StrataXRT for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis in breast cancer: a pilot study.

PURPOSE: Previous literature has produced heterogeneous results on StrataXRT for prevention of acute radiation dermatitis (RD) in breast cancer. This pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility and efficacy of StrataXRT in a cancer center. METHODS: The study consisted of five cohorts: (1) patients with large breasts treated with local radiation therapy (RT) either in the supine position or (2) the prone position, (3) patients receiving locoregional breast RT with any breast size, and (4) patients receiving chest wall RT, either locally or (5) locoregionally. The primary endpoint of the study was RD grade as assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Secondary endpoints included incidence of moist desquamation (MD), patient- and clinician-reported skin assessments, patient quality of life as assessed by the Skindex-16, and patient satisfaction. These outcomes were compared with those from a published trial from the same institution assessing standard of care and Mepitel Film (MF) as prevention of breast RD. RESULTS: Forty-five patients receiving RT to the breast or chest wall were enrolled. Two withdrew, leaving 43 evaluable patients. Overall, two (4.7%) patients had grade 3 RD, 14 (32.6%) had grade 2 RD, and 27 (62.8%) had grade 1 RD. Ten patients (23.3%) developed MD during/after RT. CONCLUSION: StrataXRT is effective in preventing grade 3 RD in patients, and the most promising results were observed within the prone cohort. Further research includes evaluating the efficacy of StrataXRT against the standard of care for the prophylaxis of RD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT05594498) on October 13, 2022.

Concordance of patient- and clinician-reported outcomes of acute radiation dermatitis in breast cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The study evaluated the concordance between patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and clinician-reported outcomes (CRO) of acute radiation dermatitis (RD) symptoms following adjuvant radiotherapy for early-stage and locally advanced breast cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a multi-center randomized phase 3 trial (376 patients). Ordinal logistic regression analysis was used to compare the Skin Symptom Assessment (SSA) independently reported by both patients and clinicians. Concordance between patient- and clinician-reported SSAs for RD symptoms was measured by percent concordance, concordance index (C-statistic), and Cohen's Kappa. Analyses were performed across all patients in the original modified intention-to-treat analysis and those with only grade 2-3 (CTCAE) RD. RESULTS: PROs were significantly more severe than CROs across all RD symptoms (Odds Ratio [OR] > 1; p < 0.0001). Pigmentation (OR 5.4), blistering/peeling (OR 4.0), and pain/soreness (OR 3.9) were the most differentially reported symptoms. Poor-to-low concordance was noted between patient- and clinician-reported SSAs for all RD symptoms for the entire cohort (percent concordance < 50%, C-statistic 0.52-0.63, Cohen's Kappa 13.9-23.4%) and those with grade 2-3 RD (percent concordance < 50%, C-statistic 0.56-0.66, Cohen's Kappa 2.0-24.5%). Similarly, poor-to-low concordance was noted in both Mepitel film and standard-of-care arms. CONCLUSION: PROs and CROs have poor concordance in breast RD, and patients report worse outcomes than clinicians, regardless of RD severity or prophylaxis. PROs must be further integrated into routine clinical practice and clinical trial design to reduce the risk of underreporting symptoms.

2020 ASCO, 2023 NCCN, 2023 MASCC/ESMO, and 2019 CCO: a comparison of antiemetic guidelines for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common toxicity that may impair the quality of life of patients with various malignancies ranging from early to end stages. In light of frequent changes to the guidelines for optimal management of CINV, we undertook this narrative review to compare the most recent guidelines published by ASCO (2020), NCCN (2023), MASCC/ESMO (2023), and CCO (2019). The processes undertaken by each organization to evaluate existing literature were also described. Although ASCO, NCCN, MASCC/ESMO, and CCO guidelines for the treatment and prevention of CINV share many fundamental similarities, the literature surrounding low and minimal emetic risk regimens is lacking. Current data regarding adherence to these guidelines is poor and warrants further investigation to improve care.

Quality of life issues in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is one of the most common pre-invasive cancers diagnosed in women. Quality of life (QoL) is extremely important to assess in studies including these patients due to the favorable prognosis of the disease. The primary objective of this systematic review was to compile a comprehensive list of QoL issues, all existing QoL assessment tools, and patient-reported outcome measures used to assess DCIS. METHODS: A search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception to August 2023, using keywords such as "ductal carcinoma in-situ", "quality of life", and "patient-reported outcomes." QoL issues and QoL tools in primary research studies were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 67 articles identified issues pertaining to patients with DCIS spanning physical, functional, and psychosocial QoL domains. Physical and functional issues observed in patients included pain, fatigue, and impaired sexual functioning. Psychosocial issues such as anxiety, depression, and confusion about one's disease were also common. QoL tools included those that assessed general QoL, breast cancer-specific tools, and issue-specific questionnaires. CONCLUSION: The current instruments available to assess QoL in patients with DCIS do not comprehensively capture the issues that are pertinent to patients. Thus, the modification of existing tools or the creation of a DCIS-specific QoL tool is recommended to ensure that future research will be sensitive towards challenges faced by patients with DCIS.

StrataXRT for the prevention and treatment of radiation dermatitis: a critical review.

PURPOSE: The primary objective is to systematically review primary studies, such as randomized control trials (RCTs), feasibility, exploratory, and case studies; and the secondary objective is to evaluate all secondary articles, such as reviews, guidelines, and editorials, relevant to the use of StrataXRT for the prevention and/or management of radiation dermatitis (RD) in cancer patients. METHODS: A literature search was conducted up to February 26, 2023, for articles investigating the use of StrataXRT for the prevention and treatment of RD, in the following databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar. The keywords "StrataXRT", "dermatitis", "radiotherapy", and "radiation" were used to identify relevant articles. RESULTS: Twenty-seven articles from 2018 to 2022 were identified to fulfill the inclusion criteria of this review, of which nine are primary studies and 18 are secondary papers. Significant heterogeneity was observed in the current literature studying the effects of StrataXRT, making it difficult to make cross-trial comparisons. There is a suggestion of the efficacy of StrataXRT in the prevention and treatment of RD. CONCLUSION: The findings of this review recommend further adequately powered RCTs with robust methodology including patient and clinician assessments to determine the efficacy of StrataXRT in preventing and treating RD. This is essential to improve the quality of life of patients and identify which groups of patients would benefit most from StrataXRT.

StrataXRT for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the overall efficacy of StrataXRT, a topical gel dressing, in preventing acute radiation dermatitis (RD) in breast cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT). METHODS: A systematic search was conducted on April 25, 2023 in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of StrataXRT in preventing acute RD in breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant RT to the breast or chest wall with or without regional nodes were included. Pooled incidence odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model, with analysis and forest plots generated in RevMan v5.4. RESULTS: The analysis included three RCTs with a total of 189 patients assessed using per-protocol analysis. Two RCTs compared StrataXRT to standard of care, while the third compared it with Mepitel film and was reported separately. In the former RCTs, the odds ratio (OR) for developing acute grade 3 RD favored StrataXRT at 0.05 (95% CI, 0.01-0.22; P < 0.0001). The OR for developing acute grades 2-3 RD was 0.32 (95% CI, 0.03-3.18; P = 0.33). The RCT comparing StrataXRT with Mepitel film showed insignificant ORs for grade 3 and grades 2-3 RD. One RCT reported significantly lower erythema index (P = 0.008) and melanin index (P = 0.015) in StrataXRT patients. The use of StrataXRT did not raise additional safety concerns. CONCLUSION: StrataXRT may help prevent severe acute RD in breast cancer RT patients. Further high quality, large-scale studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Mepitel Film for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis in head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of Mepitel Film in preventing acute radiation dermatitis (RD) in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) across randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched on 5 March 2023 to identify relevant RCTs. RD assessment tools and outcomes were compared across studies. Pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated based on random-effects analysis using RevMan 5.4. RESULTS: Three RCTs conducted between 2018 and 2020 were included. Mepitel Film decreased RD severity when compared to Sorbolene or Biafine but not when compared to mometasone. A per-protocol analysis of two of the trials revealed that, overall, Mepitel Film significantly reduced the incidence of grade 2-3 RD (odds ratio (OR), 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09-0.65; p = 0.005) and moist desquamation (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.10-0.46; p < 0.0001) and decreased average patient, researcher, and combined components of the Radiation-Induced Skin Reaction Assessment Scale (the standardized mean difference (SMD) for patient ratings, - 2.56; 95% CI, - 3.15 to - 1.96, p < 0.00001; SMD for researcher ratings, - 3.47; 95% CI, - 6.63 to - 0.31, p = 0.03; SMD for combined scores, - 3.68; 95% CI, - 6.43 to - 0.92, p = 0.009). Noted issues with Mepitel Film included itchiness and poor adherence. CONCLUSION: While there were discrepancies across studies, Mepitel Film demonstrated a decrease in the incidence of grade 2-3 RD and moist desquamation. These findings emphasize the need for further examining Mepitel Film's efficacy across diverse patient groups and the importance of standardizing RD severity assessment methodologies and control arms.

Quality of life in patients with malignant spinal cord compression: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Malignant spinal cord compression (MSCC) is an oncological emergency that may result in a devastating combination of malignancy and disability. Existing quality of life (QoL) questionnaires commonly used in MSCC literature (EORTC QLQ-C30, BM-22, Brief Pain Inventory, and Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes) may not capture all the commonly reported symptoms and lack specificity to MSCC. The primary objective of this systematic review is to determine unmet patient needs and underreported QoL issues and compile a comprehensive list of QoL issues. The secondary objective of this review is to compile all existing QoL tools and questionnaires and determine whether any QoL issues are not addressed in the existing tools currently used in the literature. METHODS: A literature search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases between 1946 and February 6, 2023, to compile all QoL issues and existing questionnaires used to assess QoL in patients with MSCC. All study designs were included given that they discussed QoL issues specific to patients with MSCC. RESULTS: The results of this systematic review identified the most frequently discussed QoL issues in the literature studying MSCC. This included direct symptoms of MSCC such as back pain, paralysis, limb weakness/numbness, and urinary/bowel incontinence. Indirect symptoms coming from radiotherapy treatment such as dysphagia, painful swallowing, mouth pain, dry mouth, diarrhea, fatigue, and nausea/vomiting were also noted. Other symptoms resulting from corticosteroid treatment included difficulty sleeping, blurring of vision, weight gain, and mood disturbance. Patients also experienced psychosocial issues such as anxiety, depression, emotional distress, low self-esteem, concerns about dependence on others, concerns about getting home, and fear about their prognosis and future. CONCLUSION: This review highlights the QoL issues specific to patients with MSCC and QoL tools capturing these issues. Relevance of QoL issues identified in this systematic review must be prospectively validated by patients and healthcare professionals with experience in treating MSCC.

Perceptions of healthcare professionals on the use of Mepitel Film for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis in breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Randomized clinical trials support Mepitel Film (MF) as a prophylactic treatment for radiation dermatitis (RD) in patients undergoing breast radiotherapy. Although several studies have canvassed the opinion of patients on using MF, no such studies have been done to investigate the perception of healthcare professionals (HCPs). The objective of this study was therefore to investigate the perceptions of HCPs on MF as a treatment option for RD. METHODS: Anonymized responses to a web-based survey sent to HCPs at a single institution managing patients using MF during breast radiotherapy were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 28 HCPs contacted, 22 completed the survey, including 6 radiation oncologists (ROs), 11 radiation therapists (RTTs), and 5 nurses. Most HCPs reported MF was better at preventing severe RD than the standard of care and improved radiation-induced skin reactions (n = 20/22, 91%, and n = 19/22, 86%, respectively). MF was recommended for mastectomy patients without reconstruction (n = 15/21, 71%). The majority of HCPs believed that patients' families could be trained to apply and remove MF (n = 19/22, 86%). Many HCPs perceived that implementation of MF would be difficult in terms of maintaining patient flow and wide-scale implementation within their institution (n = 11/22, 50%, and n = 10/22, 46%, respectively). Most HCPs perceived that fewer than 50% of their patients could afford MF if priced at $100 CAD (n = 15/20, 75%). CONCLUSION: These findings provide insights into the possibility of MF to be incorporated into standard practice of care for RD. Although most HCPs were satisfied with MF as a prophylactic treatment for RD, there are concerns about its resource-intensive operationalization and financial accessibility to patients. Future research should focus on ways to improve HCP experience with MF and to improve its implementation into clinical settings as standard of care.

Quality of life issues in patients with bone metastases: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Bones are frequent sites of metastatic disease, observed in 30-75% of advanced cancer patients. Quality of life (QoL) is an important endpoint in studies evaluating the treatments of bone metastases (BM), and many patient-reported outcome tools are available. The primary objective of this systematic review was to compile a list of QoL issues relevant to BM and its interventions. The secondary objective was to identify common tools used to assess QoL in patients with BM, and the QoL issues they fail to address. METHODS: A search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases between 1946 and 27 January 2023 with the keywords "bone metastases", "quality of life", and "patient reported outcomes". Specific QoL issues in original research studies and the QoL tools used were extracted. RESULTS: The review identified the QoL issues most prevalent to BM in the literature. Physical and functional issues observed in patients included pain, interference with ambulation and daily activities, and fatigue. Psychological symptoms, such as helplessness, depression, and anxiety were also common. These issues interfered with patients' relationships and social activities. Items not mentioned in existing QoL tools were related to newer treatments of BM, such as pain flare, flu-like symptoms, and jaw pain due to osteonecrosis. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights that QoL issues for patients with BM have expanded over time due to advances in BM-directed treatments. If they are relevant, additional treatment-related QoL issues identified need to be validated prospectively by patients and added to current assessment tools.

Examining stigma in experiences of male breast cancer patients and its impact as a barrier to care: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Male breast cancer (MBC) accounts for nearly one percent of all diagnosed breast cancer (BC). In the United States alone, there were 2,670 MBC reported cases and 500 fatalities in 2019. In addition to the general challenges faced by patients to diagnose and treat cancer, MBC patients experience stigma from the medical community and their own feelings of embarrassment. The presence of stigma has a negative impact on the quality of life and psychological outcomes of MBC patients. This narrative review investigates current research on the presence of stigma in the diagnosis and care of MBC patients, and the role of stigma as a barrier to care. METHODS: Current literature on MBC and stigma was found through a search of PubMed and Google Scholar. The search strategy consisted of keywords related to "male breast cancer, stigma, awareness, experiences, and social support". Studies published from January 2005 to April 2024, that were retrievable and written in English, were included in this review. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: Several studies have supported that MBC patients experience stigma due to the lack of awareness in the medical community, and feelings of embarrassment felt by the patients. This stigma is seen through insufficient guidelines on MBC diagnosis and treatment and a lack of male-specific information for BC. These topics of stigma act as barriers to care, as they lead to psychological distress (e.g., anxiety and depression) and delayed diagnoses. Current studies suggest addressing the lack of information and awareness of MBC and implementing screening procedures to mitigate the negative impact of stigma. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the presence of stigma in the care of MBC patients and its distressing effects on patients. There is a need for increased awareness among the medical community to improve diagnosis and treatment of MBC patients, to allow for more equitable care. Future therapies should focus on the viability of routine screening programs for male patients and addressing the gap of male-specific information.

Sexual health after breast cancer: a clinical practice review.

Breast cancer (BC) diagnoses not only present physical challenges but profoundly affect survivors' psychosocial well-being leading to sexual health challenges. This clinical practice review aimed to discuss the current literature and outline the knowledge gaps related to care for sexual health after BC, including survivors' sexual health concerns, as well as available prospective surveillance programs. Current literature on the sexual health challenges of BC survivors was identified and sorted into contributing factors, treatments and interventions, and practice recommendations. This evidence was then used to identify gaps in the literature and make recommendations for future research. BC survivors experience a variety of physical symptoms, such as pain during sex or dyspareunia, which impair sexual well-being. Additionally, dissatisfaction with sexual function may arise due to psychosocial stressors (e.g., depression or body image concerns) and the inverse may worsen psychological well-being. Treatments can have lasting effects that may impact sexual function, often reciprocally related to physical and psychosocial factors. Current treatments for sexual dysfunction involve topical products for vaginal symptoms (e.g., creams, pH-balanced gels, hyaluronic acid or vitamin E suppositories, natural oils, topical estrogen, or lubricants) and various counseling and educational interventions (e.g., mental health counseling, sex therapy, or couples-based psychotherapy). There is a general lack of research considering the ways in which intersectional concerns can impact sexual health experiences after BC. Existing studies do not often consider potential differences in needs that may arise due to ethnicity, age, or socioeconomic background. To address these limitations a significant paradigm shift in survivorship care. This requires moving beyond disease management towards a more holistic, comprehensive, patient-centered approach prioritizing comfort and sexual well-being.

Breast cancer survivorship care: a narrative review of challenges and future directions.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer (BC) is the most prevalent cancer among women worldwide. With a growing number of BC survivors (BCSs), the number of survivors who require highquality survivorship care is increasing. Various recommendations have been proposed for survivorship care plans (SCPs). However, globally, limited progress has been made to implement these recommendations consistently in cancer care centers. This review explores the gaps and challenges that exist in BC survivorship care (BCSC) and proposes future directions for improving survivorship care for patients and the healthcare system. METHODS: Current literature on BCSC was searched using PubMed and Google Scholar. The search strategy utilized a combination of keywords related to BCSC, gaps in survivorship care, and health promotion. Retrievable and English articles from January 2000 to March 2024 were included in the review. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: Despite the large number of guidelines and recommendations on best BCSC practices, only a small number of these have been translated into clinical practices that help streamline patient care. There are many gaps to the provision of high-quality survivorship care, all of which negatively affect patient outcomes. Some of these gaps include but are not limited to: the limited role of primary care providers (PCPs), lack of coordination of care, lack of evidence-based research, insufficient data on health promotion, and challenges implementing comprehensive care. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate the need for a holistic and personalized approach to BCSC. The importance of implementing a multi-disciplinary and coordinated approach to survivorship care has been emphasized. This includes further involvement of PCPs, through increased training for PCPs in survivorship care. Despite available models of survivorship care, further research is needed to determine optimal BCSC that improves patient outcomes while decreasing the strain on the healthcare system. Additionally, technology can play a beneficial role in survivorship care, especially through telehealth and artificial intelligence (AI). Nonetheless, further research is needed on BCSC.

Randomised controlled trials on radiation dose fractionation in breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis with emphasis on side effects and cosmesis.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive assessment of various fractionation schemes in radiation therapy for breast cancer, with a focus on side effects, cosmesis, quality of life, risks of recurrence, and survival outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (from inception to 23 October 2023). STUDY SELECTION: Included studies were randomised controlled trials focusing on conventional fractionation (CF; daily fractions of 1.8-2 Gy, reaching a total dose of 50-50.4 Gy over 5-6 weeks), moderate hypofractionation (MHF; fraction sizes of 2.65-3.3 Gy for 13-16 fractions over 3-5 weeks), and/or ultra-hypofractionation (UHF; schedule of only 5 fractions). DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent investigators screened studies and extracted data. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) approach, respectively. DATA SYNTHESIS: Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was analysed using Cochran's Q test and I2 statistic. Network meta-analysis was used to integrate all available evidence. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The pre-specified primary outcome was grade ≥2 acute radiation dermatitis and late radiation therapy related side effects; secondary outcomes included cosmesis, quality of life, recurrence, and survival metrics. RESULTS: From 1754 studies, 59 articles representing 35 trials (20 237 patients) were assessed; 21.6% of outcomes showed low risk of bias, whereas 78.4% had some concerns or high risk, particularly in outcome measurement (47.4%). The RR for grade ≥2 acute radiation dermatitis for MHF compared with CF was 0.54 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.61; P<0.001) and 0.68 (0.49 to 0.93; P=0.02) following breast conserving therapy and mastectomy, respectively. Hyperpigmentation and grade ≥2 breast shrinkage were less frequent after MHF than after CF, with RRs of 0.77 (0.62 to 0.95; P=0.02) and 0.92 (0.85 to 0.99; P=0.03), respectively, in the combined breast conserving therapy and mastectomy population. However, in the breast conserving therapy only trials, these differences in hyperpigmentation (RR 0.79, 0.60 to 1.03; P=0.08) and breast shrinkage (0.94, 0.83 to 1.07; P=0.35) were not statistically significant. The RR for grade ≥2 acute radiation dermatitis for UHF compared with MHF was 0.85 (0.47 to 1.55; P=0.60) for breast conserving therapy and mastectomy patients combined. MHF was associated with improved cosmesis and quality of life compared with CF, whereas data on UHF were less conclusive. Survival and recurrence outcomes were similar between UHF, MHF, and CF. CONCLUSIONS: MHF shows improved safety profile, cosmesis, and quality of life compared with CF while maintaining equivalent oncological outcomes. Fewer randomised controlled trials have compared UHF with other fractionation schedules, but its safety and oncological effectiveness seem to be similar with short term follow-up. Given the advantages of reduced treatment time, enhanced convenience for patients, and potential cost effectiveness, MHF and UHF should be considered as preferred options over CF in appropriate clinical settings, with further research needed to solidify these findings. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023460249.

Patient engagement in CPD in radiation oncology and radiation therapy across Canada: A national survey.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate patient engagement (PE) in the development and delivery of Continuing Professional Development (CPD) programs for health care providers within radiation oncology, radiation therapy and medical physics across Canada. This study looked at the current state of PE in CPD programs across Canada and how to address the benefits and barriers to PE to advance these programs. METHODS: A quantitative, exploratory survey was conducted among radiation oncologists, radiation therapists and medical physicists across Canada. The questionnaire was developed by a multi-disciplinary team and piloted among interprofessional (IP) faculty with a special interest in patient education. The survey was web-based and disseminated through the Canadian Association of Medical Radiation Technologists (CAMRT) and Canadian Radiation Oncologists (CARO) professional associations. RESULTS: A total of 97 responses were obtained, 43.3% (n = 41) were radiation oncologists 64% (n = 54) were radiation therapists and 2(2%) were medical physicists. There was representation from all provinces, except Newfoundland, with the majority 36% (n = 35) from Ontario. 57% (n = 46) of participants agreed that patients should be involved in CPD, and 11% (n = 9) disagreed. The most agreed-upon barriers are financial costs for patients and clinician bias when selecting patients. The most agreed-upon solutions were improving patient resources and creating training programs for patients. Radiation therapists agreed significantly more (p<0.05) with the potential benefits of PE in CPD, compared to radiation oncologists. DISCUSSION: PE in CPD programs is a novel and controversial topic but is still highly rated and important. We intend to advocate for patients to take an active role in our CPD programs. Further research is warranted.