The changing shape of general practice in Scotland: the rise of the 'megapractice'.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the trends in the nature of general practices in Scotland between 2014/15 and 2023. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive ecological study. METHODS: We obtained data from Public Health Scotland and used general practitioner (GP) practice codes, practice names, and the General Medical Council (GMC) numbers of their listed GPs to describe trends in practice characteristics and to identify individual practices that were likely to be operating as a single entity. RESULTS: Defining practice entities is difficult because different GP practice codes are often retained when GPs are performing across multiple practices. If GP practice codes alone are used, the median practice list size increased from 5094 to 5881, and the mean from 5588 to 6289, between 2013/14 and 2020/21. There was one outlier practice that grew to have over 45,000 patients registered by 2020/21. However, this underestimates the extent of this new mega-practice phenomenon. Using the GMC numbers of GPs listed as performers to identify where the same GPs are working across multiple GP practice codes, we identified a series of mega-practices that span across health board areas and which have experienced a dramatic increase in their list size (with the two largest having list sizes of over 101,000 and 77,000 patients, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to better understand: how mega-practices provide services and whether this differs from other practices; where financial rewards accumulate within mega-practices; differences in staffing between mega-practices and other models; and the impacts mega-practices have on the quality and continuity of care and on health and inequality outcomes.

40 Gray in 5 Fractions for Salvage Reirradiation of Spine Lesions Previously Treated With Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A retrospective single-center analysis of the safety and efficacy of reirradiation to 40 Gy in 5 fractions (reSBRT) in patients previously treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy to the spine was performed. METHODS: We identified 102 consecutive patients treated with reSBRT for 105 lesions between 3/2013 and 8/2021. Sixty-three patients (61.8%) were treated to the same vertebral level, and 39 (38.2%) to overlapping immediately adjacent levels. Local control was defined as the absence of progression within the treated target volume. The probability of local progression was estimated using a cumulative incidence curve. Death without local progression was considered a competing risk. RESULTS: Most patients had extensive metastatic disease (54.9%) and were treated to the thoracic spine (53.8%). The most common regimen in the first course of stereotactic body radiotherapy was 27 Gy in 3 fractions, and the median time to reSBRT was 16.4 months. At the time of simulation, 44% of lesions had advanced epidural disease. Accordingly, 80% had myelogram simulations. Both the vertebral body and posterior elements were treated in 86% of lesions. At a median follow-up time of 13.2 months, local failure occurred in 10 lesions (9.5%). The 6- and 12-month cumulative incidences of local failure were 4.8% and 6%, respectively. Seven patients developed radiation-related neuropathy, and 1 patient developed myelopathy. The vertebral compression fracture rate was 16.7%. CONCLUSION: In patients with extensive disease involvement, reSBRT of spine metastases with 40 Gy in 5 fractions seems to be safe and effective. Prospective trials are needed to determine the optimal dose and fractionation in this clinical scenario.

Participation of Patients From Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups in Phase 1 Early Cancer Drug Development Trials in the US, 2000-2018.

Importance: Despite federal initiatives encouraging the enrollment of individuals from racial and ethnic minority groups in US clinical trials, no studies to date have specifically examined demographic disparities among participants in phase 1 drug development trials for patients with metastatic cancer. Objective: To assess trends in the enrollment of patients from racial and ethnic minority groups in US phase 1 therapeutic drug trials for metastatic cancer from 2000 to 2018. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, ClinicalTrials.gov was queried in July 2021 to identify completed phase 1 drug trials for metastatic cancer in the US from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2018, with published results, yielding 221 phase 1 trials with 8309 participants aged 18 years or older with metastatic solid tumors. Proportions of each racial and ethnic group of trial participants were compared with that from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries' Cancer in North America (CiNA) database. Statistical analysis was performed from July 12, 2021, to March 15, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: For each racial and ethnic group, the difference between trial and CiNA proportions was examined using a 2-sample test for equality of proportions with continuity correction. Results: The 8309 phase 1 trial participants (4198 men [50.5%]; median age, 59 years) included 23 American Indian or Alaska Native participants (0.3%), 371 Asian or Pacific Islander participants (4.5%), 514 Black participants (6.2%), 401 of 5076 Hispanic or Latinx participants (7.9%), and 7154 White participants (86.1%). Industry funded 165 of the 221 trials (74.7%). White patients were overrepresented overall compared with the corresponding CiNA cohort (7154 of 8309 [86.1%] vs 4 113 096 of 4 891 486 [84.1%]; difference, 2.0 percentage points; P < .001). There was an increase in overrepresentation of White patients from 2000 to 2011 (trials, 2780 of 3245 [85.7%]; CiNA, 2 378 019 of 2 800 711 [84.9%]; difference, 0.8 percentage points; P = .23) to 2012-2018 (trials, 4374 of 5063 [86.4%]; CiNA, 1 735 077 of 2 090 775 [82.9%]; difference, 3.5 percentage points; P < .001) and corresponding worsening representation of American Indian or Alaska Native patients (2000-2011: trials, 10 of 3245 [0.3%]; CiNA, 10 905 of 2 800 711 [0.4%]; difference, -0.08 percentage points; 2012-2018: trials, 13 of 5063 [0.3%]; CiNA, 9484 of 2 090 775 [0.5%]; difference, -0.20 percentage points), Asian or Pacific Islander patients (2000-2011: trials, 121 of 3245 [3.7%]; CiNA, 75 033 of 2 800 711 [2.7%]; difference, 1.1 percentage points; 2012-2018: trials, 151 of 5063 [3.0%]; CiNA 70 535 of 2 090 775 [3.4%]; difference, -0.75 percentage points), Black patients (2000-2011: trials, 244 of 3245 [7.5%]; CiNA, 322 701 of 2 800 711 [11.5%]; difference, -4.0 percentage points; 2012-2018: trials, 270 of 5063 [5.3%]; CiNA, 255 625 of 2 090 775 [12.2%]; difference, -6.9 percentage points), and Hispanic or Latinx patients (2000-2011: trials, 161 of 1792 [9.0%]; CiNA, 169 297 of 2 800 711 [6.0%]; difference, 3.0 percentage points; 2012-2018: trials, 240 of 3295 [7.3%]; CiNA, 156 118 of 2 090 775 [7.5%]; difference, -0.2 percentage points). Similar disparities were observed when comparing industry-funded and academic center-sponsored trials. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of participants in phase 1 clinical trials of drugs for metastatic cancer, worsening disparities were observed over time in the accrual of patients from racial and ethnic minority groups. These findings may represent widening inequalities in access to trial sites and worsening systemic biases. More efforts are needed to diversify phase 1 cancer drug trials to improve equity in access to new treatments and to ensure that safety and efficacy findings from early drug trials are generalizable across populations.