Trends in nuclear medicine and the radiopharmaceutical sciences in oncology: workforce challenges and training in the age of theranostics.

Although the promise of radionuclides for the diagnosis and treatment of disease was recognised soon after the discovery of radioactivity in the late 19th century, the systematic use of radionuclides in medicine only gradually increased over the subsequent hundred years. The past two decades, however, has seen a remarkable surge in the clinical application of diagnostic and therapeutic radiopharmaceuticals, particularly in oncology. This development is an exciting time for the use of theranostics in oncology, but the rapid growth of this area of nuclear medicine has created challenges as well. In particular, the infrastructure for the manufacturing and distribution of radiopharmaceuticals remains in development, and regulatory bodies are still optimising guidelines for this new class of drug. One issue of paramount importance for achieving equitable access to theranostics is building a sufficiently trained workforce in high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries. Here, we discuss the key challenges and opportunities that face the field as it seeks to build its workforce for the 21st century.

Production and regulatory issues for theranostics.

Theranostics has become a major area of innovation and progress in cancer care over the last decade. In view of the introduction of approved therapeutics in neuroendocrine tumours and prostate cancer in the last 10 years, the ability to provide access to these treatments has emerged as a key factor in ensuring global benefits from this cancer therapy approach. In this Series paper we explore the issues that affect access to and availability of theranostic radiopharmaceuticals, including supply and regulatory issues that might affect the availability of theranostic treatments for patients with cancer.

Recent advances and impending challenges for the radiopharmaceutical sciences in oncology.

This paper is the first of a Series on theranostics that summarises the current landscape of the radiopharmaceutical sciences as they pertain to oncology. In this Series paper, we describe exciting developments in radiochemistry and the production of radionuclides, the development and translation of theranostics, and the application of artificial intelligence to our field. These developments are catalysing growth in the use of radiopharmaceuticals to the benefit of patients worldwide. We also highlight some of the key issues to be addressed in the coming years to realise the full potential of radiopharmaceuticals to treat cancer.

Addressing challenges in low-income and middle-income countries through novel radiotherapy research opportunities.

Although radiotherapy continues to evolve as a mainstay of the oncological armamentarium, research and innovation in radiotherapy in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) faces challenges. This third Series paper examines the current state of LMIC radiotherapy research and provides new data from a 2022 survey undertaken by the International Atomic Energy Agency and new data on funding. In the context of LMIC-related challenges and impediments, we explore several developments and advances-such as deep phenotyping, real-time targeting, and artificial intelligence-to flag specific opportunities with applicability and relevance for resource-constrained settings. Given the pressing nature of cancer in LMICs, we also highlight some best practices and address the broader need to develop the research workforce of the future. This Series paper thereby serves as a resource for radiation professionals.

Radiotherapy and theranostics: a Lancet Oncology Commission.

Following on from the 2015 Lancet Oncology Commission on expanding global access to radiotherapy, Radiotherapy and theranostics: a Lancet Oncology Commission was created to assess the access and availability of radiotherapy to date and to address the important issue of access to the promising field of theranostics at a global level. A marked disparity in the availability of radiotherapy machines between high-income countries and low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) has been identified previously and remains a major problem. The availability of a suitably trained and credentialled workforce has also been highlighted as a major limiting factor to effective implementation of radiotherapy, particularly in LMICs. We investigated initiatives that could mitigate these issues in radiotherapy, such as extended treatment hours, hypofractionation protocols, and new technologies. The broad implementation of hypofractionation techniques compared with conventional radiotherapy in prostate cancer and breast cancer was projected to provide radiotherapy for an additional 2·2 million patients (0·8 million patients with prostate cancer and 1·4 million patients with breast cancer) with existing resources, highlighting the importance of implementing new technologies in LMICs. A global survey undertaken for this Commission revealed that use of radiopharmaceutical therapy-other than 131I-was highly variable in high-income countries and LMICs, with supply chains, workforces, and regulatory issues affecting access and availability. The capacity for radioisotope production was highlighted as a key issue, and training and credentialling of health professionals involved in theranostics is required to ensure equitable access and availability for patient treatment. New initiatives-such as the International Atomic Energy Agency's Rays of Hope programme-and interest by international development banks in investing in radiotherapy should be supported by health-care systems and governments, and extended to accelerate the momentum generated by recognising global disparities in access to radiotherapy. In this Commission, we propose actions and investments that could enhance access to radiotherapy and theranostics worldwide, particularly in LMICs, to realise health and economic benefits and reduce the burden of cancer by accessing these treatments.

Guardians of precision: advancing radiation protection, safety, and quality systems in nuclear medicine.

BACKGROUND: In the rapidly evolving field of nuclear medicine, the paramount importance of radiation protection, safety, and quality systems cannot be overstated. This document provides a comprehensive analysis of the intricate regulatory frameworks and guidelines, meticulously crafted and updated by national and international regulatory bodies to ensure the utmost safety and efficiency in the practice of nuclear medicine. METHODS: We explore the dynamic nature of these regulations, emphasizing their adaptability in accommodating technological advancements and the integration of nuclear medicine with other medical and scientific disciplines. RESULTS: Audits, both internal and external, are spotlighted for their pivotal role in assessing and ensuring compliance with established standards, promoting a culture of continuous improvement and excellence. We delve into the significant contributions of entities like the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and relevant professional societies in offering universally applicable guidelines that amalgamate the latest in scientific research, ethical considerations, and practical applicability. CONCLUSIONS: The document underscores the essence of international collaborations in pooling expertise, resources, and insights, fostering a global community of practice where knowledge and innovations are shared. Readers will gain an in-depth understanding of the practical applications, challenges, and opportunities presented by these regulatory frameworks and audit processes. The ultimate goal is to inspire and inform ongoing efforts to enhance safety, quality, and effectiveness in nuclear medicine globally.

Radiotherapy resources in Latin America and the Caribbean: a review of current and projected needs based on International Atomic Energy Agency data.

The inequitable access to radiotherapy globally is a complex undertaking that will require sustained work identifying gaps and mobilising efforts to resolve. The purpose of this review is to identify gaps and needs in radiotherapy in Latin America and the Caribbean. Data from 41 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean on teletherapy megavoltage units and brachytherapy resources were extracted from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Directory of Radiotherapy Centers. These data were then matched to open-source data from GLOBOCAN and World Bank Data which included data on population size, gross national income per capita, cancer incidence, and mortality. These data were matched to current and projected cancer incidence and mortality (as estimated by the Global Cancer Observatory in 2020) to calculate current and projected gaps in external beam radiotherapy facilities. For brachytherapy, the analysis was focused on cervical cancer and included high dose rate and low dose rate machines. As of Oct 22, 2022, external beam radiotherapy was available in 32 (78%) of 41 countries, representing 742 radiotherapy centres and 1122 megavoltage units. Average coverage was 63%. LINACs accounted for 85% (955 of 1122) of megavoltage units and Cobalt-60 capacity decreased to 12% compared with in 2018. Median megavoltage units per 1000 cancer cases were 0·8 (IQR 0·54-1·03). Most countries clustered in the same range of gross national income per capita for teletherapy units per 1000 cases at a median of US$9380. The current deficit in megavoltage units is estimated at 668 units and is projected to be 2455 units by 2030. 28 (68%) of 41 countries had 279 installed brachytherapy services, both high dose rate and low dose rate, which could treat 108 420 patients with cervical cancer per year and meet the current needs, albeit with inequitable distribution of resources. Overall, this review indicated a 15% improvement in the current external beam radiotherapy capacity in Latin America and the Caribbean compared with 2018. However, there is still a current shortage of at least 668 extra units. By 2030, the need for megavoltage units will be double the current capacity. There is inequitable distribution of brachytherapy resources across the region primarily in the Caribbean. Adoption of hypofractionation can help overcome machine shortage; however, it will present technical challenges that need to be taken into account. Rays of Hope, is a novel IAEA initiative that is designed to mobilise global efforts to address radiotherapy gaps while ensuring the highest return on investment.

Evolution of the joint International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), and WHO cancer control assessments (imPACT Reviews).

Before 2005, cancer and other non-communicable diseases were not yet health and development agenda priorities. Since the 2005 World Health Assembly Resolution, which encouraged WHO, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to jointly work on cancer control, progress was achieved in low-income and middle-income countries on a small scale. Recently, rapid acceleration in UN collaboration and global cancer activities has focused attention in global cancer control. This Policy Review presents the evolution of the IAEA, IARC, and WHO joint advisory service to help countries assess needs and capacities throughout the comprehensive cancer control continuum. We also highlight examples per country, showcasing a snapshot of global good practices to foster an exchange of experiences for continuous improvement in the integrated mission of Programme of Action for Cancer Therapy (imPACT) reviews and follow-up support. The future success of progress in cancer control lies in the high-level political and financial commitments. Linking the improvement of cancer services to the strengthening of health systems after the COVID-19 pandemic will also ensure ongoing advances in the delivery of care across the cancer control continuum.

Radiotherapy resources in Africa: an International Atomic Energy Agency update and analysis of projected needs.

The number of patients with cancer in Africa has been predicted to increase from 844 279 in 2012 to more than 1·5 million in 2030. However, many countries in Africa still lack access to radiotherapy as a part of comprehensive cancer care. The objective of this analysis is to present an updated overview of radiotherapy resources in Africa and to analyse the gaps and needs of the continent for 2030 in the context of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Data from 54 African countries on teletherapy megavoltage units and brachytherapy afterloaders were extracted from the Directory for Radiotherapy Centres, an electronic, centralised, and continuously updated database of radiotherapy centres. Cancer incidence and future predictions were taken from the GLOBOCAN 2018 database of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Radiotherapy need was estimated using a 64% radiotherapy utilisation rate, while assuming a machine throughput of 500 patients per year. As of March, 2020, 28 (52%) of 54 countries had access to external beam radiotherapy, 21 (39%) had brachytherapy capacity, and no country had a capacity that matched the estimated treatment need. Median income was an important predictor of the availability of megavoltage machines: US$1883 (IQR 914-3269) in countries without any machines versus $4485 (3079-12480) in countries with at least one megavoltage machine (p=0·0003). If radiotherapy expansion continues at the rate observed over the past 7 years, it is unlikely that the continent will meet its radiotherapy needs. This access gap might impact the ability to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly the target to reduce preventable, premature mortality by a third, and meet the target of the cervical cancer elimination strategy of 90% with access to treatment. Urgent, novel initiatives in financing and human capacity building are needed to change the trajectory and provide comprehensive cancer care to patients in Africa in the next decade.

Medical imaging and nuclear medicine: a Lancet Oncology Commission.

The diagnosis and treatment of patients with cancer requires access to imaging to ensure accurate management decisions and optimal outcomes. Our global assessment of imaging and nuclear medicine resources identified substantial shortages in equipment and workforce, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). A microsimulation model of 11 cancers showed that the scale-up of imaging would avert 3·2% (2·46 million) of all 76·0 million deaths caused by the modelled cancers worldwide between 2020 and 2030, saving 54·92 million life-years. A comprehensive scale-up of imaging, treatment, and care quality would avert 9·55 million (12·5%) of all cancer deaths caused by the modelled cancers worldwide, saving 232·30 million life-years. Scale-up of imaging would cost US$6·84 billion in 2020-30 but yield lifetime productivity gains of $1·23 trillion worldwide, a net return of $179·19 per $1 invested. Combining the scale-up of imaging, treatment, and quality of care would provide a net benefit of $2·66 trillion and a net return of $12·43 per $1 invested. With the use of a conservative approach regarding human capital, the scale-up of imaging alone would provide a net benefit of $209·46 billion and net return of $31·61 per $1 invested. With comprehensive scale-up, the worldwide net benefit using the human capital approach is $340·42 billion and the return per dollar invested is $2·46. These improved health and economic outcomes hold true across all geographical regions. We propose actions and investments that would enhance access to imaging equipment, workforce capacity, digital technology, radiopharmaceuticals, and research and training programmes in LMICs, to produce massive health and economic benefits and reduce the burden of cancer globally.

Estimating the impact of treatment and imaging modalities on 5-year net survival of 11 cancers in 200 countries: a simulation-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Accurate survival estimates are important for cancer control planning. Although observed survival estimates are unavailable for many countries, where they are available, wide variations are reported. Understanding the impact of specific treatment and imaging modalities can help decision makers to effectively allocate resources to improve cancer survival in their local context. METHODS: We developed a microsimulation model of stage-specific cancer survival in 200 countries and territories for 11 cancers (oesophagus, stomach, colon, rectum, anus, liver, pancreas, lung, breast, cervix uteri, and prostate) comprising 60% of global diagnosed cancer cases. The model accounts for country-specific availability of treatment (chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy, and targeted therapy) and imaging modalities (ultrasound, x-ray, CT, MRI, PET, single-photon emission CT), as well as quality of care. We calibrated the model to reported survival estimates from CONCORD-3 (which reports global trends in cancer survival in 2000-14). We estimated 5-year net survival for diagnosed cancers in each country or territory and estimated potential survival gains from increasing the availability of individual treatment and imaging modalities, and more comprehensive packages of scale-up of these interventions. We report the mean and 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for all outcomes, calculated as the 2·5 and 97·5 percentiles of the simulation results. FINDINGS: The estimated global 5-year net survival for all 11 cancers combined is 42·6% (95% uncertainty interval 40·3-44·3), with survival in high-income countries being an average of 12 times (range 4-17) higher than that in low-income countries. Expanding availability of surgery or radiotherapy or improving quality of care would yield the largest survival gains in low-income (2·5-3·4 percentage point increase in survival) and lower-middle-income countries (2·4-6·1 percentage point increase), whereas upper-middle-income and high-income countries are more likely to benefit from improved availability of targeted therapy (0·7 percentage point increase for upper-middle income and 0·4 percentage point increase for high income). Investing in medical imaging will also be necessary to achieve substantial survival gains, with traditional modalities estimated to provide the largest gains in low-income settings, while MRI and PET would yield the largest gains in higher-income countries. Simultaneous expansion of treatment, imaging, and quality of care could improve 5-year net survival by more than ten times in low-income countries (3·8% [95% UI 0·5-9·2] to 45·2% [40·2-52·1]) and could more than double 5-year net survival in lower-middle-income countries (20·1% [7·2-31·7] to 47·1% [42·8-50·8]). INTERPRETATION: Scaling up both treatment and imaging availability could yield synergistic survival gains for patients with cancer. Expanding traditional modalities in lower-income settings might be a feasible pathway to improve survival before scaling up more modern technologies. FUNDING: Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health.

Addressing Global Inequities in Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography (PET-CT) for Cancer Management: A Statistical Model to Guide Strategic Planning.

BACKGROUND According to the World Health Organization (WHO), non-communicable diseases are responsible for 71% of annual global mortality. National governments and international organizations are increasingly considering medical imaging and nuclear medicine access data in strategies to address epidemiologic priorities. Our objective here was to develop a statistical model to assist countries in estimating their needs for PET-CT systems for the management of specific cancer types. MATERIAL AND METHODS We introduce a patient-centered statistical model based on country-specific epidemiological data, PET-CT performance, and evidence-based clinical guidelines for PET-CT use for cancer. The output of the model was integrated into a Bayesian model to rank countries or world regions that would benefit the most from upscaling PET-CT scanners. RESULTS We applied our model to the IMAGINE database, recently developed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Our model indicates that at least 96 countries should upscale their PET-CT services and more than 200 additional PET-CT scanners would be required to fulfill their needs. The model also provides quantitative evidence indicating that low-income countries would benefit the most from increasing PET-CT provision. Finally, we discuss several cases in which the standard unit [number of scanners]/[million inhabitants] to guide strategic planning or address inequities is misleading. CONCLUSIONS Our model may help in the accurate delineation and further reduction of global inequities in access to PET-CT scanners. As a template, the model also has the potential to estimate the costs and socioeconomic impact of implementing any medical imaging modality for any clinical application.

Intra- and inter-fractional liver and lung tumor motions treated with SBRT under active breathing control.

PURPOSE: To assess intra- and inter-fractional motions of liver and lung tumors using active breathing control (ABC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Nineteen patients with liver cancer and 15 patients with lung cancer treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) were included in this retrospective study. All patients received a series of three CTs at simulation to test breath-hold reproducibility. The centroids of the whole livers and of the lung tumors from the three CTs were compared to assess intra-fraction variability. For 15 patients (8 liver, 7 lung), ABC-gated kilovoltage cone-beam CTs (kV-CBCTs) were acquired prior to each treatment, and the centroids of the whole livers and of the lung tumors were also compared to those in the planning CTs to assess inter-fraction variability. RESULTS: Liver intra-fractional systematic/random errors were 0.75/0.39 mm, 1.36/0.97 mm, and 1.55/1.41 mm at medial-lateral (ML), anterior-posterior (AP), and superior-inferior (SI) directions, respectively. Lung intra-fractional systematic/random errors were 0.71/0.54 mm (ML), 1.45/1.10 mm (AP), and 3.95/1.93 mm (SI), respectively. Substantial intra-fraction motions (>3 mm) were observed in 26.3% of liver cancer patients and in 46.7% of lung cancer patients. For both liver and lung tumors, most inter-fractional systematic and random errors were larger than the corresponding intra-fractional errors. However, these inter-fractional errors were mostly corrected by the treatment team prior to each treatment based on kV CBCT-guided soft tissue alignment, thereby eliminating their effects on the treatment planning margins. CONCLUSIONS: Intra-fractional motion is the key to determine the planning margins since inter-fractional motion can be compensated based on daily gated soft tissue imaging guidance of CBCT. Patient-specific treatment planning margins instead of recipe-based margins were suggested, which can benefit mostly for the patients with small intra-fractional motions.

Assessment of cancer control capacity and readiness: the role of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

During the past six decades, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has helped to address the growing cancer burden, by delivering substantial cancer-related assistance to low-income and middle-income member states. IAEA assistance has primarily been facilitated through sustainable radiotherapy and nuclear medicine programmes to establish safe and effective diagnostic imaging, nuclear medicine, and radiotherapy capacity to safely treat patients with cancer. Planning of a National Cancer Control Programme starts with a needs assessment of all aspects of cancer control in the country to ensure evidence-based strategies are adapted to the country's specific needs. The IAEA offers its member states a tool, known as an integrated mission of Programme of Action for Cancer Therapy Review, to assess the status of national capacities for implementation and delivery of cancer control plans and activities and the readiness to develop and implement a long-term radiation medicine infrastructure and plan to improve capacity.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Borderline and Unresectable Pancreas Cancer.

The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. The panel reviewed the pertinent literature and voted on five variants to establish appropriate recommended treatment of borderline and unresectable pancreatic cancer. The guidelines reviewed the use of radiation, chemotherapy, and surgery. Radiation technique, dose, and targets were evaluated, as was the recommended chemotherapy, administered either alone or concurrently with radiation. This report will aid clinicians in determining guidelines for the optimal treatment of borderline and unresectable pancreatic cancer.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Resectable Stomach Cancer.

For resectable gastric cancer, perioperative chemotherapy or adjuvant chemoradiation with chemotherapy are standards of care. The decision making for adjuvant therapeutic management can depend on the stage of the cancer, lymph node positivity, and extent of surgical resection. After gastric cancer resection, postoperative chemotherapy combined with chemoradiation should be incorporated in cases of D0 lymph node dissection, positive regional lymph nodes, poor clinical response to induction chemotherapy, or positive margins. In the setting of a D2 lymph node dissection, especially those with negative regional lymph nodes, adjuvant chemotherapy alone could be considered. The American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.