Assessment of endpoint definitions in curative-intent trials for mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: Head and Neck Cancer International Group consensus recommendations.

Robust time-to-event endpoint definitions are crucial for the assessment of treatment effect and the clinical value of trial interventions. Here, the Head and Neck Cancer International Group investigated endpoint use in phase 3 trials and trials considered potentially practice-changing published between 2008 and 2021 in the curative-intent setting for patients with mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Of the 92 trials reviewed, we show that all core components of endpoint reporting were heterogeneous, including definitions of common terms, such as overall survival and progression-free survival. Our report highlights the urgent need for harmonisation of fundamental components of clinical trial endpoints and the engagement of all stakeholders to ensure the transparent reporting of endpoint details.

Assessment of endpoint definitions in recurrent and metastatic mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma trials: Head and Neck Cancer International Group consensus recommendations.

Transparent and precise endpoint definitions are a crucial aspect of clinical trial conduct and reporting, and are used to communicate the benefit of an intervention. Previous studies have identified inconsistencies in endpoint definitions across oncological clinical trials. Here, the Head and Neck Cancer International Group assessed endpoint definitions from phase 3 trials or trials considered practice-changing for patients with recurrent or metastatic mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, published between 2008 and 2021. We identify considerable and global heterogeneity in endpoint definitions, which undermines the interpretation of results and development of future studies. We show how fundamental components of even incontrovertible endpoints such as overall survival vary widely, highlighting an urgent need for increased rigour in reporting and harmonisation of endpoints.

The American Society for Radiation Oncology Workforce Taskforce Review of the United States Radiation Oncology Workforce Analysis.

Over the past decade, concerns have arisen in radiation oncology regarding potential workforce supply and demand imbalance. The American Society for Radiation Oncology commissioned an independent analysis in 2022, looking at supply and demand in the United States radiation oncology workforce and projecting future trends for 2025 and 2030. The final report, titled Projected Supply and Demand for Radiation Oncologists in the U.S. in 2025 and 2030, is now available. The analysis included evaluating radiation oncologist (RO) supply (new graduates, exits from the specialty), potential changes in demand (growth of Medicare beneficiaries, hypofractionation, loss of indications, new indications) as well as RO productivity (growth of work relative value units [wRVUs] produced), and demand per beneficiary. The results demonstrated a relative balance between radiation oncology supply and demand for radiation services; the growth in ROs was balanced by the rapid growth of Medicare beneficiaries over the same period. The primary factors driving the model were found to be growth of Medicare beneficiaries and change in wRVU productivity, with hypofractionation and loss of indication having only a moderate effect; although the most likely scenario was a balance of workforce supply and demand, scenarios did demonstrate the possibility of over- and undersupply. Oversupply may become a concern if RO wRVU productivity reaches the highest region; beyond 2030, this is also possible if growth in RO supply does not parallel Medicare beneficiary growth, which is projected to decline and will require corresponding supply adjustment. Limitations of the analysis included uncertainty regarding the true number of ROs, the lack of inclusion of most technical reimbursement and its effect as well as failing to account for stereotactic body radiation therapy. A modeling tool is available to allow individuals to evaluate different scenarios. Moving forward, continued study will be needed to evaluate trends (particularly wRVU productivity and Medicare beneficiary growth) to allow for continued assessment of workforce supply and demand in radiation oncology.

Insurance Authorization and Access to Proton Therapy for Patients With Head and Neck Cancers.

PURPOSE: We evaluated our institutional experience to assess potential racial inequities in insurance coverage for proton therapy in patients with head and neck (HN) cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We examined the demographics of 1519 patients with HN cancer seen in consultation at our HN multidisciplinary clinic (HN MDC) and 805 patients for whom a proton insurance authorization was sought (PAS) from January 2020 to June 2022. The prospects for proton therapy insurance authorization were prospectively noted based on each patient's ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision) diagnosis code and their specific insurance plan. Proton-unfavorable (PU) insurance were those plans whose policy describes proton beam therapy as "experimental" or "not medically necessary" for the given diagnosis. RESULTS: For patients seen in our HN MDC, Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) were significantly more likely to have PU insurance than non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients (24.9% vs 18.4%, P = .005). In multivariable analysis including race, average income of residence ZIP code, and Medicare eligibility age, BIPOC patients had an odds ratio of 1.25 for PU insurance (P = .041). In the PAS cohort, while there was no difference in the percentage of patients receiving insurance approval for proton therapy between NHW and BIPOC populations (88% vs 88.2%, P = .80), for patients with PU insurance, the median time to determination was significantly longer (median, 15.5 days), and the median time to start any radiation of any modality was longer (46 vs 35 days, P = .08). Compared with NHW patients, the median time from consultation to start of radiation therapy was longer for BIPOC patients (37 vs 43 days, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: BIPOC patients were significantly more likely to have insurance plans unfavorable to proton therapy coverage. These PU insurance plans were associated with a longer median time to determination, a lower approval rate for proton therapy, and a longer time to start radiation of any modality.

Prospective 5-Year Analysis of the United States Radiation Oncology Job Market Using the ASTRO Career Center Website.

PURPOSE: We provide 5-year results of prospectively collected radiation oncology (RO) job opportunities and a longitudinal assessment of RO graduate numbers within the United States. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Full-time domestic RO job opportunities were collected and categorized using the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Career Center from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2021. A chi-square test was used to compare regional job availability by city size and position type. The corresponding number of graduating United States (US) RO residents (2017-2021) was collected. US census and Medicare database resources were used as comparators for population and workforce estimates. Pearson's correlation coefficients were used to examine changes in data over time and a 2-tailed t test was used to assess for statistical significance. RESULTS: Over the 5-year study period, 819 unique job offers were posted, compared with 935 RO graduates (0.88 total jobs-to-graduates ratio). Most jobs were nonacademic (57.6%), located in populated areas >1 million (57.1%; median: 1.57M), with the largest proportion of jobs seen in the South region (32.4%). One-third of academic jobs were located at satellites. Regional differences were seen between academic versus nonacademic job availability (P < .01), with the highest proportion of academic jobs seen in the Northeast (60.3%) and the lowest in the Midwest (34.5%). Differences between regions were also observed for jobs in areas >1 million versus ≤1 million (P < .01), with the most jobs in areas >1 million seen in the West (64.6%) and the least in the South (51.3%). Regional job availability over time did not differ by position type (academic vs nonacademic) or population area size (P = .11 and P = .27, respectively). Annual graduate numbers increased with time (P = .02), with the highest percentage of graduates trained in the South (30.8%). Regional distribution of jobs versus graduates significantly differed (P < .01) with the lowest jobs-to-graduates ratio observed in the Northeast (0.67) and highest ratio in the West (1.07). Regional RO workforce estimates based on the 4336 radiation oncologists who were Medicare providers in 2020 were compared with total jobs and graduates by region with no difference observed between the distributions of the workforce and jobs (P = .39), but comparisons between the workforce and graduates were proportionally different (P < .01). The number of total jobs (vs graduates) per 10 million population in the Northeast, South, Midwest, and West were 30.2 (45.1), 21.0 (22.7), 30.6 (33.4), and 22.6 (21.2), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This multiyear quantitative assessment of the RO job market and graduates identified fewer job opportunities than graduates overall in most regions, most notably in the Northeast. Regional differences were seen between available job type (academic vs nonacademic) and population size (>1 million vs ≤1 million). The findings are worrisome for trainee oversupply and geographic maldistribution. The number and distribution of RO trainees and residency programs across the US should be evaluated to minimize job market imbalance for future graduates, promote workforce stability, and continue to meet the future societal needs of patients with cancer.

Low-Cost Model for Battlefield Wound and Hemorrhage Training.

INTRODUCTION: Exsanguination is the leading cause of preventable death on the battlefield and in austere environments. Multiple courses have been developed to save lives by stopping hemorrhage. Training for this requires simulation models; however, many models are expensive, preventing the further expansion of this life-saving training. We present a low-cost model for hemorrhage training and realistic moulage based on simple medical supplies and grocery store meats. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Wound packing training was completed by use of a block of pork shoulder roast with an incision simulating a wound and IV tubing connected to a syringe with fake blood. Hemostasis was obtained with proper wound packing by the student, causing the bleeding to be tamponaded. Wound moulage utilized remaining supplies of pork roast being attached to patient actors or mannequins and adorned with fake blood creating wounds with the appearance and feel of real tissues. RESULTS: Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) training was completed at a small military medical facility with a start-up cost of less than $70 and a single course as cheap as $15. These methods have been utilized to establish other TCCC training centers while keeping costs low. CONCLUSIONS: We present low-cost models for simulating massive hemorrhage for wound packing with pork roast and realistic moulage. These methods can be utilized for other hemorrhage training courses such as TCCC, Advanced Wilderness Life Support, and Stop the Bleed.

Geographic access to brachytherapy services in the United States.

PURPOSE: Disparities in geographic access to medical care exist in nearly all fields of medicine including radiation oncology. We aim to update knowledge of the geographic distribution of radiation oncologists in the United States. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We used the Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File (PUF) from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Directory of Radiotherapy Centers (DIRAC) database to identify practices that either coded for or are marked as having access to brachytherapy services. Geographic analysis was performed on several levels including United States (US) Census region, Dartmouth Atlas Healthcare Referral Region, and the county level. RESULTS: We identified 327 providers that billed for a brachytherapy code during the calendar year 2018 and 564 facilities providing brachytherapy. Within the 306 HRRs in the US, 149 have access to brachytherapy. This represents 247.5 million people based on 2018 estimates of population from the US Census Bureau. This implies that 76.7% of people within the US live in an HRR with access to brachytherapy, and, conversely, that 75.3 million people (23.3%) do not. Numerically, counties in metropolitan areas were more likely to have access to brachytherapy than those outside of a metropolitan area. CONCLUSIONS: Geographic disparities exist in access to brachytherapy; metropolitan counties are more likely to have access than non-metropolitan counties. We support continued development of databases of brachytherapy providers and programs that may support travel and lodging costs to minimize these disparities.