Guide for paediatric radiotherapy procedures.

A third of children with cancer receive radiotherapy as part of their initial treatment, which represents 800 paediatric irradiations per year in France carried out in 15 specialized centres approved on the recommendations of the French national cancer institute in decreasing order of frequency, the types of cancer that require irradiation are: brain tumours, neuroblastomas, Ewing's sarcomas, Hodgkin's lymphomas, soft tissue sarcomas including rhabdomyosarcomas, and nephroblastomas. The treatment guidelines follow the recommendations of the French society for childhood cancers (SFCE) or the French and European prospective protocols. The therapeutic indications, the technical and/and ballistic choices of complex cases are frequently discussed during bimonthly paediatric radiotherapy technical web-conferences. All cancers combined, overall survival being 80%, long-term toxicity logically becomes an important concern, making the preparation of treatments complex. The irradiation methods include all the techniques currently available: 3D conformational irradiation, intensity modulation radiation therapy, irradiation under normal or hypofractionated stereotaxic conditions, brachytherapy and proton therapy. We present the update of the recommendations of the French society for radiation oncology on the indications, the technical methods of realization and the organisation and the specificities of paediatric radiation oncology.

Moving Forward in the Next Decade: Radiation Oncology Sciences for Patient-Centered Cancer Care.

In a time of rapid advances in science and technology, the opportunities for radiation oncology are undergoing transformational change. The linkage between and understanding of the physical dose and induced biological perturbations are opening entirely new areas of application. The ability to define anatomic extent of disease and the elucidation of the biology of metastases has brought a key role for radiation oncology for treating metastatic disease. That radiation can stimulate and suppress subpopulations of the immune response makes radiation a key participant in cancer immunotherapy. Targeted radiopharmaceutical therapy delivers radiation systemically with radionuclides and carrier molecules selected for their physical, chemical, and biochemical properties. Radiation oncology usage of "big data" and machine learning and artificial intelligence adds the opportunity to markedly change the workflow for clinical practice while physically targeting and adapting radiation fields in real time. Future precision targeting requires multidimensional understanding of the imaging, underlying biology, and anatomical relationship among tissues for radiation as spatial and temporal "focused biology." Other means of energy delivery are available as are agents that can be activated by radiation with increasing ability to target treatments. With broad applicability of radiation in cancer treatment, radiation therapy is a necessity for effective cancer care, opening a career path for global health serving the medically underserved in geographically isolated populations as a substantial societal contribution addressing health disparities. Understanding risk and mitigation of radiation injury make it an important discipline for and beyond cancer care including energy policy, space exploration, national security, and global partnerships.

Advances in radiotherapy technology for pediatric cancer patients and roles of medical physicists: COG and SIOP Europe perspectives.

Over the last two decades, rapid technological advances have dramatically changed radiation delivery to children with cancer, enabling improved normal-tissue sparing. This article describes recent advances in photon and proton therapy technologies, image-guided patient positioning, motion management, and adaptive therapy that are relevant to pediatric cancer patients. For medical physicists who are at the forefront of realizing the promise of technology, challenges remain with respect to ensuring patient safety as new technologies are implemented with increasing treatment complexity. The contributions of medical physicists to meeting these challenges in daily practice, in the conduct of clinical trials, and in pediatric oncology cooperative groups are highlighted. Representing the perspective of the physics committees of the Children's Oncology Group (COG) and the European Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOP Europe), this paper provides recommendations regarding the safe delivery of pediatric radiotherapy. Emerging innovations are highlighted to encourage pediatric applications with a view to maximizing the therapeutic ratio.

Implementation, adherence, and results of systematic SARS-CoV-2 testing for asymptomatic patients treated at a tertiary care regional radiation oncology network.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus is a current pandemic. We initiated a program of systematic SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing in all asymptomatic patients receiving radiotherapy (RT) at a large radiation oncology network in the Charlotte, NC metropolitan region and report adherence and results of the testing program. METHODS: Patients undergoing simulation for RT between May 18, 2020 and July 10, 2020 within the Levine Cancer Institute radiation oncology network who were asymptomatic for COVID-19 associated symptoms, without previous positive SARS-CoV-2 testing, and without recent high-risk contacts were included. PCR testing was performed on nasal cavity or nasopharyngeal swab samples. Testing was performed within 2 weeks of RT start (pre-RT) and at least every 4 weeks during RT for patients with prolonged RT courses (intra-RT). An automated task based process using the oncology electronic medical record (EMR) was developed specifically for this purpose. RESULTS: A total of 604 unique patients were included in the cohort. Details on testing workflow and implementation are described herein. Pre-RT PCR testing was performed in 573 (94.9%) patients, of which 4 (0.7%) were positive. The adherence rate to intra-RT testing overall was 91.6%. Four additional patients (0.7%) tested positive during their RT course, of whom 3 were tested due to symptom development and 1 was asymptomatic and identified via systematic testing. A total of 8 (1.3%) patients tested positive overall. There were no known cases of SARS-CoV-2 transmission from infected patients to clinic staff and/or other patients. CONCLUSIONS: We detailed the workflows used to implement systematic SARS-CoV-2 for asymptomatic patients at a large radiation oncology network. Adherence rates for pre-RT and intra-RT testing were high using this process. This information allowed for appropriate delay in initiating RT, minimizing the occurrence of RT treatment interruptions, and no known cases of transmission from infected patients to clinic staff and/or other patients.

Fostering Radiation Oncology Physician Scientist Trainees Within a Diverse Workforce: The Radiation Oncology Research Scholar Track.

There is a need to foster future generations of radiation oncology physician scientists, but the number of radiation oncologists with sufficient education, training, and funding to make transformative discoveries is relatively small. A large number of MD/PhD graduates have entered he field of radiation oncology over the past 2 decades, but this has not led to a significant cohort of externally funded physician scientists. Because radiation oncologists leading independent research labs have the potential to make transformative discoveries that advance our field and positively affect patients with cancer, we created the Duke Radiation Oncology Research Scholar (RORS) Program. In crafting this program, we sought to eliminate barriers preventing radiation oncology trainees from becoming independent physician scientists. The RORS program integrates the existing American Board of Radiology Holman Pathway with a 2-year post-graduate medical education instructor position with 80% research effort at the same institution. We use a separate match for RORS and traditional residency pathways, which we hope will increase the diversity of our residency program. Since the inception of the RORS program, we have matched 2 trainees into our program. We encourage other radiation oncology residency programs at peer institutions to consider this training pathway as a means to foster the development of independent physician scientists and a diverse workforce in radiation oncology.

[Application of the « Junior Doctor ¼ status in Radiation Oncology]. / Guide du Docteur Junior en oncologie-radiothérapie.

Introduced in 2017, the reform of the 3rd cycle has modified the organization of the residency in all specialties, and in particular radiation oncology. The residency was thus divided into 3 phases with increasing knowledge and responsibilities. The latter, carried out under the status of "junior doctor", created and defined by decree n°2018-571 of July 3, 2018 and the decree of January 16, 2020, is a phase of supervised autonomy of the resident. Radiotherapy is a singular specialty, with multiple and complex activities, and requires multiple skills. A guide defining the status of the "Junior Doctor" in radiation oncology therefore appears necessary, defining each resident's role and obligations. This guide is of an advisory nature and must be adapted to the particularities of each department. This guide aims to help the implementation of the reform of the 3rd cycle in radiation oncology and especially the final year called the consolidation phase. It is destined to evolve, expanded by individual and collective feedback and the constant renewal of our speciality.

Factors predicting timely implementation of radiotherapy innovations: the first model.

OBJECTIVE: The improvement of radiotherapy depends largely on the implementation of innovations, of which effectivity varies widely. The aim of this study is to develop a prediction model for successful innovation implementation in radiotherapy to improve effective management of innovation projects. METHODS: A literature review was performed to identify success factors for innovation implementation. Subsequently, in two large academic radiotherapy centres in the Netherlands, an inventory was made of all innovation projects executed between 2011 and 2017. Semi-structured interviews were performed to record the presence/absence of the success factors found in the review for each project. Successful implementation was defined as timely implementation, yes/no. Cross-tables, Χ2 tests, t-tests and Benjamin-Hochberg correction were used for analysing the data. A multivariate logistic regression technique was used to build a prediction model. RESULTS: From the 163 identified innovation projects, only 54% were successfully implemented. We found 31 success factors in literature of which 14 were significantly related to successful implementation in the innovation projects in our study. The prediction model contained the following determinants: (1) sufficient and competent employees, (2) complexity, (3) understanding/awareness of the project goals and process by employees, (4) feasibility and desirability. The area Under the curve (AUC) of the prediction model was 0.86 (0.8-0.92, 95% CI). CONCLUSION: A prediction model was developed for successful implementation of innovation in radiotherapy. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This prediction model is the first of its kind and, after external validation, could be widely applicable to predict the timely implementation of radiotherapy innovations.

Brachytherapy care during the COVID-19 pandemic: Practice statement from a cancer center in Wuhan, China.

PURPOSE: COVID-19 broke out in late 2019 and rapidly spread around the world and became a pandemic. This highly contagious disease affects routine health care services and patients with cancer who are susceptible to it. Delivering brachytherapy on time is critical for patients with cancer to get better prognosis. The purpose of this study is to present workflow and standard for radiation centers to deliver brachytherapy and avoid cross-infection during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study combined previous literature and guidelines of precaution with clinical experience in the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: A workflow covering patients' screening, health care workers' precaution, training, and other aspects of the whole brachytherapy procedure was established. CONCLUSIONS: From the reopening of radiation center to mid-May in 2020, there is no hospital infection of COVID-19 in patients or health care workers. This recommendation is effective and helpful to other cancer centers.

Radiotherapy management of rectal cancer in the backdrop of the COVID pandemic.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 outbreak was declared as a pandemic by the World Health Organization in March 2020. Over the last 3 months, the pandemic has challenged the diagnosis and treatment of all cancer, including rectal cancer. Constraints in resources call for a change in the treatment strategy without compromising efficacy. RECENT FINDINGS: Delivery of shorter treatment schedules for radiotherapy offers advantages like short overall treatment time, improved throughput on the machine, improved compliance and reduced risk of transmission of COVID 19. Other strategies include delaying surgery, reducing the intensity of chemotherapy and adoption of organ preservation approach. CONCLUSION: The curative treatment of rectal cancer should not be hindered during the COVID pandemic, and modifications in the multi-modality treatment will help achieve quality care.

Managing patient flows in radiation oncology during the COVID-19 pandemic : Reworking existing treatment designs to prevent infections at a German hot spot area University Hospital.

PURPOSE: The described work aimed to avoid cancellations of indispensable treatments by implementing active patient flow management practices and optimizing infrastructure utilization in the radiation oncology department of a large university hospital and regional COVID-19 treatment center close to the first German SARS-CoV­2 hotspot region Heinsberg in order to prevent nosocomial infections in patients and personnel during the pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study comprised year-to-date intervention analyses of in- and outpatient key procedures, machine occupancy, and no-show rates in calendar weeks 12 to 19 of 2019 and 2020 to evaluate effects of active patient flow management while monitoring nosocomial COVID-19 infections. RESULTS: Active patient flow management helped to maintain first-visit appointment compliance above 85.5%. A slight appointment reduction of 10.3% daily (p = 0.004) could still significantly increase downstream planning CT scheduling (p = 0.00001) and performance (p = 0.0001), resulting in an absolute 20.1% (p = 0.009) increment of CT performance while avoiding overbooking practices. Daily treatment start was significantly increased by an absolute value of 18.5% (p = 0.026). Hypofractionation and acceleration were significantly increased (p = 0.0043). Integrating strict testing guidelines, a distancing regimen for staff and patients, hygiene regulations, and precise appointment scheduling, no SARS-CoV­2 infection in 164 tested radiation oncology service inpatients was observed. CONCLUSION: In times of reduced medical infrastructure capacities and resources, controlling infrastructural time per patient as well as optimizing facility utilization and personnel workload during treatment evaluation, planning, and irradiation can help to improve appointment compliance and quality management. Avoiding recurrent and preventable exposure to healthcare infrastructure has potential health benefits and might avert cross infections during the pandemic. Active patient flow management in high-risk COVID-19 regions can help Radiation Oncologists to continue and initiate treatments safely, instead of cancelling and deferring indicated therapies.

Development, implementation, and associated challenges of a new HDR brachytherapy program.

Developing any new radiation oncology program requires planning and analysis of the current state of the facility and its capacity to take on another program. Staff must consider a large number of factors to establish a feasible, safe, and sustainable program. We present a simple and generic outline that lays out the process for developing and implementing a new HDR brachytherapy program in any setting, but with particular emphasis on challenges associated with starting the program in a limited resource setting. The sections include feasibility of a program, starting cases, machine and equipment selection, and quality and safety.

Safety practices and opportunities for improvement in brachytherapy: A patient safety practices survey of the American Brachytherapy Society membership.

PURPOSE: Safe delivery of brachytherapy and establishing a safety culture are critical in high-quality brachytherapy. The American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) Quality and Safety Committee surveyed members regarding brachytherapy services offered, safety practices during treatment, quality assurance procedures, and needs to develop safety and training materials. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 22-item survey was sent to ABS membership in early 2019 to physicians, physicists, therapists, nurses, and administrators. Participation was voluntary. Responses were summarized with descriptive statistics and relative frequency distributions. RESULTS: There were 103 unique responses. Approximately one in three was attending physicians and one in three attending physicists. Most were in practice >10 years. A total of 94% and 50% performed gynecologic and prostate brachytherapy, respectively. Ninety-one percent performed two-identification patient verification before treatment. Eighty-six percent performed a time-out. Ninety-five percent had an incident reporting or learning system, but only 71% regularly reviewed incidents. Half reviewed safety practices within the last year. Twenty percent reported they were somewhat or not satisfied with department safety culture, but 92% of respondents were interested in improving safety culture. Most reported time, communication, and staffing as barriers to improving safety. Most respondents desired safety-oriented webinars, self-assessment modules, learning modules, or checklists endorsed by the ABS to improve safety practice. CONCLUSIONS: Most but not all practices use standards and quality assurance procedures in line with society recommendations. There is a need to heighten safety culture at many departments and to shift resources (e.g., time or staffing) to improve safety practice. There is a desire for society guidance to improve brachytherapy safety practices. This is the first survey to assess safety practice patterns among a national sample of radiation oncologists with expertise in brachytherapy.

COVID-19 and radiation oncology: the experience of a two-phase plan within a single institution in central Italy.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 in Italy has led to the need to reorganize hospital protocols with a significant risk of interruption to cancer treatment programs. In this report, we will focus on a management model covering the two phases of the COVID-19 emergency, namely lockdown-phase I and post-lockdown-phase II. METHODS: The following steps were taken in the two phases: workload during visits and radiotherapy planning, use of dedicated routes, measures for triage areas, management of suspected and positive COVID-19 cases, personal protective equipment, hospital environments and intra-institutional meetings and tumor board management. Due to the guidelines set out by the Ministry of Health, oncological follow-up visits were interrupted during the lockdown-phase I; consequently, we set about contacting patients by telephone, with laboratory and instrumental exams being viewed via telematics. During the post-lockdown-phase II, the oncological follow-up clinic reopened, with two shifts operating daily. RESULTS: By comparing our radiotherapy activity from March 9 to May 4 2019 with the same period in 2020 during full phase I of the COVID-19 emergency, similar results were achieved. First radiotherapy visits, Simulation Computed Tomography and Linear Accelerator treatments amounted to 123, 137 and 151 in 2019 compared with 121, 135 and 170 in 2020 respectively. There were no cases of COVID-19 positivity recorded either in patients or in healthcare professionals, who were all negative to the swab tests performed. CONCLUSION: During both phases of the COVID-19 emergency, the planned model used in our own experience guaranteed both continuity in radiotherapy treatments whilst neither reducing workload nor interrupting treatment and, as such, it ensured the safety of cancer patients, hospital environments and staff.

[Reducing the impact of COVID-19 on radiation oncology units of developing countries: A rapid review and expert consensus]. / Reduciendo el impacto de COVID-19 sobre la radioterapia oncológica en países en desarrollo: revisión rápida y consenso de expertos.

OBJECTIVE: To generate recommendations on the management of radiotherapeutic treatments during the pandemic, adapted to a country with limited health resources. METHODS: We did a rapid review of the literature, searching for papers that describe any measures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection, as well as management guidelines to reduce the workload, in radiotherapy units. The following conditions were included in the scope of this review: gynecological tumors, breast cancer, gastrointestinal tumors, genitourinary tumors, head and neck tumors, skin cancer, tumors of the central nervous system, and lymphomas. An expert group discussed online the extracted data and drafted the recommendations. Using a modified Delphi method, the consensus was reached among 14 certificated radio-oncologists. The quality of the evidence that supported the recommendations on treatment schedules was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 57 documents were included. Of these, 25 provided strategies to reduce the risk of infection. Recommendations for each condiction were extracted from the remaining documents. The recommendations aim to establish specific parameters where treatments can be omitted, deferred, prioritized, and shortened. Treatment schemes are recommended for each condition, prioritizing hypo-fractionated schemes whenever possible. CONCLUSIONS: We propose strategies for the management of radiotherapy services to guarantee the continuity of high-quality treatments despite the health crisis caused by COVID-19.

OBJETIVO: Establecer recomendaciones para la toma de decisiones de manejo en radioterapia durante la pandemia de COVID-19, adaptadas a un país con recursos de salud limitados. MÉTODOS: A través de una revisión rápida de la literatura se buscaron publicaciones que describieran medidas para reducir el riesgo de infección por COVID-19, así como también pautas de manejo para reducir la carga de trabajo en las unidades de radioterapia. Se incluyeron en el alcance de esta revisión las siguientes patologías: tumores ginecológicos, cáncer de mama, tumores gastrointestinales, tumores genitourinarios, tumores de cabeza y cuello, cáncer de piel, tumores del sistema nervioso central y linfomas. Un grupo de expertos discutió en línea los datos extraídos y redactó las recomendaciones. Mediante un método Delphi modificado, se evaluó el consenso entre 14 radio-oncólogos certificados. Se evaluó la calidad de la evidencia que sustentó las recomendaciones sobre esquemas de tratamiento. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron un total de 57 documentos. De 25 trabajos se extrajeron las estrategias para reducir el riesgo de infección. De los restantes, se obtuvieron las recomendaciones para cada patología. Las recomendaciones están orientadas a establecer escenarios específicos donde se pueden omitir, diferir, priorizar y acortar los tratamientos. En el ítem de acortar se recomiendan esquemas de tratamiento para cada patología, priorizando los esquemas hipofraccionados cuando fue posible. CONCLUSIÓN: Se plantean estrategias para la gestión de los servicios de radioterapia con el objetivo de garantizar que los tratamientos de alta calidad para pacientes oncológicos sigan entregándose, pese a la crisis sanitaria ocasionada por COVID-19.

The 3 Bs of cancer care amid the COVID-19 pandemic crisis: "Be safe, be smart, be kind"-A multidisciplinary approach increasing the use of radiation and embracing telemedicine for head and neck cancer.

Because of the national emergency triggered by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, government-mandated public health directives have drastically changed not only social norms but also the practice of oncologic medicine. Timely head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment must be prioritized, even during emergencies. Because severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 predominantly resides in the sinonasal/oral/oropharyngeal tracts, nonessential mucosal procedures are restricted, and HNCs are being triaged toward nonsurgical treatments when cures are comparable. Consequently, radiation utilization will likely increase during this pandemic. Even in radiation oncology, standard in-person and endoscopic evaluations are being restrained to limit exposure risks and preserve personal protective equipment for other frontline workers. The authors have implemented telemedicine and multidisciplinary conferences to continue to offer standard-of-care HNC treatments during this uniquely challenging time. Because of the lack of feasibility data on telemedicine for HNC, they report their early experience at a high-volume cancer center at the domestic epicenter of the COVID-19 crisis.