractionation increased from 2.0% to 18.3% (P for trend <.001). By 2020, the most common RT schedule was ultrahypofractionation for patients in the low-risk group and moderate hypofractionation for patients in the intermediate-risk group. On multivariable analysis, treatment at a community cancer program (compared with academic or research program; odds ratio [OR], 0.54 [95% CI, 0.52-0.56]; P < .001), Medicaid insurance (compared with Medicare; OR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.41-1.57]; P < .001), Black race (compared with White race; OR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.87-0.92]; P < .001), and higher median income (compared with lower median income; OR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.25-1.31]; P < .001) were associated with receipt of shorter courses of RT.

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this cohort study showed an increase in the use of shorter courses of RT for prostate cancer from 2004 to 2020; a number of social determinants of health appeared to be associated with reduced adoption of shorter treatment courses. Realignment of reimbursement models may be necessary to enable broader adoption of ultrahypofractionation to support technology acquisition costs.

Moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy for breast cancer: preferences amongst radiation oncologists from countries in Latin America and the Caribbean

Background

The safety and effectiveness of moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy for breast cancer were demonstrated by several trials. This study aimed to evaluate the current patterns of practice and prescription preference about moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy to assess possible aspects that affect the decision-making process regarding the use of fractionation in breast cancer patients in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). We also aimed to identify factors that can restrain the utilization of moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy for breast cancer.

Materials an methods

Radiation oncologists from LAC were invited to contribute to this study. A 38-question survey was used to evaluate their opinions.

Results

A total of 173 radiation oncologists from 13 countries answered the questionnaire. The majority of respondents (84.9%) preferred moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy as their first choice in cases of whole breast irradiation. Whole breast plus regional nodal irradiation, post-mastectomy (chest wall and regional nodal irradiation) without reconstruction, and post-mastectomy (chest wall and regional node irradiation) with reconstruction hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy was preferred by 72.2% 71.1%, and 53.7% of respondents, respectively. Breast cancer stage, and flap-based breast reconstruction were the factors associated with absolute contraindications for the use of hypofractionated schedules.

Conclusion

Even though moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy for breast cancer is considered a new standard to the vast majority of the patients, its unrestricted application in clinical practice across LAC still faces reluctance.

Unwarranted variation in radiation therapy fractionation

The adoption of hypofractionation across multiple tumour sites has been slow despite robust evidence. There is considerable unwarranted variation in practice, both within and between jurisdictions. This has been attributed to inconsistencies in guidelines, physician preference, lack of technology and differing financial incentives. Unwarranted variation in the use of hypofractionation has a tremendous effect on cost to both patients and the healthcare system. This places an unnecessary burden on patients and poorly utilises scarce healthcare resources. A collaborative effort from clinicians, patients, healthcare providers and policymakers is needed to reduce unwarranted variation in practice. This will improve quality of care both for patients and at broader healthcare system level.

Adoption of Ultrahypofractionated Radiation Therapy in Patients With Breast Cancer

Introduction

The first high-quality clinical trial to support ultrahypofractionated whole-breast irradiation (ultra-HF-WBI) for invasive early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) was published in April 2020, coinciding with the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. We analyzed adoption of ultra-HF-WBI for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and ESBC at our institution after primary trial publication.

Methods and Materials

We evaluated radiation fractionation prescriptions for all patients with DCIS or ESBC treated with WBI from March 2020 to May 2021 at our main campus and regional campuses. Demographic and clinical characteristics were extracted from the electronic medical record. Treating physician characteristics were collected from licensure data. Hierarchical logistic regression models identified factors correlated with adoption of ultra-HF-WBI (26 Gy in 5 daily factions [UK-FAST-FORWARD] or 28.5 Gy in 5 weekly fractions [UK-FAST]).

Results

Of 665 included patients, the median age was 61.5 years, and 478 patients (71.9%) had invasive, hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. Twenty-one physicians treated the included patients. In total, 249 patients (37.4%) received ultra-HF-WBI, increasing from 4.3% (2 of 46) in March-April 2020 to a high of 45.5% (45 of 99) in July-August 2020 (P < .001). Patient factors associated with increased use of ultra-HF-WBI included older age (≥50 years old), low-grade WBI without inclusion of the low axilla, no radiation boost, and farther travel distance (P < .03). Physician variation accounted for 21.7% of variance in the outcome, with rate of use of ultra-HF-WBI by the treating physicians ranging from 0% to 75.6%. No measured physician characteristics were associated with use of ultra-HF-WBI.

Conclusions

Adoption of ultra-HF-WBI at our institution increased substantially after the publication of randomized evidence supporting its use. Ultra-HF-WBI was preferentially used in patients with lower risk disease, suggesting careful selection for this new approach while long-term data are maturing. Substantial physician-level variation may reflect a lack of consensus on the evidentiary standards required to change practice.

Has Hypofractionated Whole-Breast Radiation Therapy Become the Standard of Care in the United States? An Updated Report from National Cancer Database

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND

We aimed to update the previous evaluation of hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation (HF-WBI) use over time in the United States and factors related to its adoption for patients undergoing a lumpectomy from 2004 to 2016.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Among the patients who underwent a lumpectomy, we identified 688,079 patients with early-stage invasive breast cancer and 248,218 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ in the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2016. We defined HF-WBI as 2.5 to 3.33 Gy/fraction to the breast and conventional fractionated whole-breast irradiation as 1.8 to 2.0 Gy/fraction. We evaluated the trend of HF-WBI use and examined factors associated with HF-WBI use using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Among invasive cancer patients, the use of HF-WBI increased exponentially from 0.7% in 2004 to 15.6% in 2013 and then to 38.1% in 2016. Among patients with ductal carcinoma in situ, the use of HF-WBI has increased significantly from 0.42% in 2004 to 13.4% in 2013 and then to 34.3% in 2016. Factors found to be associated with HF-WBI use included age, patient geographical location, race/ethnicity, tumor stage, grade, treating facility type, and volume.

CONCLUSION

HF-WBI use in the United States has more than doubled from 2013 to 2016. Although its use is close to that of conventional fractionated whole-breast irradiation, HF-WBI is still far from the preferred standard of care in the United States. We identified several patient and facility factors that can impact the uptake of HF-WBI treatment. Microabstract Using the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2016, we evaluated the trend of hypofractionated whole-breast radiation therapy use and factors associated with use. Use in the United States has more than doubled from 2013 to 2016, but it has not become the standard of care. We identified several patient and facility factors that impact the uptake of hypofractionated whole-breast radiation therapy treatment.

The Financial Impact on Reimbursement of Moderately Hypofractionated Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer: An International Consortium Report

AIMS

Moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation has been evaluated in several prospective studies, resulting in wide acceptance of shorter treatment protocols for postoperative breast irradiation. Reimbursement for radiation therapy varies between private and public systems and between countries, impacting variably financial considerations in the use of hypofractionation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the financial impact of moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation by reimbursement system in different countries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was designed by an international group of radiation oncologists. A web-questionnaire was distributed to representatives from each country. The participants were asked to involve the financial consultant at their institution.

RESULTS

Data from 13 countries from all populated continents were collected (Europe: Denmark, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, UK; North America: Canada, USA; South America: Brazil; Africa: South Africa; Oceania: Australia; Asia: Israel, Taiwan). Clinicians and/or departments in most of the countries surveyed (77%) receive remuneration based on the number of fractions delivered to the patient. The financial loss per patient estimated resulting from applying moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation instead of conventional fractionation ranged from 5-10% to 30-40%, depending on the healthcare provider.

CONCLUSION

Although a generalised adoption of moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation would allow for a considerable reduction in social and economic burden, the financial loss for the healthcare providers induced by fee-for-service remuneration may be a factor in the slow uptake of these regimens. Therefore, fee-for-service reimbursement may not be preferable for radiation oncology. We propose that an alternative system of remuneration, such as bundled payments based on stage and diagnosis, may provide more value for all stakeholders.

Radiation Oncologists' Views on Breast Radiation Therapy Guidelines: Utilizing an Online Q&A Platform to Assess Current Views on Whole-Breast Irradiation Therapy

INTRODUCTION

Poor adherence to the 2011 American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) evidence-based guideline on whole-breast irradiation (WBI) has been reported. We utilized theMednet to assess the views of the updated 2018 guideline among radiation oncologists (ROs).

METHODS

We identified 11 questions asked by community ROs on theMednet, a web-based platform, between October 27, 2014 and May 2, 2017 that were updated in the 2018 guideline. New answers provided by senior authors of the 2018 guideline, cited guidelines, and polls to survey ROs were disseminated in 3 theMednet's newsletters between March 16, 2018 and May 1, 2018. Any question with less than 60% consensus was resubmitted on October 9, 2019 and assessed on February 13, 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 792 ROs responded to the initial surveys. In each survey, the answer choice(s) that received the majority of the votes aligned with the 2018 guideline. The strongest consensus was for the use of hypofractionated (HF)-WBI regardless of histology (97%), followed by HF-WBI boost dose (92%), molecular subtype (90%), grade (88%), and concurrent use of trastuzumab (87%). The least consensus was for age at which HF-WBI should be offered with 53% of respondents, specifically 73% of academic ROs versus 47% of community ROs (P = .001), agreeing with the guideline. The re-submitted survey 19 months later showed 77% of 287 new respondents now agreed with the guideline regarding age.

CONCLUSION

The majority of ROs concur with the 2018 WBI guideline in theMednet surveys, with better agreement among academic ROs than community ROs for certain components of the guideline. Further research into the different practice patterns may optimize patient care.

The Case for Brachytherapy: Why It Deserves a Renaissance

The recent global events related to the coronavirus disease of 2019 pandemic have significantly changed the medical landscape and led to a shift in oncologic treatment perspectives. There is a renewed focus on preserving treatment outcomes while maintaining medical accessibility and decreasing medical resource utilization. Brachytherapy, which is a vital part of the treatment course of many cancers (particularly prostate and gynecologic cancers), has the ability to deliver hypofractionated radiation and thus shorten treatment time. Studies in the early 2000s demonstrated a decline in brachytherapy usage despite data showing equivalent or even superior treatment outcomes for brachytherapy in disease sites, such as the prostate and cervix. However, newer data suggest that this trend may be reversing. The renewed call for shorter radiation courses based on data showing equivalent outcomes will likely establish hypofractionated radiation as the standard of care across multiple disease sites. With shifting reimbursement, brachytherapy represents the pinnacle in hypofractionated, conformal radiation therapy, and with extensive long-term data in support of the treatment modality brachytherapy is primed for a renaissance.

Mechanisms of radiation-induced endothelium damage: Emerging models and technologies

Radiation-induced endothelial/vascular injury is a major complicating factor in radiotherapy and a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in nuclear or radiological catastrophes. Exposure of tissue to ionizing radiation (IR) leads to the release of oxygen radicals and proteases that result in loss of endothelial barrier function and leukocyte dysfunction leading to tissue injury and organ damage. Microvascular endothelial cells are particularly sensitive to IR and radiation-induced alterations in endothelial cell function are thought to be a critical factor in organ damage through endothelial cell activation, enhanced leukocyte-endothelial cell interactions, increased barrier permeability and initiation of apoptotic pathways. These radiation-induced inflammatory responses are important in early and late radiation pathologies in various organs. A better understanding of mechanisms of radiation-induced endothelium dysfunction is therefore vital, as radiobiological response of endothelium is of major importance for medical management and therapeutic development for radiation injuries. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge of cellular and molecular mechanisms of radiation-induced endothelium damage and their impact on early and late radiation injury. Furthermore, we review established and emerging in vivo and in vitro models that have been developed to study the mechanisms of radiation-induced endothelium damage and to design, develop and rapidly screen therapeutics for treatment of radiation-induced vascular damage. Currently there are no specific therapeutics available to protect against radiation-induced loss of endothelial barrier function, leukocyte dysfunction and resulting organ damage. Developing therapeutics to prevent endothelium dysfunction and normal tissue damage during radiotherapy can serve as the urgently needed medical countermeasures.

Time-Driven, Activity-Based Cost Analysis of Radiation Treatment Options for Spinal Metastases

PURPOSE:

Several treatment options for spinal metastases exist, including multiple radiation therapy (RT) techniques: three-dimensional (3D) conventional RT (3D-RT), intensity-modulated RT (IMRT), and spine stereotactic radiosurgery (SSRS). Although data exist regarding reimbursement differences across regimens, differences in provider care delivery costs have yet to be evaluated. We quantified institutional costs associated with RT for spinal metastases, using a time-driven activity-based costing model.

METHODS:

Comparisons were made between (1) 10-fraction 3D-RT to 30 Gy, (2) 10-fraction IMRT to 30 Gy, (3) 3-fraction SSRS (SSRS-3) to 27 Gy, and (4) single-fraction SSRS (SSRS-1) to 18 Gy. Process maps were developed from consultation through follow-up 30 days post-treatment. Process times were determined through panel interviews, and personnel costs were extracted from institutional salary data. The capacity cost rate was determined for each resource, then multiplied by activity time to calculate costs, which were summed to determine total cost.

RESULTS:

Full-cycle costs of SSRS-1 were 17% lower and 17% higher compared with IMRT and 3D-RT, respectively. Full-cycle costs for SSRS-3 were only 1% greater than 10-fraction IMRT. Technical costs for IMRT were 50% and 77% more than SSRS-3 and SSRS-1. In contrast, personnel costs were 3% and 28% higher for SSRS-1 than IMRT and 3D-RT, respectively ( P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS:

Resource utilization varies significantly among treatment options. By quantifying provider care delivery costs, this analysis supports the institutional resource efficiency of SSRS-1. Incorporating clinical outcomes with such resource and cost data will provide additional insight into the highest value modalities and may inform alternative payment models, operational workflows, and institutional resource allocation.

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.

Peer Influence on Physician Use of Shorter Course External Beam Radiation Therapy for Patients with Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Social contagion among physicians may affect the dissemination of innovative and high-value cancer care. We applied social contagion theory to investigate the role of physician peer influence on the use of short courses of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for patients with breast cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Using a cohort of Medicare beneficiaries with breast cancer, we constructed physician peer groups based on patient-sharing relationships. Outcomes were a patient's receipt of (1) moderately hypofractionated adjuvant EBRT after breast-conserving surgery and (2) short-course palliative EBRT for bone metastases. Using a longitudinal design, we used mixed-effects logistic regression to examine the association between physician peer group rate of short-course EBRT in 2011 to 2012 (T1) and patients' receipt of short-course EBRT in 2013 to 2014 (T2).

RESULTS

During T2, a total of 17,248 patients received adjuvant therapy (32.3% moderately hypofractionated) from 3235 physicians in 1202 physician peer groups. Compared with patients treated within peer groups in which no moderately hypofractionated adjuvant EBRT was used in T1, patients treated by a physician in a peer group with higher T1 use of moderately hypofractionated adjuvant EBRT were more likely to receive moderately hypofractionated adjuvant EBRT in T2 (adjusted odds ratio = 2.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.62-2.54, vs adjusted odds ratio = 2.61; 95% confidence interval, 2.04-3.35, for peer groups where 21%-46% and 47%-100% of radiation oncologists used moderately hypofractionated adjuvant EBRT in T1, respectively, compared with peer groups with no use of moderately hypofractionated adjuvant EBRT). In contrast, there was no significant relationship between T1 peer group use and T2 receipt of short-course palliative EBRT for bone metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician peer groups significantly influenced use of short-course EBRT in adjuvant therapy but not in palliative therapy for patients with breast cancer.

The impact of provider payment reforms and associated care delivery models on cost and quality in cancer care: A systematic literature review

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the impact of provider payment reforms and associated care delivery models on cost and quality in cancer care.

METHODS

Data sources/study setting: Review of English-language literature published in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library (2007-2019). Study design: We performed a systematic literature review (SLR) to identify the impact of cancer care reforms. Primary endpoints were resource use, cost, quality of care, and clinical outcomes. Data collection/extraction methods: For each study, we extracted and categorized comparative data on the impact of policy reforms. Given the heterogeneity in patients, interventions and outcome measures, we did a qualitative synthesis rather than a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 26 included studies, seven evaluations were in fact qualified as quasi experimental designs in retrospect. Alternative payment models were significantly associated with reduction in resource use and cost in cancer care. Across the seventeen studies reporting data on the implicit payment reforms through care coordination, the adoption of clinical pathways was found effective in reduction of unnecessary use of low value services and associated costs. The estimates of all measures in ACO models varied considerably across participating providers, and our review found a rather mixed impact on cancer care outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest promising improvement in resource utilization and cost control after transition to prospective payment models, but, further primary research is needed to apply robust measures of performance and quality to better ensure that providers are delivering high-value care to their patients, while reducing the cost of care.

The case for radiotherapy in a Value based environment

AIM

Describe the Value proposition for radiotherapy (RT) in the United States.

BACKGROUND

In the United States since 2005, two forces have worked to decrease RT cost per patient: Federal changes in reimbursement and hypofractionation of treatment courses. We theorize that these have driven stable reimbursement in the context of increasing technology of intensity modulation (IMRT) and image guidance (IGRT). This phenomenon provides increasing Value of the discipline to patients and systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched the Medicare Physician/Supplier data for Program Payments per Person with Utilization for 2000 through 2016. This involves two databases: Enrollment Database (EDB) for 2000-2012 and Common Medicare Enrollment (CME) since 2013. RT payments to individual patients accessing services were retrieved.

RESULTS

Taking into account the change of calculation algorithm used by CMS in 2013, costs per patient were similar in 2012 and 2003, and 2016 and 2013.

CONCLUSIONS

In the United States, stabilizing costs in the face of increasing work, better outcomes, and decreased toxicity contributes to increasing RT value over the past 10 years.

Proton Facility Economics: Single-Room Centers

OBJECTIVE

We have previously described the central nature of simple cases for financial feasibility of proton beam therapy centers-especially four- to five-room centers. In the 5 years since that publication, such construction has slowed drastically, and smaller, single-room projects are in vogue. We now seek to show under what circumstances a single-room system is optimally financially viable.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A "standard" construction cost and debt for a single gantry system of $40 million was presumed, with 75% of the construction funded through standard 20-year financing. We then modeled a statistical analysis, deriving the optimal case mix required daily to cover construction and debt service costs.

RESULTS

We previously published that a single gantry treating only complex patients would need to apply 85% of its treatment slots simply to service debt, though it would cover its debt treating 4 hours of simple patients. As the business model has changed, debt maintenance, profit and operational costs have somewhat reduced the business case for adding a large number of simple patients. Debt maintenance is possible with as little as 13% of daily patients for a 40% Medicare case mix, but these numbers are critically sensitive to continued patient throughput.

CONCLUSIONS

Even in a single-room system, reducing overall debt, using tax-exempt financing, and having a case load emphasizing simple, private payer patients is paramount to fiscal health of the facility. Unused capacity is a huge risk if insufficient patients are available.

Cost-containment in hypofractionated radiation therapy: a literature review

Recent technological advances in radiation therapy have allowed for greater accuracy in planning and treatment delivery. The development of hypofractionated radiation treatment regimens is an example, and has the potential to decrease the cost per episode of care, relative to conventional treatments. Our aim was to analyse published literature on the cost-effectiveness and budgetary implications of hypofractionated radiation therapy. As such, this article will quantify the projected health care cost savings and address the optimal means of treatment delivery, associated patient outcomes, and implications arising from an increased use of hypofractionated regimens.

Implementation and utilization of hypofractionation for breast cancer

Purpose

Hypofractionation (HF) of whole breast irradiation has become a standard treatment regimen because randomized trials continue to demonstrate equivalence in survival and local control compared with conventional fractionation. In 2011, the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) adopted clinical guidelines on the proper selection of HF. Nevertheless, utilization remains lower than predicted. We evaluate the effects of clinical directives that serve as default treatment decisions and prospective contouring rounds on the implementation of HF in a large, multicenter radiation oncology department.

Methods and materials

In 2010, we implemented consensus-driven and evidence-based clinical directives to guide treatment decisions. Five directives were available for adjuvant breast cancer treatment, including conventional fractionation and HF approaches, and were selected on the basis of disease specifics and clinical judgment. In 2012, we instituted prospective contouring rounds wherein the treating physicians presented their directive selection and patient contours for peer-review and consensus opinion. For this study, charts for patients with early stage breast cancer were reviewed. A total of 1043 cases of breast cancer were identified. Patients receiving HF were analyzed on the basis of the ASTRO 2011 guidelines and adherence to our more inclusive clinical directives.

Results

For the ASTRO-endorsed group (n = 685), 49% of patients received HF in 2011, and 80% received HF in 2015. For the directives-endorsed group (n = 1042), 47% of patients received HF in 2011, and 73% received HF in 2015.

Conclusions

HF is underutilized despite equivalent local control, superior toxicity profile, and noninferior late effects. Our study demonstrates the possibility of achieving high levels of utilization in a large, multisite, outpatient setting. Factors responsible may include default rules established through the development of consensus-based treatment directives, peer review by faculty, and strong financial leadership to implement HF when indicated. To our knowledge, this is the first example of combining both consensus-based treatment directives and prospective contouring rounds in an attempt to change practice patterns.

Adoption of Radiation Technology Among Privately Insured Nonelderly Patients With Cancer in the United States, 2008 to 2014: A Claims-Based Analysis

Despite enthusiasm for advanced radiation technologies, understanding of their adoption in recent years is limited. The aim of this study was to elucidate utilization trends of conventional radiation, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), brachytherapy, proton radiotherapy, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) using a large convenience sample of irradiated patients with cancer identified from private insurance claims in the United States. The unit of analysis was a claim corresponding to a fraction of delivered radiotherapy from 2008 to 2014. Each claim was assigned a disease site on the basis of the diagnosis code and a radiation technology on the basis of the procedure code. In 2014, conventional radiation and IMRT constituted 56% and 39% of all radiation treatment claims, respectively, while brachytherapy constituted 2%, proton radiotherapy 1%, SBRT 1%, and SRS <1%. Compared with the first quarter of 2008, the proportional contribution of conventional radiation and brachytherapy to all radiation claims each decreased by 16% in the fourth quarter of 2014. In contrast, proportional contribution increased by 32% for IMRT, 83% for proton radiotherapy, 124% for SRS, and 309% for SBRT. Prostate cancer constituted 60% of all proton claims in 2008 but declined to 37% by 2014. SBRT was used to treat a variety of disease sites, most commonly primary lung (25%), prostate (12%), secondary bone (9%), and secondary lung (9%), in 2014. In this claims-based analysis of younger patients with private insurance, conventional radiation and IMRT were the most commonly used technologies from 2008 to 2014, while SBRT showed the most robust growth over the study period.

The Impact of Radiation Oncologists on the Early Adoption of Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Despite multiple randomized trials showing the efficacy of hypofractionated radiation therapy in early-stage breast cancer, the United States has been slow to adopt this treatment. The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of individual radiation oncologists on the early adoption of hypofractionated radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer.

METHODS

We identified 22,233 Medicare beneficiaries with localized breast cancer that was diagnosed from 2004 to 2011 who underwent breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiation. Multilevel, multivariable logistic models clustered by radiation oncologist and geographic practice area were used to determine the impact of the provider and geographic region on the likelihood of receiving hypofractionated compared with standard fractionated radiation therapy while controlling for a patient's clinical and demographic covariates. Odds ratios (OR) describe the impact of demographic or clinical covariates, and the median OR (MOR) describes the relative impact of the individual radiation oncologist and geographic region on the likelihood of undergoing hypofractionated radiation therapy.

RESULTS

Among the entire cohort, 2333 women (10.4%) were treated with hypofractionated radiation therapy, with unadjusted rates ranging from 0.0% in the bottom quintile of radiation oncologists to 30.4% in the top quintile. Multivariable analysis found that the individual radiation oncologist (MOR 3.08) had a greater impact on the use of hypofractionation than did geographic region (MOR 2.10) or clinical and demographic variables. The impact of the provider increased from the year 2004 to 2005 (MOR 2.82) to the year 2010 to 2011 (MOR 3.16) despite the publication of long-term randomized trial results in early 2010. Male physician and radiation oncologists treating the highest volume of breast cancer patients were less likely to perform hypofractionation (P<.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The individual radiation oncologist strongly influenced the likelihood of a patient's receiving hypofractionated radiation therapy, and this trend increased despite the publication of long-term data showing equivalence to standard fractionation. Future research should focus on physician-related factors that influence this decision.