Cost-Effectiveness of Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: a Critical Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to summarize and appraise published cost-effectiveness studies on stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). RECENT FINDINGS: We performed a Medline search of cost-effectiveness studies of SRS, SBRT, and other cancer treatment modalities such as surgery and systemic therapy from 2006 to 2016. We included studies that used both modeling and retrospective review techniques. We excluded studies of benign disease. We defined a strategy whose incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is ≤$50,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) as "clearly cost-effective," a strategy whose ICER is ≤$100,000/QALY as "probably cost-effective," and a strategy ≤$200,000/QALY as "possibly cost-effective." We appraised modeling studies by determining whether or not they conform to the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Good Research Practices (ISPOR) in modeling task force good research practices in model transparency and validation. We identified 24 studies that met inclusion criteria. Treatment sites included brain, bone, liver, lung, pancreas, and prostate. SRS and SBRT were clearly cost-effective strategies in 17 studies, probably cost-effective in 3 studies, and possibly cost-effective in 2 studies. Of the 16 modeling studies,15 conformed to transparency best practices; however, only 6 studies performed rigorous validation as described by the ISPOR guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: SRS and SBRT are likely to be cost-effective management strategies across a large variety of treatment sites and techniques. However, rigorous model validation techniques are lacking in these modeling studies.

Adjuvant Therapy Use and Survival in Stage II Endometrial Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Radiotherapy (RT) is an established adjuvant treatment for stage II endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (EEC). The role of chemotherapy (CT) in stage II EEC is less proven. We used the National Cancer Data Base to identify factors associated with adjuvant CT in stage II EEC and to explore whether receipt of CT was associated with improved overall survival (OS). METHODS/MATERIALS: Women diagnosed in 2010 to 2013 with International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology stage II EEC (grades 1-3) after hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy were identified in the National Cancer Data Base. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify covariates associated with receipt of CT. Overall survival among patients receiving RT, CT, or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) after surgery was compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates, the log-rank test, Cox proportional hazards regression, and propensity score matching. RESULTS: We identified 6102 stage II EEC patients. There were 358 patients (6%) who received adjuvant CT alone and 525 (9%) who received CRT; the remainder received RT alone (n = 1906; 31%) or no adjuvant treatment (n = 3313; 54%). The presence of lymphovascular invasion (odds ratio, 3.58; P < 0.001) and grade 3 disease (odds ratio, 3.40; P < 0.001) was strongly associated with receipt of CT or CRT. The OS at 3 years for the entire cohort was 89%. On multivariable analysis, CT versus RT was associated with worse OS (hazard ratio [HR], 2.12 [95% confidence interval, 1.46-3.06]; P < 0.001), whereas CRT versus RT was not associated with improved OS (HR, 1.07 [95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.62]; P = 0.781). After propensity score matching, there remained no difference in OS between RT and CRT (HR, 1.14; P = 0.614). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with stage II EEC have an excellent prognosis, and most undergo observation or receive adjuvant RT in the United States. Receipt of CT (alone or with RT) was not associated with an OS advantage compared with RT alone in this observational cohort. Randomized trials will help clarify the role of CT in stage II patients.

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for "biopsy-only" glioblastoma multiforme.

BACKGROUND: Combined temozolomide and radiotherapy (RT) is the standard postoperative therapy for glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). However, the clearest benefit of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) observed in clinical trials has been among patients who undergo surgical resection. Whether the improved survival with CRT extends to patients who undergo "biopsy only" is less certain. The authors compared overall survival (OS) in a national cohort of patients with GBM who underwent biopsy and received either RT alone or CRT during the temozolomide era. METHODS: The US National Cancer Data Base was used to identify patients with histologically confirmed, biopsy-only GBM who received either RT alone or CRT from 2006 through 2011. Demographic and clinicopathologic predictors of treatment were analyzed using the chi-square test, the t test, and multivariable logistic regression. OS was evaluated using the log-rank test, multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression, and propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS: In total, 1479 patients with biopsy-only GBM were included, among whom 154 (10.4%) received RT alone and 1325 (89.6%) received CRT. The median age at diagnosis was 61 years. CRT was associated with a significant OS benefit compared with RT alone (median, 9.2 vs 5.6 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.76; P < .001). CRT was independently associated with improved OS compared with RT alone on multivariable analysis (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60-0.85; P < .001). A significant OS benefit for CRT persisted in a propensity score-matched analysis (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56-0.93; P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: The current data suggest that CRT significantly improves OS in patients with GBM who undergo biopsy only compared with RT alone and should remain the standard of care for patients who can tolerate therapy. Cancer 2016;122:2364-2370. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Who benefits from chemoradiation in stage III-IVA endometrial cancer? An analysis of the National Cancer Data Base.

OBJECTIVE: Adjuvant therapy for advanced endometrial cancer (AEC) is not standardized. We investigated whether regional radiotherapy with chemotherapy (CRT) compared to chemotherapy alone (CT) was associated with improved overall survival (OS) in an AEC cohort and among subgroups by stage and histologic grade. METHODS: Women who received CT or CRT after hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for FIGO stage III-IVA AEC diagnosed in 2004-2012 were identified in the National Cancer Data Base. Multilevel modeling was used to identify covariates associated with treatment selection. OS was compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates, the log-rank test, Cox proportional hazards regression, and propensity score matching. RESULTS: We identified 9837 patients, of whom 6358 (65%) received CT and 3479 (35%) received CRT. Median follow-up was 59.6months. OS was higher in patients receiving CRT compared to CT (70% v 55% at 5years, log-rank P<0.001). Controlling for stage, histologic grade, tumor size, age, comorbidity and race, CRT remained independently associated with improved OS (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.57-0.70, P<0.001). When stratified by stage and histologic grade, there was a significant OS benefit for stage IIIA, IIIB, IIIC, grade 2, and grade 3 (all P<0.001), a trend for stage IVA (P=0.06), but no benefit for grade 1 (P=0.91). On multivariable subgroup analyses, these findings persisted, including lack of benefit in grade 1 patients (HR 0.72, P=0.14). These results were further confirmed after propensity score matching. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant CRT for AEC was associated with improved OS, except for patients with well-differentiated disease, who fared equally well with CT alone.

Addition of radiotherapy to adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with improved overall survival in resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma: An analysis of the National Cancer Data Base.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for resected pancreatic cancer is controversial because direct comparisons of adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) alone and chemotherapy and radiotherapy (CRT) are limited. This study assessed outcomes of CT versus CRT in a national cohort to provide a modern estimate of comparative effectiveness. METHODS: Patients with pT1-3N0-1M0 pancreatic adenocarcinoma after pancreatectomy were identified in the National Cancer Data Base. Overall survival (OS) was compared for CT and CRT groups with Cox regression and propensity score matching. Subset analyses by clinicopathologic characteristics were performed. RESULTS: This study identified 6165 patients treated with CT (n = 2334 or 38%) or CRT (n = 3831 or 62%). Most were classified as pT3 (72%), pN1 (67%), and status-post R0 resection (84%). For CRT patients, the median radiotherapy dose was 50.4 Gy. Compared with CT, CRT was associated with improved OS in a univariate analysis (median, 20.0 vs 22.3 months; at 5 years, 16.5% vs 19.6%; P < .001) and a multivariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.893; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.837-0.953; P = .001). CRT remained associated with improved OS after propensity score matching (HR, 0.851; 95% CI, 0.793-0.913; P < .001). Subset analyses showed that CRT was associated with improved OS among patients with pT3 (HR, 0.892; 95% CI, 0.828-0.962; P = .003) or pN1 disease (HR, 0.856; 95% CI, 0.793-0.924; P < .001) and both R0 resection (HR, 0.901; 95% CI, 0.839-0.969; P = .005) and R1 resection (HR, 0.842; 95% CI, 0.722-0.983; P = .030). CONCLUSIONS: CRT was independently associated with improved OS after the resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma in a large national cohort and particularly among patients with R1 resection and pN1 disease. Well-designed randomized comparisons of CRT and CT are urgently needed.

The evolving role of adjuvant radiotherapy for elderly women with early-stage breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients with early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) derive a local control benefit from radiotherapy (RT) after lumpectomy, without any apparent effect on overall survival. Therefore, the use of RT is controversial. In the current study, the authors characterized updated trends in RT for elderly patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive ESBC. METHODS: Patients aged ≥70 years with ER-positive ESBC measuring ≤2 cm after lumpectomy with negative resection margins and known RT details were identified in the National Cancer Data Base. Patients were classified by year of diagnosis and segregated into 3 groups relative to the initial publication and updated presentation of the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 9343 trial. RT use overall, prescription of hypofractionated RT, and use of boost RT were compared between groups using logistic regression analysis, and the influence of clinicopathologic covariates was determined with multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 122,796 elderly patients with ER-positive ESBC who were diagnosed between 1998 and 2011 were identified. Overall, 84,649 patients (68.9%) received adjuvant RT, with a decline observed between successive cohorts (71.3% in the pre-initial publication cohort, 69.5% in the pre-update cohort, and 64.7% in the post-update cohort; P <.001). Hypofractionated RT use increased among treated patients over time (P<.001). Boost RT was used in 67.5% of patients, with a decline noted between the pre-update and post-update cohorts (68.7% vs 57.7%; P<.001). Overall RT use as well as use of boost RT were found to be lower among older patients and those with lower-grade or smaller tumors (P<.001), whereas hypofractionated RT was used more commonly in these groups (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: RT use appears to have declined in elderly patients with ER-positive ESBC, a finding that is reflective of evidence-based practice integrating mature trial data. Further research is needed to develop tools to aid in the decision-making process regarding the delivery or avoidance of RT in this setting.

Benefits and risks of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women undergoing treatment for sporadic unilateral breast cancer: a decision analysis.

The rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) is rising rapidly, despite limited evidence about the procedure's relative benefits and harms. The objective of this study is to examine the impact of CPM on life expectancy (LE) and quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) in women with sporadic unilateral breast cancer. A Markov model was developed to compare 18 hypothetical cohorts of 45-year-old women with newly diagnosed unilateral, sporadic breast cancer treated with or without CPM. The probability of developing distant metastases by American Joint Committee on Cancer stage and molecular subtype was derived from British Columbia Cancer Agency data. Additional model parameters were identified from the medical literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the impact of plausible variations in key model parameters on results. CPM improved LE in all cohorts (range 0.06-0.54 years). Stage had more effect on LE than subtype (stage I mean, 0.44 years, stage III mean, 0.11 years). However, after adjusting for quality-of-life, No CPM was favored in all cohorts. Univariate sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the most influential model parameter was the post-CPM health state utility. The preferred strategy shifted from No CPM to CPM when the post-CPM utility exceeded 0.83 (base case value 0.81). PSA indicated that LE gains and QALE decreases were stable in all cohorts. The primary determinant of survival after unilateral breast cancer is stage at diagnosis. Our results suggest that routine CPM would not improve quality-adjusted survival for the majority of women with unilateral sporadic breast cancer.

Death from high-risk prostate cancer versus cardiovascular mortality with hormonal therapy: a decision analysis.

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials have demonstrated improved survival when hormonal therapy (HT) is added to radiation therapy (RT) for high-risk prostate cancer. However, it is still unknown whether men who have a history of myocardial infarction (MI) or MI risk factors achieve a superior outcome from HT. METHODS: A Markov decision analysis model was used to compare quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) in men aged 50, 60, and 70 years who received RT and no HT, 6 months of HT (short-term), or 3 years of HT (long-term) for high-risk prostate cancer stratified by cardiac risk group. RESULTS: In men with a history of MI, there was a decrease of 0.1 to 0.2 quality-adjusted life years and 0.5 to 0.6 quality-adjusted life years across all ages with short-term HT and long-term HT, respectively, compared with no HT. In men without MI, receipt of short-term or long-term HT was associated with a QALE benefit versus no HT in all cohorts. Among men without MI, the optimal duration of HT was a function of age and the number of MI risk factors. Long-term HT improved QALE (range, 1.4-5.4 years) for men aged 50 or 60 years except those with MI; whereas, for men aged 70 years with 4 cardiac risk factors, short-term and long-term HT yielded identical QALE. CONCLUSIONS: Men who received RT for high-risk prostate cancer and had a history of MI experienced net harm when they received HT. Men without MI gained a QALE benefit from HT, even if they had up to 4 cardiac risk factors. The optimal duration of HT is a function of patient age and the number of cardiac risk factors.

Practical Steps to Mitigate Cybersecurity Attacks on Radiation Oncology Practices.

Radiation oncology, as a technologically intensive discipline that requires communication between multiple and diverse computer systems, is vulnerable to cyberattack. Given the enormous amount of the loss of time, energy, and money that results from a cyberattack, it behooves radiation oncologists and their teams to minimize cybersecurity threats to their practices. In this article, we present practical steps that radiation oncologists can take to prevent, prepare for, and respond to a cyberattack.

Trends and Outcomes of Salvage Lobectomy for Early-stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: There is little data describing the outcomes for patients who develop local recurrences after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), a standard-of-care treatment for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. One emerging option is salvage lobectomy. We investigated trends in the use of salvage lobectomy after SBRT and described patient outcomes using a nationally representative sample. METHODS: This is a retrospective study using the National Cancer Database of patients with non-small cell lung cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2017. We used descriptive statistics to describe patients who underwent salvage lobectomy. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate overall survival (OS). Cox proportional modeling was used to identify factors associated with OS. RESULTS: We identified 276 patients who underwent salvage lobectomy. Ninety-day mortality was 0%. The median survival time for the cohort was 50 months (95% CI, 44 to 58). Median follow-up was 65 months (Interquartile Range: 39 to 96). The factors associated with decreased OS include squamous cell histology (hazard ratio (HR)=1.72, P =0.005) and high grade (1.50, P =0.038). Increased OS was associated with lobectomy performed between 3 and 6 months after SBRT (HR=0.53, P =0.021), lobectomy performed >6 months after SBRT (HR=0.59, P =0.015), and female sex (HR=0.56, P =0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Salvage lobectomy after local failures of SBRT was associated with no perioperative mortality and favorable long-term outcomes. Our data suggest that lobectomy performed within 3 months of SBRT is associated with worse OS.

Utilization and Survival Impact of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Stage I Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The optimal fractionation schedule in unresected stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) unsuitable for stereotactic body radiation therapy is unclear. Given the lack of comparative data regarding nonstereotactic body radiation therapy schemas, we compared overall survival (OS) with hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) and examined the OS impact of different HFRT doses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective analysis included 2159 patients from the National Cancer Database diagnosed with stage I (cT1-2aN0M0) NSCLC between 2008 and 2016. Patients underwent CFRT (70≤BED10 [biologically effective dose] <100 Gy10 in ≥30 fractions), low-dose HFRT (LD-HFRT; 70≤BED10 [assuming α/ß=10] <100 Gy10 in 11 to 24 fractions), or high-dose HFRT (HD-HFRT; 100≤BED10 ≤120 Gy10 in 6 to 10 fractions). Patients who received surgery, chemotherapy, or immunotherapy were excluded. We compared CFRT versus all HFRT, and separately CFRT versus LD-HFRT and CFRT versus HD-HFRT. OS was evaluated with the Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test, and Cox regression. RESULTS: A total of 63.2% of patients underwent CFRT, 23.5% LD-HFRT, and 13.3% HD-HFRT. OS was significantly longer with HFRT versus CFRT on univariable (28.2 mo [95% CI, 25.6-31.7] vs 26.4 mo [25.0-27.9]; log-rank=0.0025) but not multivariable analysis (MVA; hazard ratio [HR] 0.90; P=0.062). MVA yielded no significant difference in OS between CFRT and LD-HFRT (HR 0.96, P=0.53). OS was significantly longer with HD-HFRT versus CFRT on MVA (HR, 0.75; P=0.003). However, on sensitivity analysis using different multivariable modeling techniques, this did not retain statistical significance (HR, 0.83; P=0.12). CONCLUSIONS: For stage I NSCLC, HFRT does not show a robust OS benefit compared with CFRT but may be preferred given the convenience and lower costs.

'CROSS'-ing into the 'Real World': a retrospective cohort study of patients receiving trimodality and bimodality therapy for esophageal cancer.

Background: A standard of care for nonmetastatic esophageal cancer is trimodality therapy consisting of neoadjuvant chemoradiation and esophagectomy, with evidence for improved overall survival versus surgery alone in the ChemoRadiotherapy for Oesophageal cancer followed by Surgery Study (CROSS) trial. Patients who receive treatment with curative intent but are poor candidates for or decline surgery receive definitive bimodality therapy. Literature characterizing patients who receive bimodality therapy compared to trimodality therapy, and their relative outcomes, is sparse, especially among patients who are too old or too frail to qualify for clinical trials. In this study, we assess a single-institution real-world dataset of patients receiving bimodality and trimodality management. Methods: Patients treated for clinically resectable, nonmetastatic esophageal cancer between 2009 and 2019 who received bimodality or trimodality therapy were reviewed, generating a dataset of 95 patients. Clinical variables and patient characteristics were assessed for association with modality on multivariable logistic regression. Overall, relapse-free, and disease-free survival were assessed with Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional modeling. For patients nonadherent to planned esophagectomy, reasons for nonadherence were recorded. Results: Bimodality therapy was associated with greater age-adjusted comorbidity index, worse performance status, higher N-stage, presenting symptom other than dysphagia, and held chemotherapy cycles on multivariable analysis. Compared to bimodality therapy, trimodality therapy was associated with higher overall (3-year: 62% vs. 18%, P<0.001), relapse-free (3-year: 71% vs. 18%, P<0.001), and disease-free (3-year: 58% vs. 12%, P<0.001) survival. Similar results were observed among patients who did not meet CROSS trial qualifying criteria. Only treatment modality was associated with overall survival after adjusting for covariates (HR 0.37, P<0.001, reference group: bimodality). Patient choice accounted for 40% of surgery nonadherence in our population. Conclusions: Patients receiving trimodality therapy were observed to have superior overall survival compared to bimodality therapy. Patient preference for organ-preserving therapies appears to impact resection rate; further characterization of patient decision-making may be helpful. Our results suggest patients who wish to prioritize overall survival should be encouraged to pursue trimodality therapy and obtain early consultation with surgery. Development of evidence-based interventions to physiologically prepare patients before and during neoadjuvant therapy as well as efforts to optimize the tolerability of the chemoradiation plan are warranted.

Trends and costs of stereotactic body radiation therapy in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

Background: The purpose of this study is to describe stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) use, outcomes, hospitalizations and costs compared to patients receiving chemotherapy among patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database, we identified patients aged ≥66 with metastatic NSCLC treated with SBRT as first-line treatment between 2004 and 2014. Multivariable logistic regression identified covariates associated with SBRT. Overall survival (OS) between SBRT and chemotherapy was compared using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox proportional hazards regression. To compare hospitalizations and associated costs, we matched patients treated with SBRT to those with comparable prognostic factors receiving chemotherapy. Results: We identified 215 patients with metastatic NSCLC who received SBRT and 12,486 patients who received chemotherapy as first-line treatment. SBRT use increased from 0.5% to 3% and was associated with older age, female sex, poor disability status, and lower T- and N-stage. OS increased with SBRT, female sex, higher income and decreased with higher Charlson Comorbidity Score ≥2, poor disability status, higher T-stage and higher N-stage. Among a matched sample, SBRT patients underwent fewer hospitalizations vs. chemotherapy patients (73% vs. 81%, P=0.02). Among those hospitalized, SBRT patients incurred higher hospitalization costs ($33,063 vs. $23,865, P<0.001) but costs per month of survival were similar. Conclusions: SBRT is increasing among Medicare patients with metastatic NSCLC. Our findings suggest that SBRT may play a role in management of select metastatic NSCLC patients in addition to standard-of-care chemotherapy.

The Potential for Overtreatment With Total Neoadjuvant Therapy (TNT): Consider One Local Therapy Instead.

With increased therapeutic options in rectal cancer, a central question has become how to tailor therapy to patient preferences to avoid both over and under treatment. Total Neoadjuvant Therapy (TNT), defined as delivering all planned chemotherapy and radiation therapy (RT) before surgery, was developed with the primary goal of improving overall survival through early elimination of micrometastatic disease. In this narrative review assessing patients with operable adenocarcinoma of the rectum, we sought to evaluate TNT versus alternative options with regard to both quality of life (QoL) and oncologic outcomes. Survey data of patient preferences reveal that an increased focus on QoL when discussing options is essential. While evidence favors TNT improving distant metastases-free survival, this has not yet translated to a clear OS benefit. The improved pathologic complete response rate with TNT compared to short course RT or chemoradiation alone suggests proceeding to surgery might result in overtreatment, lending support to a watch-and-wait option for patients with a goal for nonoperative management if a clinical complete response is achieved. Similarly, for select low-risk patients, surgery may be the only local therapy required allowing for safe omission of RT. In the treatment of rectal cancer, the future appears to be moving toward one local therapy. As an alternative to TNT, there is growing support for the concept we define herein as total definitive therapy instead: chemoradiation followed by consolidation chemotherapy, saving surgery only for incomplete responders rather than as part of the initial treatment plan. Also, selective use of RT should be considered for low-risk patients. By thoroughly assessing how these treatment de-escalation options compare to more traditional treatment algorithms, this narrative review provides guidance on how to honor patient preferences for QoL by avoiding treatments that might offer negligible benefits in oncologic outcomes.

Active Surveillance for Early Stage Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Data describing outcomes for patients with early stage lung cancer who undergo expectant management is lacking, despite evidence of a sub-population with indolent malignancies. We used the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) to identify factors associated with active surveillance for early stage lung cancer. Additionally, we sought to describe outcomes of three different care plans: active surveillance, no treatment, and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT). METHODS: Patients diagnosed in 2010 to 2017 with early stage lung cancer who underwent active surveillance, no treatment, and SBRT were retrospectively identified in the NCDB. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess care plan selection. Kaplan Meier analysis was used to assess overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We identified 30,107 patients that met our inclusion criteria: 838 (3%) underwent active surveillance, 6388 patients (21%) received no treatment, and 22,881 (76%) underwent SBRT. Black race (relative risk ratio (RRR): 1.66) and older age (RRR: 1.02) were significant positive predictors of active surveillance selection. Conversely, higher tumor stage (RRR: 0.26) and squamous cell carcinoma (RRR: 0.35) were significant negative predictors of active surveillance selection. Kaplan Meier analysis revealed a longer median OS associated with active surveillance compared to no treatment at 49.3 months versus 26.5 months, respectively. SBRT OS was 43.1 months. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a population of lung cancer patients who underwent expectant management with favorable outcomes. Additionally, we identified factors associated with active surveillance selection. The selection of active surveillance over no treatment was associated with significantly longer OS.

Hypofractionated vs. standard radiotherapy for locally advanced limited-stage small cell lung cancer.

Background: Hypofractionated radiotherapy in locally advanced limited-stage small cell lung cancer is preferred in many Western countries but not used regularly in the United States. We examined practice patterns and overall survival with definitive hypofractionated radiotherapy and chemotherapy vs. standard radiotherapy in this setting. Methods: We included patients in the National Cancer Database with unresected primary stage II-III small cell lung cancer in 2008-2016 who underwent chemotherapy within six months of either hypofractionated radiotherapy (40-45 Gy/15 fractions) or standard radiotherapy (45 Gy/30 fractions or 60-70 Gy/30-35 fractions) in this retrospective cohort study. Patient characteristics were assessed with univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test, and multivariable Cox regression were used to evaluate overall survival. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed as a sensitivity analysis. Early concurrent chemotherapy consisted of radiotherapy and chemotherapy initiated within 30 days of each other. Results: Seven thousand and one hundred forty-three patients were included: 97.9% received standard radiotherapy and 2.1% hypofractionated radiotherapy. Multivariable analysis on the whole cohort yielded comparable overall survival (HR for hypofractionated radiotherapy 1.09, CI: 0.90-1.32, P=0.37). On PSM (N=292), median overall survival was similar between standard radiotherapy [22.9 months (95% CI: 18.2-30.4 months)] vs. hypofractionated radiotherapy [21.2 months (CI: 16.3-24.7 months); P=0.13]. Overall survival was shorter with hypofractionated radiotherapy in the early concurrent chemotherapy subset (15.8 vs. 22.1 months, P=0.007) and longer with hypofractionated radiotherapy in the non-early concurrent chemotherapy subset (29.5 vs. 18.5 months, P=0.027). Conclusions: Overall survival with hypofractionated radiotherapy appears similar to standard radiotherapy in locally advanced limited-stage small cell lung cancer. Chemotherapy timing may modify the effect of fractionation on overall survival, though larger numbers must confirm. Hypofractionated radiotherapy may be considered in those unable to receive early concurrent chemotherapy.

Impact of and Response to Cyberattacks in Radiation Oncology.

Cyberattacks on health care facilities are increasing and significantly affecting health care delivery throughout the world. The recent cyberattack on our hospital-based radiation facility exposed vulnerabilities of radiation oncology systems and highlighted the dependence of radiation treatment on integrated and complex radiation planning, delivery and verification systems. After the cyberattack on our health care facility, radiation oncology staff reconstructed patient information, schedules, and radiation plans from existing paper records and physicians developed a system to triage patients requiring immediate transfer of radiation treatment to nearby facilities. Medical physics and hospital information technology collaborated to restore services without access to the system backup or network connectivity. Ultimately, radiation treatments resumed incrementally as systems were restored and rebuilt. The experiences and lessons learned from this response were reviewed. The successes and shortcomings were incorporated into recommendations to provide guidance to other radiation facilities in preparation for a possible cyberattack. Our response and recommendations are intended to serve as a starting point to assist other facilities in cybersecurity preparedness planning. Because there is no one-size-fits-all response, each department should determine its specific vulnerabilities, risks, and available resources to create an individualized plan.

Cost-effectiveness of Prostate Radiation Therapy for Men With Newly Diagnosed Low-Burden Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

Importance: Prostate radiation therapy (PRT) is a treatment option in men with low-volume metastatic prostate cancer based on the results of the Systemic Therapy in Advancing or Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Evaluation of Drug Efficacy Arm H (STAMPEDE-H) trial. However, the cost-effectiveness of this treatment remains unaddressed. Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of PRT when added to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for men with low-volume metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation used microsimulation modeling to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding PRT to ADT. A simulated cohort of 10 000 individuals with low-volume mHSPC was created. Data from men with low-volume mHSPC were extracted and analyzed from January 18, 2019, through July 4, 2020. Transition probabilities were extracted from the STAMPEDE-H study. Health states included stable disease, progression, second progression, and death. Individual grade 2 or higher genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxic events associated with PRT were tracked. Univariable deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses explored uncertainty with regard to the model assumptions. Health state utility estimates were based on the published literature. Exposures: The combination of PRT and ADT using regimens of 20 fractions and 6 weekly fractions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included net quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs in US dollars, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. A strategy was classified as dominant if it was associated with higher QALYs at lower costs than the alternative and dominated if it was associated with fewer QALYs at higher costs than the alternative. Results: For the base case scenario of men 68 years of age with low-volume mHSPC, the modeled outcomes were similar to the target clinical data for overall survival, failure-free survival, and rates of PRT-related toxic effects. The addition of PRT was a dominant strategy compared with ADT alone, with a gain of 0.16 QALYs (95% CI, 0.15-0.17 QALYs) and a reduction in net costs by $19 472 (95% CI, $23 096-$37 362) at 37 months of follow-up and a gain of 0.81 QALYs (95% CI, 0.73-0.89 QALYs) and savings of $30 229 (95% CI, $23 096-$37 362) with lifetime follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: In the economic evaluation, PRT was a dominant treatment strategy compared with ADT alone. These findings suggest that addition of PRT to ADT is a cost-effective treatment for men with low-volume mHSPC.