Public reporting of outcomes in radiation oncology: the National Prostate Cancer Audit.

The public reporting of patient outcomes is crucial for quality improvement and informing patient choice. However, outcome reporting in radiotherapy, despite being a major component of cancer control, is extremely sparse globally. Public reporting has many challenges, including difficulties in defining meaningful measures of treatment quality, limitations in data infrastructure, and fragmented health insurance schemes. The National Prostate Cancer Audit (NPCA), done in the England and Wales National Health Service (NHS), shows that it is feasible to develop outcome indicators for radiotherapy treatment, including patient-reported outcomes. The NPCA provides a transparent mechanism for comparing the performance of all NHS providers, with results accessible to patients, providers, and policy makers. Using the NPCA as a case study, we discuss the development of a radiotherapy-outcomes reporting programme, its impact and future potential, and the challenges and opportunities to develop this approach across other tumour types and in different health systems.

Clinical needs assessment for sexual health among cancer patients receiving pelvic radiation: Implications for development of a radiation oncology sexual health clinic.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients treated with pelvic radiation therapy (RT) often experience sexual health-related side effects during and following treatment. A clinical needs assessment was used to evaluate sexual health needs and to determine how needs differed between patients receiving and who had completed RT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A questionnaire was used to evaluate sexual health needs among patients treated with pelvic RT. All answers were rated using a 4-point Likert scale. Convenience sampling was used, and patients were stratified by whether they were on-treatment or in follow-up. Charts were reviewed for demographic, diagnostic, and treatment information. Pearson's χ2 test and logistic regression analysis were used to analyze the associations between sexual health-related topics and clinical variables. RESULTS: A total of 107 of 109 (98%) invited patients completed the questionnaire (46 females, 61 males; 52 undergoing RT, 54 completed RT). Most (75%) reported some degree of change in sexual health from the effects of cancer and/or treatment; 22% and 28% reported "quite a bit" or "very much" change, respectively. Sixty-nine percent reported that they experienced some degree of distress from sexual health changes (28% reported "very much" or "quite a bit" of distress). Seventy-six percent "agreed" or "strongly agreed" that they were interested in access to a multidisciplinary sexual health clinic (MSHC). Compared with patients currently receiving RT, patients in follow-up were significantly more likely to report worsening degrees of "change" (P = .008) and "distress" (P = .04) and to express interest in having access to an MSHC (P = .03). CONCLUSION: The majority of patients receiving pelvic RT reported a change in sexual health with associated distress, with more reports among those in follow-up. Patients undergoing pelvic RT expressed a high interest in attending a radiation oncology MSHC. Our findings emphasize the important role radiation oncologists can play in the quality of life of our patients.

Incidence, Clinicopathological Risk Factors, Management and Outcomes of Nonmuscle Invasive Recurrence after Complete Response to Trimodality Therapy for Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.

PURPOSE: We describe the incidence, clinicopathological risk factors, management and outcomes of recurrent nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer after a complete response to trimodality therapy of muscle invasive bladder cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 342 patients with cT2-4aN0M0 muscle invasive bladder cancer and a complete response after trimodality therapy from 1986 to 2013. Using competing risks analyses we examined the association between baseline clinicopathological variables and nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer outcomes. Kaplan-Meier and the generalized Fleming-Harrington test were used to compare disease specific and overall survival. RESULTS: At a median followup of 9 years nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer recurred in 85 patients (25%) who had had a complete response. On Kaplan-Meier analysis baseline carcinoma in situ was associated with recurrent nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (p = 0.02). However, on multivariate analysis carcinoma in situ and other baseline clinicopathological characteristics did not predict such recurrence. Patients with recurrent nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer had worse 10-year disease specific survival than those without recurrence (72.1% vs 78.4%, p = 0.002), although overall survival was similar (p = 0.66). Of the 39 patients (46%) who received adjuvant intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guérin 29 (74%) completed induction therapy and 19 (49%) reported bacillus Calmette-Guérin toxicity. Three-year recurrence-free and progression-free survival after induction bacillus Calmette-Guérin was 59% and 63%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After a complete response to trimodality therapy nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer recurred in 25% of patients, developing in some of them more than a decade after trimodality therapy. No baseline clinicopathological characteristics were associated with such recurrence after a complete response. Patients with nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer recurrence had worse disease specific survival than those without such recurrence but similar overall survival. Adjuvant intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guérin had a reasonable toxicity profile and efficacy in this population. Properly selected patients with recurrent nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer after a complete response may avoid immediate salvage cystectomy.

Promoting the Appropriate Use of Advanced Radiation Technologies in Oncology: Summary of a National Cancer Policy Forum Workshop.

PURPOSE: Leaders in the oncology community are sounding a clarion call to promote "value" in cancer care decisions. Value in cancer care considers the clinical effectiveness, along with the costs, when selecting a treatment. To discuss possible solutions to the current obstacles to achieving value in the use of advanced technologies in oncology, the National Cancer Policy Forum of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a workshop, "Appropriate Use of Advanced Technologies for Radiation Therapy and Surgery in Oncology" in July 2015. The present report summarizes the discussions related to radiation oncology. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The workshop convened stakeholders, including oncologists, researchers, payers, policymakers, and patients. Speakers presented on key themes, including the rationale for a value discussion on advanced technology use in radiation oncology, the generation of scientific evidence for value of advanced radiation technologies, the effect of both scientific evidence and "marketplace" (or economic) factors on the adoption of technologies, and newer approaches to improving value in the practice of radiation oncology. The presentations were followed by a panel discussion with dialogue among the stakeholders. RESULTS: Challenges to generating evidence for the value of advanced technologies include obtaining contemporary, prospective, randomized, and representative comparative effectiveness data. Proposed solutions include the use of prospective registry data; integrating radiation oncology treatment, outcomes, and quality benchmark data; and encouraging insurance coverage with evidence development. Challenges to improving value in practice include the slow adoption of higher value and the de-adoption of lower value treatments. The proposed solutions focused on engaging stakeholders in iterative, collaborative, and evidence-based efforts to define value and promote change in radiation oncology practice. Recent examples of ongoing or successful responses to the discussed challenges were provided. CONCLUSIONS: Discussions of "value" have increased as a priority in the radiation oncology community. Practitioners in the radiation oncology community can play a critical role in promoting a value-oriented framework to approach radiation oncology treatment.

The Radiation Oncology Job Market: The Economics and Policy of Workforce Regulation.

Examinations of the US radiation oncology workforce offer inconsistent conclusions, but recent data raise significant concerns about an oversupply of physicians. Despite these concerns, residency slots continue to expand at an unprecedented pace. Employed radiation oncologists and professional corporations with weak contracts or loose ties to hospital administrators would be expected to suffer the greatest harm from an oversupply. The reduced cost of labor, however, would be expected to increase profitability for equipment owners, technology vendors, and entrenched professional groups. Policymakers must recognize that the number of practicing radiation oncologists is a poor surrogate for clinical capacity. There is likely to be significant opportunity to augment capacity without increasing the number of radiation oncologists by improving clinic efficiency and offering targeted incentives for geographic redistribution. Payment policy changes significantly threaten radiation oncologists' income, which may encourage physicians to care for greater patient loads, thereby obviating more personnel. Furthermore, the implementation of alternative payment models such as Medicare's Oncology Care Model threatens to decrease both the utilization and price of radiation therapy by turning referring providers into cost-conscious consumers. Medicare funds the vast majority of graduate medical education, but the extent to which the expansion in radiation oncology residency slots has been externally funded is unclear. Excess physician capacity carries a significant risk of harm to society by suboptimally allocating intellectual resources and creating comparative shortages in other, more needed disciplines. There are practical concerns associated with a market-based solution in which medical students self-regulate according to job availability, but antitrust law would likely forbid collaborative self-regulation that purports to restrict supply. Because Congress is unlikely to create one central body to govern residency controls for all specialties, we recommend better reporting of program-specific employment metrics and careful, intellectually honest re-evaluation of existing Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education accreditation standards.

Multinational Prospective Study of Patient-Reported Outcomes After Prostate Radiation Therapy: Detailed Assessment of Rectal Bleeding.

PURPOSE: The new short Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice (EPIC-CP) patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL) tool has removed the rectal bleeding question from the previous much longer version, EPIC-26. Herein, we assess the impact of losing the dedicated rectal bleeding question in 2 independent prospective multicenter cohorts. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In a prospective multicenter test cohort (n=865), EPIC-26 patient-reported HRQOL data were collected for 2 years after treatment from patients treated with prostate radiation therapy from 2003 to 2011. A second prospective multicenter cohort (n=442) was used for independent validation. A repeated-effects model was used to predict the change from baseline in bowel summary scores from longer EPIC instruments using the change in EPIC-CP bowel summary scores with and without rectal bleeding scores. RESULTS: Two years after radiation therapy, 91% of patients were free of bleeding, and only 2.6% reported bothersome bleeding problems. Correlations between EPIC-26 and EPIC-CP bowel scores were very high (r2=0.90-0.96) and were statistically improved with the addition of rectal bleeding information (r2=0.94-0.98). Considering all patients, only 0.2% of patients in the test cohort and 0.7% in the validation cohort reported bothersome bleeding and had clinically relevant HRQOL changes missed with EPIC-CP. However, of the 2.6% (n=17) of men with bothersome rectal bleeding in the test cohort, EPIC-CP failed to capture 1 patient (6%) as experiencing meaningful declines in bowel HRQOL. CONCLUSIONS: Modern prostate radiation therapy results in exceptionally low rates of bothersome rectal bleeding, and <1% of patients experience bothersome bleeding and are not captured by EPIC-CP as having meaningful HRQOL declines after radiation therapy. However, in the small subset of patients with bothersome rectal bleeding, the longer EPIC-26 should strongly be considered, given its superior performance in this patient subset.

Can We Advance Proton Therapy for Prostate? Considering Alternative Beam Angles and Relative Biological Effectiveness Variations When Comparing Against Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: For prostate treatments, robust evidence regarding the superiority of either intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or proton therapy is currently lacking. In this study we investigated the circumstances under which proton therapy should be expected to outperform IMRT, particularly the proton beam orientations and relative biological effectiveness (RBE) assumptions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: For 8 patients, 4 treatment planning strategies were considered: (A) IMRT; (B) passively scattered standard bilateral (SB) proton beams; (C) passively scattered anterior oblique (AO) proton beams, and (D) AO intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). For modalities (B)-(D) the dose and linear energy transfer (LET) distributions were simulated using the TOPAS Monte Carlo platform and RBE was calculated according to 3 different models. RESULTS: Assuming a fixed RBE of 1.1, our implementation of IMRT outperformed SB proton therapy across most normal tissue metrics. For the scattered AO proton plans, application of the variable RBE models resulted in substantial hotspots in rectal RBE weighted dose. For AO IMPT, it was typically not possible to find a plan that simultaneously met the tumor and rectal constraints for both fixed and variable RBE models. CONCLUSION: If either a fixed RBE of 1.1 or a variable RBE model could be validated in vivo, then it would always be possible to use AO IMPT to dose-boost the prostate and improve normal tissue sparing relative to IMRT. For a cohort without rectum spacer gels, this study (1) underlines the importance of resolving the question of proton RBE within the framework of an IMRT versus proton debate for the prostate and (2) highlights that without further LET/RBE model validation, great care must be taken if AO proton fields are to be considered for prostate treatments.

Current status and recommendations for the future of research, teaching, and testing in the biological sciences of radiation oncology: report of the American Society for Radiation Oncology Cancer Biology/Radiation Biology Task Force, executive summary.

In early 2011, a dialogue was initiated within the Board of Directors (BOD) of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) regarding the future of the basic sciences of the specialty, primarily focused on the current state and potential future direction of basic research within radiation oncology. After consideration of the complexity of the issues involved and the precise nature of the undertaking, in August 2011, the BOD empanelled a Cancer Biology/Radiation Biology Task Force (TF). The TF was charged with developing an accurate snapshot of the current state of basic (preclinical) research in radiation oncology from the perspective of relevance to the modern clinical practice of radiation oncology as well as the education of our trainees and attending physicians in the biological sciences. The TF was further charged with making suggestions as to critical areas of biological basic research investigation that might be most likely to maintain and build further the scientific foundation and vitality of radiation oncology as an independent and vibrant medical specialty. It was not within the scope of service of the TF to consider the quality of ongoing research efforts within the broader radiation oncology space, to presume to consider their future potential, or to discourage in any way the investigators committed to areas of interest other than those targeted. The TF charge specifically precluded consideration of research issues related to technology, physics, or clinical investigations. This document represents an Executive Summary of the Task Force report.

Proton beam therapy and accountable care: the challenges ahead.

PURPOSE: Proton beam therapy (PBT) centers have drawn increasing public scrutiny for their high cost. The behavior of such facilities is likely to change under the Affordable Care Act. We modeled how accountable care reform may affect the financial standing of PBT centers and their incentives to treat complex patient cases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We used operational data and publicly listed Medicare rates to model the relationship between financial metrics for PBT center performance and case mix (defined as the percentage of complex cases, such as pediatric central nervous system tumors). Financial metrics included total daily revenues and debt coverage (daily revenues - daily debt payments). Fee-for-service (FFS) and accountable care (ACO) reimbursement scenarios were modeled. Sensitivity analyses were performed around the room time required to treat noncomplex cases: simple (30 minutes), prostate (24 minutes), and short prostate (15 minutes). Sensitivity analyses were also performed for total machine operating time (14, 16, and 18 h/d). RESULTS: Reimbursement under ACOs could reduce daily revenues in PBT centers by up to 32%. The incremental revenue gained by replacing 1 complex case with noncomplex cases was lowest for simple cases and highest for short prostate cases. ACO rates reduced this incremental incentive by 53.2% for simple cases and 41.7% for short prostate cases. To cover daily debt payments after ACO rates were imposed, 26% fewer complex patients were allowable at varying capital costs and interest rates. Only facilities with total machine operating times of 18 hours per day would cover debt payments in all scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Debt-financed PBT centers will face steep challenges to remain financially viable after ACO implementation. Paradoxically, reduced reimbursement for noncomplex cases will require PBT centers to treat more such cases over cases for which PBT has demonstrated superior outcomes. Relative losses will be highest for those facilities focused primarily on treating noncomplex cases.

The American Board of Radiology Holman Research Pathway: 10-year retrospective review of the program and participant performance.

INTRODUCTION: In 1999, the American Board of Radiology (ABR) implemented an innovative training program track in diagnostic radiology (DR) and radiation oncology (RO) designed to stimulate development of a cadre of future academic researchers and educators in the 2 disciplines. The program was designated the Holman Research Pathway (HRP). An in-depth retrospective review of initial certification examination performance, post-training career choices, and academic productivity has not been written. This report represents a 10-year retrospective review of post-training performance of a cohort of trainees who have had sufficient time to complete their training and initial certification process and to enter practice. METHODS AND MATERIALS: All pertinent proceedings of the ABR and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Residency Review Committees for DR and RO between 1997 and May 2011 were reviewed. Thirty-four HRP candidates who fulfilled the established evaluation criteria were identified, and their ABR data files were analyzed regarding performance on the qualifying and certifying examinations. All candidates were contacted directly to obtain a current curriculum vitae. RESULTS: Twenty candidates in RO and 14 candidates in DR were identifiable for review. All candidates attained initial certification. At the time of analysis, 23 of 33 (66.6%) candidates were employed in full-time academic practice (1 DR candidate remained in a fellowship and was not evaluated regarding employment status). Fifteen of 20 (75%) RO candidates were in faculty positions compared with 7 of 13 (53.8%) DR trainees. Additional academic productivity metrics are reported. CONCLUSIONS: A high percentage of HRP trainees remained in academic practice and demonstrated significant academic productivity as measured by manuscript authorship and research support. Additional time and observation will be needed to determine whether these findings will be sustained by past, current, and future HRP trainees.

Use of potentially curative therapies for muscle-invasive bladder cancer in the United States: results from the National Cancer Data Base.

BACKGROUND: Despite its lethal potential, many patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) do not receive aggressive, potentially curative therapy consistent with established practice standards. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the treatments received by patients with MIBC and analyze their use according to sociodemographic, clinical, pathologic, and facility measures. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using the National Cancer Data Base, we analyzed 28 691 patients with MIBC (stages II-IV) treated between 2004 and 2008, excluding those with cT4b tumors or distant metastases. Treatments included radical or partial cystectomy with or without chemotherapy (CT), chemoradiotherapy (CRT), radiation therapy (RT), or CT alone and observation following biopsy. Aggressive therapy (AT) was defined as radical or partial cystectomy or definitive RT/CRT (total dose ≥ 50 Gy). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: AT use and correlating variables were assessed by multivariable, generalized estimating equation models adjusted for facility clustering. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: According to the database, 52.5% of patients received AT; 44.9% were treated surgically, 7.6% received definitive CRT or RT, and 25.9% of patients received observation only. AT use decreased with advancing age (odds ratio [OR]: 0.34 for age 81-90 yr vs ≤ 50 yr; p<0.001). AT use was also lower in racial minorities (OR: 0.74 for black race; p<0.001), the uninsured (OR: 0.73; p<0.001), Medicaid-insured patients (OR: 0.81; p=0.01), and at low-volume centers (OR: 0.64 vs high-volume centers; p<0.001). Use of AT was higher with increasing tumor stage (OR: 2.23 for T3/T4a vs T2; p<0.001) and nonurothelial histology (OR: 1.25 and 1.43 for squamous and adenocarcinoma, respectively; p<0.001). Study limitations include retrospective design and lack of information about patient and provider motivations regarding therapy selection. CONCLUSIONS: AT for MIBC appears underused, especially in the elderly and in groups with poor socioeconomic status. These data point to a significant unmet need to inform policy makers, payers, and physicians regarding appropriate therapies for MIBC.

Prospective preference assessment of patients' willingness to participate in a randomized controlled trial of intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus proton therapy for localized prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To investigate patients' willingness to participate (WTP) in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with proton beam therapy (PBT) for prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS AND MATERIALS: We undertook a qualitative research study in which we prospectively enrolled patients with clinically localized PCa. We used purposive sampling to ensure a diverse sample based on age, race, travel distance, and physician. Patients participated in a semi-structured interview in which they reviewed a description of a hypothetical RCT, were asked open-ended and focused follow-up questions regarding their motivations for and concerns about enrollment, and completed a questionnaire assessing characteristics such as demographics and prior knowledge of IMRT or PBT. Patients' stated WTP was assessed using a 6-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Forty-six eligible patients (33 white, 13 black) were enrolled from the practices of eight physicians. We identified 21 factors that impacted patients' WTP, which largely centered on five major themes: altruism/desire to compare treatments, randomization, deference to physician opinion, financial incentives, and time demands/scheduling. Most patients (27 of 46, 59%) stated they would either "definitely" or "probably" participate. Seventeen percent (8 of 46) stated they would "definitely not" or "probably not" enroll, most of whom (6 of 8) preferred PBT before their physician visit. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of patients indicated high WTP in a RCT comparing IMRT and PBT for PCa.

A clinical approach to technology assessment: how do we and how should we choose the right treatment?

The evidence required to support the use of new technology in medicine differs from that required for new drugs. On one extreme, very little may be required for small devices, but on the other strong evidence is required to support the use of truly novel, potentially dangerous, and high-cost machines. The randomized controlled trial is built into the evaluation of drugs and suits them well. It is not so well suited to the evaluation of major devices in which installation costs and return on investment are important. We discuss where the randomized controlled trial may still play a role and what alternatives may exist when this is not possible. We also discuss the role that independent bodies may have in determining whether or not a new device is not only safe but also adds to the medical landscape in a way that justifies its cost.

Technology evolution: is it survival of the fittest?

New technologies are constantly being developed and introduced into medical practice. Their potential or actual use raises questions of efficacy and cost. All too often financial considerations of profit primarily determine whether a technology will be adopted. In an era in which the need to control costs has become clear, this situation is undesirable. The assessment of efficacy can, however, be very difficult, and the control of financial aspects is likewise problematic. In this article, we address these problems and suggest potential solutions, using proton radiotherapy as an example that may be relevant to the development of other medical devices.