Patient-Reported Outcomes as a Recruitment Strategy for Clinical Trial Enrollment.

Importance: Clinical trials are critical for progress in oncology; however, only 5% of the adult cancer population participates. Harnessing data that are routinely collected (ie, electronic patient-reported outcomes [ePROs]) may serve as a method to promote trial enrollment. Objective: To evaluate if an ePRO-prompted recruitment strategy is associated with increased clinical trial enrollment. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized substudy was conducted from September 2022 to March 2023 at a multisite tertiary cancer center as part of an ongoing clinical trial that was testing a symptom-intervention for cancer-related fatigue. Patients with breast cancer who were undergoing radiotherapy who completed at least 1 ePRO questionnaire during the study period were included. Physician-level cluster randomization assigned fatigue-eligible patients to either receive a portal message invitation to a symptom-intervention trial or standard of care (SOC; physician-based referral). Exposure: ePRO questionnaires distributed in routine practice were queried weekly and screened for moderate or greater fatigue, the principle inclusion criterion for the primary trial. To assess the association of the portal message source with response and enrollment, every other patient received a message from the primary radiation oncology team or the referral service. Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinical trial response/referral and enrollment. Results: A total of 1041 patients completed ePRO questionnaires, of whom 394 (38%; 53 Asian [13.6%], 43 Black [11.0%], 29 Hispanic [7.4%], and 262 White individuals [66.5%]; median [IQR] age, 55 [47-65] years) endorsed moderate or greater fatigue while receiving treatment. A total of 210 patients (53.3%) were assigned to receive a portal message and 184 (46.7%) patients, SOC. In the portal message group, 73 patients (35%) responded and 41 (20%) enrolled compared with 1 patient (0.5%) referred and 0 enrolled in the SOC group (P < .001). The response rate to portal messages favored the referral service vs the primary radiation oncology service (44% vs 26%; P = .01), but there was no significant difference in enrollments. Conclusions and Relevance: The study results suggest that use of routine care ePROs was associated with greater enrollment in a symptom-intervention trial compared with physician-based referral. Messaging directly from the referral service may support enrollment and help reduce oncology physician-level barriers to trial enrollment for studies testing symptom interventions.

Disparities in Stage at Presentation Among Hispanic and Latinx Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in the United States.

PURPOSE: Hispanic and Latinx people in the United States are the fastest-growing ethnic group. However, previous studies in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) often analyze these diverse communities in aggregate. We aimed to identify differences in NSCLC stage at diagnosis in the US population, focusing on disaggregated Hispanic/Latinx individuals. METHODS: Data from the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2018 identified patients with primary NSCLC. Individuals were disaggregated by racial and ethnic subgroup and Hispanic country of origin. Ordinal logistic regression adjusting for age, facility type, income, educational attainment, comorbidity index, insurance, and year of diagnosis was used to create adjusted odds ratios (aORs), with higher odds representing diagnosis at later-stage NSCLC. RESULTS: Of 1,565,159 patients with NSCLC, 46,616 were Hispanic/Latinx (3.0%). When analyzed in the setting of race and ethnicity, Hispanic patients were more likely to be diagnosed with metastatic disease compared with non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients: 47.0% for Hispanic Black, 46.0% Hispanic White, and 44.3% of Hispanic other patients versus 39.1% of non-Hispanic White patients (P < .001 for all). By country of origin, 51.4% of Mexican, 41.7% of Puerto Rican, 44.6% of Cuban, 50.8% of South or Central American, 48.4% of Dominican, and 45.6% of other Hispanic patients were diagnosed with metastatic disease, compared with 39.1% of NHWs. Conversely, 20.2% of Mexican, 26.9% of Puerto Rican, 24.2% of Cuban, 22.5% of South or Central American, 23.7% of Dominican, and 24.5% of other Hispanic patients were diagnosed with stage I disease, compared with 30.0% of NHWs. All Hispanic groups were more likely to present with later-stage NSCLC than NHW patients (greatest odds for Mexican patients, aOR, 1.44; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Hispanic/Latinx patients with non-small-cell lung cancer were more likely to be diagnosed with advanced disease compared with NHWs. Disparities persisted upon disaggregation by both race and country of origin, with over half of Mexican patients with metastatic disease at diagnosis. Disparities among Hispanic/Latinx groups by race and by country of origin highlight the shortcomings of treating these groups as a monolith and underscore the need for disaggregated research and targeted interventions.

Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer and Radiation Therapy-Related Fatigue: A Prospective Pilot Study.

PURPOSE: Fatigue is among the most common but most poorly understood radiation therapy-associated toxicities. This prospective study sought to investigate whether cardiorespiratory fitness, an integrative measure of whole-body cardiopulmonary function, is associated with patient-reported fatigue in women with early-stage breast cancer undergoing radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with stage Tis-T2N0M0 breast cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1 undergoing breast radiation therapy performed a symptom-limited cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) on a motorized treadmill to assess cardiorespiratory fitness as measured by peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak). Fatigue was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Fatigue Scale. Both assessments were performed during or immediately after radiation therapy completion. All patients were treated with an opposed tangent technique to a dose of 4240 cGy in 16 fractions with or without a lumpectomy bed boost. Patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy were excluded. Pearson correlation coefficients and univariate linear regression were used to assess associations amongVO2peak, fatigue, and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients (median age, 52 years; range, 31-71) completed a CPET and FACIT-Fatigue assessment. Median VO2peak was 25.1 mL O2.kg-1.min-1 (range, 16.7-41.7). The majority of patients (78.6%) displayed a VO2peak lower than their age-predicted VO2peak. Both age and body mass index were significantly associated with VO2peak levels. The median FACIT-Fatigue score was 41.5 (range, 10-52), with lower values indicating more fatigue. VO2peak was not significantly associated with FACIT-Fatigue score (P = .20). CONCLUSIONS: VO2peak was not a significant predictor of radiation therapy-related fatigue. Most patients with breast cancer had marked impairments in cardiorespiratory fitness as determined by VO2peak. Larger prospective studies are needed to further investigate this novel finding and evaluate the effects of interventions aimed at improving cardiorespiratory fitness and their ability to potentially prevent fatigue.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trials: From an Endpoint to an Intervention in Cancer Care.

Underreporting of patient symptoms by clinicians is a common and well-documented phenomenon that has led to integrating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as endpoints into clinical trials. While PROs are often used to measure disease symptoms, cancer therapy toxicities, and quality of life, they can also assess patients' general experiences and preferences. With the increasing use of electronic medical records and the digital health revolution in oncology, conversion from paper to electronic PROs (ePROs) has also facilitated the integration of PROs into routine care. Evidence from clinical trials is rapidly emerging to support ePROs as a care delivery innovation, given the potential for ePROs to improve patient outcomes through timely evaluation and response to patient needs. Meanwhile, work is ongoing to understand and address ePRO use and challenges to equitable integration, including technical and language barriers for patients, clinicians, and health systems. Nonetheless, the health system and regulatory bodies continue to develop stipulations to promote the use of ePROs. Herein, we review the evolution of PROs from an endpoint to an intervention in prospective clinical trials in oncology.

Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation: Association of Dosimetric Parameters With Patient-Reported Outcomes.

Purpose: Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) after breast-conserving surgery offers a well-tolerated adjuvant radiation therapy option for patients with breast cancer. We sought to describe patient-reported acute toxicity as a function of salient dosimetric parameters during and after an APBI regimen of 40 Gy in 10 once-daily fractions. Methods and Materials: From June 2019 to July 2020, patients undergoing APBI were assigned a weekly, response-adapted, patient reported outcomes-common terminology criteria for adverse events-based acute toxicity assessment. Patients reported acute toxicity during treatment and for up to 8 weeks after treatment. Dosimetric treatment parameters were collected. Descriptive statistics and univariable analyses were used to summarize patient-reported outcomes and their correlation to corresponding dosimetric measures, respectively. Results: Overall, 55 patients who received APBI completed a total of 351 assessments. Median planning target volume was 210 cc (range, 64-580 cc), and median planning target volume:ipsilateral breast volume ratio was 0.17 (range, 0.05-0.44). Overall, 22% of patients reported moderate breast enlargement and 27% reported maximum skin toxicity as severe or very severe. Furthermore, 35% of patients reported fatigue, and 44% of patients reported pain in the radiated area as moderate to very severe. Median time to first report of any moderate to very severe symptom was 10 days (interquartile range, 6-27 days). By 8 weeks after APBI, most patients reported resolution of symptoms, with 16% reporting residual moderate symptoms. Upon univariable analysis, none of the ascertained salient dosimetric parameters were associated with maximum symptoms or with the presence of moderate to very severe toxicity. Conclusions: Weekly assessments during and after APBI showed that patients experienced moderate to very severe toxicities, most commonly skin toxicity, but that these typically resolved by 8 weeks after radiation therapy. More comprehensive evaluations among larger cohorts are warranted to define the precise dosimetric parameters that correspond to outcomes of interest.

Assessment of Guideline-Nonconcordant Radiotherapy in Medicare Beneficiaries With Metastatic Cancer Near the End of Life, 2015-2017.

This cross-sectional study uses data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to assess the use of professional society guideline-nonconcordant radiotherapy in patients at the end of life.

Disparities in Primary Breast Cancer Stage at Presentation Among Hispanic Subgroups.

BACKGROUND: Although the United States (US) Hispanic population consists of diverse communities, prior breast cancer studies often analyze this group in aggregate. Our aim was to identify differences in breast cancer stage at presentation in the US population, with a particular focus on Hispanic subgroups. METHODS: Data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2004 to 2017 were used to select women with primary breast cancer; individuals were disaggregated by racial and ethnic subgroup and Hispanic country of origin. Ordinal logistic regression was used to create adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), with higher odds representing presentation at later-stage breast cancer. Subgroup analysis was conducted based on tumor receptor status. RESULTS: Overall, among 2,282,691 women (5.2% Hispanic), Hispanic women were more likely to live in low-income and low-educational attainment neighborhoods, and were also more likely to be uninsured. Hispanic women were also more likely to present at later-stage primary breast cancer when compared with non-Hispanic White women (aOR 1.19, 95% CI 1.18-1.21; p < 0.01). Stage disparities were demonstrated when populations were disaggregated by country of origin, particularly for Mexican women (aOR 1.55, 95% CI 1.51-1.60; p < 0.01). Disparities worsened among both racial and country of origin subgroups in women with triple-negative disease. CONCLUSION: Later breast cancer stage at presentation was observed among Hispanic populations when disaggregated by racial subgroup and country of origin. Socioeconomic disparities, as well as uncaptured disparities in access and/or differential care, may drive these observed differences. Future studies with disaggregated data are needed to characterize outcomes in Hispanic communities and develop targeted interventions.

A Comparison of Patient- and Clinician-Reported Acute Toxic Effects During Radiation Therapy for Primary Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Evidence suggests that cancer treatment-related toxic effects are underreported by clinicians. We sought to compare patient- and clinician-reported acute toxic effects among patients undergoing radiation therapy for primary breast cancer and to determine factors associated with patient-clinician discordance. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patient responses from a weekly Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events based assessment were matched to clinician assessments of acute toxic effects during treatment. Weighted κ statistics were used to evaluate agreement between patient and clinician assessments. Linear regression, logistic regression, and generalized estimating equation models were used to identify covariates associated with discordance. RESULTS: Overall, 842 patient-clinician assessment pairs from 376 unique patients were analyzed. Total symptom burden score was higher for patients than clinicians (4.7 vs 2.3, P < .01). Dermatitis, pruritis, pain, and edema items were classified as having minimal agreement (κ of 0.25, 0.23, 0.20, and 0.25, respectively). Fatigue (κ 0.17) and psychosocial (0.03) patient-clinician pairs were found to have no agreement. The linear regression demonstrated that assessments by patients who identified as Black or African American were associated with a 0.13-point decrease in discordance (95% confidence interval, -0.25 to -0.01), while time from the start of treatment was associated with increased discordance (95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.12). CONCLUSIONS: For patients undergoing breast radiation therapy, discordance in patient and clinician symptom reporting is high and increases as treatment progresses. The mechanism of reduced discordance among Black or African American patients warrants further investigation. Prospective studies are needed to determine whether interventions for lower severity symptoms, which are commonly overlooked by clinicians, can reduce symptom burden and improve patient quality of life during radiation therapy.

Multidisciplinary Treatment of Non-Spine Bone Metastases: Results of a Modified Delphi Consensus Process.

Purpose: Local treatment for bone metastases is becoming increasingly complex. National guidelines traditionally focus only on radiation therapy (RT), leaving a gap in clinical decision support resources available to clinicians. The objective of this study was to reach expert consensus regarding multidisciplinary management of non-spine bone metastases, which would facilitate standardizing treatment within an academic-community partnership. Methods and Materials: A multidisciplinary panel of physicians treating metastatic disease across the Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) Cancer Alliance, including community-based partner sites, was convened. Clinical questions rated of high importance in the management of non-spine bone metastases were identified via survey. A literature review was conducted, and panel physicians drafted initial recommendation statements. Consensus was gathered on recommendation statements through a modified Delphi process from a full panel of 17 physicians from radiation oncology, orthopaedic surgery, medical oncology, interventional radiology, and anesthesia pain. Consensus was defined a priori as 75% of respondents indicating "agree" or "strongly agree" with the consensus statement. Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy was employed to assign evidence strength for each statement. Results: Seventeen clinical questions were identified, of which 11 (65%) were selected for the consensus process. Consensus was reached for 16 of 17 answer statements (94%), of which 12 were approved after Round 1 and additional 4 approved after Round 2 of the modified Delphi voting process. Topics included indications for referral to surgery or interventional radiology, radiation fractionation and appropriate use of stereotactic approaches, and the handling of systemic therapies during radiation. Evidence strength was most commonly C (n = 7), followed by B (n = 5) and A (n = 3). Conclusions: Consensus among a multidisciplinary panel of community and academic physicians treating non-spine bone metastases was feasible. Recommendations will assist clinicians and potentially provide measures to reduce variation across diverse practice settings. Findings highlight areas for further research such as pathologic fracture risk estimation, pre-operative radiation, and percutaneous ablation.

Development and Pilot Implementation of a Remote Monitoring System for Acute Toxicity Using Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes for Patients Undergoing Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: We aimed to develop and study the implementation of a remote system for toxicity assessment and management of acute side effects of breast radiation using electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A response-adapted Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events-based assessment for breast radiation toxicity was administered weekly during and for 8 weeks after radiation from June 2019 to July 2020. The care team received alerts when "severe" symptoms were reported by patients, who were then contacted. Treatment, clinic, and sociodemographic characteristics were abstracted from patient records. A subsample of patients and care team members was qualitatively interviewed at follow-up. RESULTS: Overall, 5787 assessments were sent to 678 patients, of whom 489 (72%) completed 2607 assessments (45%). Moderate or greater toxicity was reported by 419 responders (86%; 95% CI, 82%-89%). Clinician alerts for severe toxicity were generated for 264 assessments among 139 unique patients, of which 83% occurred posttreatment. The proportion of surveys that prompted an alert was significantly higher after treatment (219 [13%]) than during treatment (45 [5%]) (P < .001). Survey completion rates in the posttreatment period were higher among patients undergoing partial breast irradiation than postmastectomy radiation (incidence rate ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.60-0.81) (P < .001) despite these patients experiencing less severe toxicity. Interviews (15) found that patients had a positive experience with ePROs, although many thought the primary purpose was for research rather than symptom management. CONCLUSIONS: With the majority of toxicity occurring after breast radiation has ended, remote symptom monitoring with ePROs appears to fill a gap in clinical practice, particularly for patients undergoing shorter courses of radiation. It is important to properly onboard patients and explain that the purpose of ePROs is to aid clinical care. Further research is needed to determine whether the costs associated with ePROs can be offset by reducing routine clinic visits and whether this approach is acceptable and appropriate.

The use of complementary and integrative therapies as adjunct interventions during radiotherapy: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Literature supporting the efficacy of complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) alongside radiotherapy is fragmented with varying outcomes and levels of evidence. This review summarizes the available evidence on CIM used with radiotherapy in order to inform clinicians. METHODS: A systematic literature review identified studies on the use of CIM during radiotherapy. Inclusion required the following criteria: the study was interventional, CIM therapy was for human patients with cancer, and CIM therapy was administered concurrently with radiotherapy. Data points of interest were collected from included studies. A subset was identified as high-quality using the Jadad scale. Fisher's exact test was used to assess the association between study results, outcome measured, and type of CIM. RESULTS: Overall, 163 articles met inclusion. Of these, 68 (41.7%) were considered high-quality trials. Articles published per year increased over time (p < 0.01). Frequently identified therapies were biologically based therapies (47.9%), mind-body therapies (23.3%), and alternative medical systems (13.5%). Within the subset of high-quality trials, 60.0% of studies reported a favorable change with CIM while 40.0% reported no change. No studies reported an unfavorable change. Commonly assessed outcome types were patient-reported (41.1%) and provider-reported (21.5%). Rate of favorable change did not differ based on type of CIM (p = 0.90) or outcome measured (p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent CIM may reduce radiotherapy-induced toxicities and improve quality of life, suggesting that physicians should discuss CIM with patients receiving radiotherapy. This review provides a broad overview of investigations on CIM use during radiotherapy and can inform how radiation oncologists advise their patients about CIM.

The Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group 2020 Spring Symposium: Is Virtual the New Reality?

PURPOSE: Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group (ROECSG) hosted its annual international symposium using a virtual format in May 2020. This report details the experience of hosting a virtual meeting and presents attendee feedback on the platform. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The ROECSG symposium was hosted virtually on May 15, 2020. A postsymposium survey was distributed electronically to assess attendee demographics, participation, and experience. Attendee preference and experience were queried using 3-point and 5-point Likert-type scales, respectively. Symplur LLC was used to generate analytics for the conference hashtag (#ROECSG). RESULTS: The survey was distributed to all 286 registrants, with a response rate of 67% (191 responses). Seventeen nonattendee responses were omitted from this analysis, for a total of 174 included respondents. Eighty-two attendees (47%) were present for the entire symposium. A preference for a virtual symposium was expressed by 78 respondents (45%), whereas 44 (25%) had no preference and 52 (30%) preferred an in-person meeting. A total of 150 respondents (86%) rated the symposium as "extremely" well organized. Respondents who had not attended a prior in-person ROECSG symposium were more likely to prefer the virtual format (P = .03). Seventy-eight respondents (45%) reported a preference for the virtual platform for reviewing scholarly work, and 103 (59%) reported a preference for an in-person platform for networking. On the day of the symposium, #ROECSG had 408 tweets and 432,504 impressions. CONCLUSIONS: The 2020 ROECSG symposium was well received and can serve as a framework for future virtual meetings. Although the virtual setting may facilitate sharing research, networking aspects are more limited. Effort is needed to develop hybrid virtual and in-person meetings that meet the needs of participants in both settings. Social media is a significant avenue for dissemination and discussion of information and may be valuable in the virtual setting.

Evaluating Bias in Speaker Introductions at the American Society for Radiation Oncology Annual Meeting.

PURPOSE: Introducing a physician without a professional title may reinforce bias in medicine by influencing perceived credibility. We evaluated differences in the use of professional titles in introductions of speakers at recent American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Annual Meetings. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We reviewed recordings from the 2017 to 2019 ASTRO Annual Meetings and included complete introductions of speakers with a doctoral degree. Professional introduction was defined as "Doctor" or "Professor" followed by the speaker's full or last name. We collected use of professional introduction, introducer gender, speaker gender, and speaker professional and demographic variables. Identified speakers were sent surveys to collect self-reported demographic data. Analysis was performed using χ2 tests and multivariable logistic regression (MVA). RESULTS: Of 3267 presentations reviewed, 1226 (38%) met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 805 (66%) speakers and 710 (58%) introducers were men. Professional introductions were used in 74% (2017), 71% (2018), and 69% (2019) of the presentations. There was no difference in the use of professional introductions for male and female speakers (71% vs 73%; P = .550). On MVA, male introducers were associated with decreased use of professional address (odds ratio [OR], 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26-0.49; P < .001). At the 2019 conference, professional introduction was less likely to be used (2019 vs 2017: OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.49-0.96; P = 0.026). Those who self-identified as Asian/Pacific Islander were twice as likely to receive a professional introduction compared with those who identified as white (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.07-3.64; P = .033). CONCLUSION: Male introducers were significantly less likely to introduce any speaker, regardless of gender, by their professional title, and overall use of professional introductions decreased from 2017 to 2019. Furthermore, no difference in professional introduction use by speaker gender was identified at the recent ASTRO meetings. Implementing speaker guidelines could increase the use of professional introductions and raise awareness of unconscious bias at future ASTRO meetings.

Trends in Radiation Therapy for Bone Metastases, 2015 to 2017: Choosing Wisely in the Era of Complex Radiation.

PURPOSE: Guidelines recommend short-course (≤10 fractions) external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for bone metastases. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) may also improve outcomes; however, routine use is not recommended outside clinical trials. We assessed national radiation therapy trends in complex techniques for bone metastases and associated expenditures. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using a claims-based Medicare data set covering 84% of beneficiaries, we assessed the relative proportion of all radiation episodes represented by bone metastases. We then evaluated use of short-course and long-course (>10 fractions) EBRT, intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and SBRT for bone metastases in hospital-affiliated outpatient (OPD) or freestanding (FREE) facilities. We assessed differences using χ2d or Wilcoxon rank sum tests for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. We identified associations with modality, fractionation, and expenditures using multivariable logistic/linear regression. RESULTS: Among 467,781 radiation episodes for 17 cancer diagnoses, the overall proportion of episodes dedicated to bone metastases (9.4%) was stable from 2015 to 2017, although treatments were increasing in the hospital-affiliated outpatient setting (P < .005). We identified 40,993 episodes for bone metastases, of which 63% were short-course EBRT, 24% were long-course EBRT, 7% were SBRT, and 6% were IMRT. Techniques more common in the hospital-affiliated outpatient setting included short-course EBRT (OPD, 69%, vs FREE, 56%) and SBRT (OPD, 9%, vs FREE, 5%). Techniques more common among free-standing centers included long-course EBRT (OPD, 19%, vs FREE, 31%) and IMRT (OPD, 4%, vs FREE, 9%). From 2015 to 2017, long-course EBRT decreased by an absolute 8%; short-course EBRT, SBRT, and IMRT increased by 4%, 2.5%, and 1%, respectively. The SBRT/IMRT uptake did not differ by setting (P = .4). Differences in expenditures between SBRT and short-course EBRT decreased by a relative 8% in professional and 12% in technical fees. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 1 in 4 patients received long-course EBRT, with small reductions in use largely replaced by complex treatment modalities. However, expenditures for complex modalities also decreased over time. As alternative payment models take effect, quality metrics are needed to ensure appropriate, effective, and safe delivery of complex technologies.

Replacing 30 Gy in 10 fractions with stereotactic body radiation therapy for bone metastases: A large multi-site single institution experience 2016-2018.

BACKGROUND: Bone metastases cause significant morbidity in patients with cancer, and radiation therapy (RT) is an effective treatment approach. Indications for more complex ablative techniques are emerging. We sought to evaluate RT trends at a large multi-site tertiary cancer center. METHODS: Patients who received RT for bone metastases at a single institution (including regional outpatient clinics) from 2016 to 2018 were identified. Patients were grouped by RT regimen: single-fraction conventional RT (8 Gy × 1), 30 Gy in 10 fractions, SBRT, and "other". Multinomial logistic regression was performed to assess trends in regimens over time. Binary logistic regression was performed to evaluate factors associated with receipt of SBRT. RESULTS: Between 2016 and 2018, 5,952 RT episodes were received by 2,969 patients with bone metastases. Overall, 76% of episodes were ≤ 5 fractions. The median number of fractions planned for SBRT and non-SBRT episodes was 3 (IQR 3-3) and 5 (IQR 5-10), respectively. Use of SBRT increased from 2016 to 2018 (39% to 53%, p < 0.01) while use of 30 Gy in 10 fractions decreased (26% to 12%, p < 0.01), and 8 Gy × 1 was stable (5.3% to 6.9%, p = 0.28). SBRT was associated with higher performance status (p < 0.01) and non-radiosensitive histology (p < 0.01). Use of SBRT increased in the regional network (19% to 48%, p < 0.01) and at the main center (52% to 59%, p = 0.02), but did not increase within 30 days of death. More patients treated with 8 Gy × 1 than SBRT died within 30 days of treatment (24% vs 3.8%, respectively, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: SBRT is replacing 30 Gy in 10 fractions for bone metastases, especially among patients with high performance status and non-radiosensitive histologies. Better prognostic algorithms could further improve patient-centered treatment selection at the end of life.

Patterns and Perceptions of "Away" Rotations Among Radiation Oncology Residency Applicants.

PURPOSE: Medical students often complete clinical rotations at other institutions (away rotations). This study assesses the number of away rotations undertaken by radiation oncology residency applicants and their value from the applicants' perspective. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A survey was sent to applicants to a single radiation oncology program from 2015 to 2017. Questions addressed away rotation frequency, funding, motivations, barriers, and match results. A χ2 test was used to assess the correlation between number of away rotations and matching to an away program. Binary logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with undertaking >2 away rotations. RESULTS: The response rate was 39% (n = 194); 89% of respondents completed ≥1 away rotation (median, 2; interquartile range, 2-3), of whom 39% (n = 67) matched to an away program. The number of away rotations completed did not differ between those who did and did not match (P = .29). Furthermore, the number of away rotations did not correlate with matching at an away program (P = .40). Factors associated with completing more away rotations included male sex and high loan burden (P < .05). Away rotations were perceived as extremely important (71%), with interest in a specific program (44%) and obtaining letters of recommendation (31%) the most common reasons to pursue away rotations. Only 9% (n = 15) of applicants did away rotations because they had no home program. Funding sources included personal savings (29%), family support (26%), and loans (22%). If costs were inconsequential, 67 applicants (35%) noted they would do more away rotations. CONCLUSIONS: Away rotations are common and often result in students matching to an away program, although benefits of ≥2 away rotations appear limited and have associated costs. Limiting the number of away rotations in radiation oncology may decrease costs without sacrificing one's chances of matching.

A Systematic Review of Contouring Guidelines in Radiation Oncology: Analysis of Frequency, Methodology, and Delivery of Consensus Recommendations.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials have described variation in radiation therapy plan quality, of which contour delineation is a key component, and linked this to inferior patient outcomes. In response, consensus guidelines have been developed to standardize contour delineation. This investigation assesses trends in contouring guidelines and examines the methodologies used to generate and deliver recommendations. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a literature search for contouring guidelines published after 1995. Of 11,124 citations, 332 were identified for full-text review to determine inclusion. We abstracted articles for the intent of the consensus process, key elements of the methodology, and mode of information delivery. A Fisher exact test was used to identify elements that differed among the guidelines generated for clinical trials and routine care. RESULTS: Overall, 142 guidelines were included, of which 16 (11%) were developed for a clinical trial. There was an increase in guideline publication over time (0 from 1995-1999 vs 65 from 2015- 2019; P = .03), particularly among recommendations for stereotactic radiation and brachytherapy. The most common disease sites were head and neck (24%), gastrointestinal (12%), and gynecologic (12%). Methods used to develop recommendations included literature review (50%) and image-based methods (45%). Panels included a median of 10 physicians (interquartile range, 7-16); 70% of panels represented multidisciplinary expertise. Guidelines developed for a clinical trial were more likely to include an image-based approach, with quantitative analysis of contours submitted by the panel members and to publish a full set of image-based recommendations (P < .005). CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights an increase in consensus contouring recommendations over time. Guidelines focus on disease sites, such as head and neck, with evidence supporting a correlation between treatment planning and patient outcomes, although variation exists in the approach to the consensus process. Elements that may improve guideline acceptance (ie, image-based consensus contour analysis) and usability (ie, inclusion of a full image set) are more common in guidelines developed for clinical trials.

Reduction of Opioid Use by Acupuncture in Patients Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized, Sham-Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate acupuncture as a nonpharmacologic intervention for pain management in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). METHODS: Adult patients with multiple myeloma undergoing high-dose melphalan chemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood HSCT were randomized to receive either true (TA) or sham acupuncture (SA) once daily for five days starting on the day after chemotherapy. Use of pain medications and pain scores were assessed at baseline and at days 5, 15, and 30 after transplantation. RESULTS: Among 60 evaluable subjects, the SA group (vs TA) had greater than five times odds of increasing pain medication use from baseline. Among patients who were opioid nonusers at baseline, all 15 patients in the TA group remained free from opioid use at the end of the study. In contrast, 20% of those in the SA group (four of the 20 patients) started to use opioids after chemotherapy and stem cell infusion (day 5) and 40% (eight of the 20) had become opioid users by day 30 after HSCT (Fisher exact test P = 0.006). Among patients who were taking opioids at baseline, 14% in the TA group vs 10% in the SA group increased opioid intake at day 5, and 21% (TA) vs 30% (SA) at day 30 (P = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture appears to significantly reduce the need for pain medications during HSCT and the number of post-HSCT opioid users among baseline opioid nonusers. It warrants further studies as an opioid-sparing intervention for pain in HSCT patients.

A Feasibility Study of Restorative Yoga Versus Vigorous Yoga Intervention for Sedentary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Survivors.

Yoga has been shown to improve cancer survivors' quality of life, yet regular yoga practice is a challenge for those who are sedentary. We conducted a pilot randomized controlled study to assess feasibility and adherence of two types of yoga intervention among sedentary cancer survivors. Sedentary breast and ovarian cancer survivors were randomized to practice either restorative yoga (minimal physical exertion, Group R) or vigorous yoga (considerable physical exertion, Group V) in three 60-minute supervised sessions a week for 12 weeks, followed by 12 weeks of home practice. Accrual, adherence, and attendance rates were assessed. Of the 226 eligible patients, 175 (77%) declined to participate in the study, citing time commitment and travel as the most common barriers. Forty-two subjects consented to participate in the study. Of the 35 participants who began the intervention (20 in Group R and 15 in Group V), adherence rate (percentage remaining in the study at week 12) was 100% and 87%, respectively. Rate of adequate attendance (more than 66% of the scheduled supervised sessions) was 85% and 73%, respectively. Rate of completion of the home practice period was 85% and 77%, respectively. In this study, sedentary cancer survivors were able to adhere to a long-term, regular yoga regimen. The rate of adequate attendance was higher for restorative yoga. Future studies for sedentary patients should focus on reducing time commitment and travel requirements to improve recruitment, and on using restorative yoga as a more feasible intervention for this population.