Variation in the use of radiotherapy fractionation for breast cancer: Survival outcome and cost implications

Background and purpose: Substantial variation in the adoption of hypofractionation for breast radiation therapy has been observed, despite the availability of consensus guidelines. This study aimed to investigate the variation in radiation therapy fractionation in breast cancer patients in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, and to estimate survival outcome and cost implications. Materials and methods: This is a population-based cohort of patients who received radiation therapy for breast cancer (2009–2013), as captured in the NSW Central Cancer Registry. A logistic regression model was used to identify factors associated with fractionation type. Survival outcome was estimated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. Cost per treatment and potential cost saving associated with evidence-based fractionation was estimated. Results: A total of 10,482 patients were available for analysis, divided into 3 cohorts (breast alone: N = 7000; breast + nodes: N = 1119; all chestwall: N = 2363). In multivariable analysis, increasing age, laterality (right), year of treatment (2013), early stage, lower socioeconomic status, and regional area of residence were independent predictors of hypofractionation for breast alone radiation therapy. For the breast + nodes and chest wall cohorts, common factors that predicted the use of hypofractionation were increasing age. In multivariable survival analysis, there was no difference between the fractionation regimens at 5 years. Estimated radiation therapy cost of this cohort approximated $52.1 million, compared with$38.5 million had these patients been treated with evidence-based fractionation. This demonstrated a potential saving of $13.6 million. Conclusion: Hypofractionation appears underused for breast radiation therapy in NSW over time. This study highlights that evidence-based practice will translate to reduced health care treatment costs

Receipt of radiotherapy after mastectomy in women with breast cancer: population-based cohort study in New Zealand

Purpose To investigate the receipt of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in breast cancer patients in New Zealand for whom radiotherapy is strongly recommended in current clinical guidelines. Method This study involved all women who were diagnosed with primary invasive breast cancer in two health regions, had undergone a mastectomy, and met the “strong recommendation” criteria for PMRT based on New Zealand National Guidelines. We performed logistic regression analyses to identify demographic and clinical factors associated with the receipt of PMRT. Results Of the 1455 patients with stage II to III cancers included in this analysis, 1195 (82%) received radiotherapy. The receipt of PMRT decreased with increasing age, and was significantly lower in rural residents, Māori and Pacific women, those with more comorbidity, those who received primary cancer care in a public facility, and those diagnosed with stage III cancer. Although not significant, the receipt was also lower in patients who resided in more deprived neighborhood, and those with comorbidities. The findings restricted to stage III patients (n = 1325), and to those diagnosed since 2010 (n = 422), after the current guidelines were published, which were very similar to the whole cohort. Conclusion Disparities exist in the receipt of PMRT in breast cancer patients in New Zealand, underscoring the need for a greater equity focus in management of breast cancer.</p

Cautiously optimistic: A survey of radiation oncology professionals’ perceptions of automation in radiotherapy planning

Introduction: While there is evidence to show the positive effects of automation, the impact on radiation oncology professionals has been poorly considered. This study examined radiation oncology professionals’ perceptions of automation in radiotherapy planning. Method: An online survey link was sent to the chief radiation therapists (RT) of all Australian radiotherapy centres to be forwarded to RTs, medical physicists (MP) and radiation oncologists (RO) within their institution. The survey was open from May-July 2019. Results: Participants were 204 RTs, 84 MPs and 37 ROs (response rates ∼10% of the overall radiation oncology workforce). Respondents felt automation resulted in improvement in consistency in planning (90%), productivity (88%), quality of planning (57%), and staff focus on patient care (49%). When asked about perceived impact of automation, the responses were; will change the primary tasks of certain jobs (66%), will allow staff to do the remaining components of their job more effectively (51%), will eliminate jobs (20%), and will not have an impact on jobs (6%). 27% of respondents believe automation will reduce job satisfaction. 71% of respondents strongly agree/agree that automation will cause a loss of skills, while only 25% strongly agree/agree that the training and education tools in their department are sufficient. Conclusion: Although the effect of automation is perceived positively, there are some concerns on loss of skillsets and the lack of training to maintain this. These results highlight the need for continued education to ensure that skills and knowledge are not lost with automation

Health economic and health service issues of palliative radiotherapy

Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) makes up about half of all courses delivered in radiotherapy departments. It is effective in the management of common complications of cancer and is relatively inexpensive. About one third of cancer patients receive PRT within the last 2 years of life. One quarter of all patients who receive radiotherapy will undergo a second or subsequent course, mostly for palliative indications. There is considerable variation in practice, both within and between jurisdictions. This has been attributed to inconsistencies in guidelines, physician variation and differing financial incentives. Because of the widespread use of hypofractionation, variation in PRT fractionation has a lower effect on departmental capacity than variation in radical and adjuvant treatments. Excessive fractionation places an unnecessary burden on frail patients at the end of their lives and uses scarce healthcare resources. With appropriate case selection, the increased cost of fractionation or more conformal treatments can be justified where clinical benefit is expected