Radiation doses and fractionation schedules in non-low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ in the breast (BIG 3-07/TROG 07.01): a randomised, factorial, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Whole breast irradiation (WBI) after conservative surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) reduces local recurrence. We investigated whether a tumour bed boost after WBI improved outcomes, and examined radiation dose fractionation sensitivity for non-low-risk DCIS. METHODS: The study was an international, randomised, unmasked, phase 3 trial involving 136 participating centres of six clinical trials organisations in 11 countries (Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Italy, Ireland, and the UK). Eligible patients were women aged 18 years or older with unilateral, histologically proven, non-low-risk DCIS treated by breast-conserving surgery with at least 1 mm of clear radial resection margins. They were assigned to one of four groups (1:1:1:1) of no tumour bed boost versus boost after conventional versus hypofractionated WBI, or randomly assigned to one of two groups (1:1) of no boost versus boost after each centre prespecified conventional or hypofractionated WBI. The conventional WBI used was 50 Gy in 25 fractions, and hypofractionated WBI was 42·5 Gy in 16 fractions. A boost dose of 16 Gy in eight fractions, if allocated, was delivered after WBI. Patients and clinicians were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was time to local recurrence. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00470236). FINDINGS: Between June 25, 2007, and June 30, 2014, 1608 patients were randomly assigned to have no boost (805 patients) or boost (803 patients). Conventional WBI was given to 831 patients, and hypofractionated WBI was given to 777 patients. Median follow-up was 6·6 years. The 5-year free-from-local-recurrence rates were 92·7% (95% CI 90·6-94·4%) in the no-boost group and 97·1% (95·6-98·1%) in the boost group (hazard ratio 0·47; 0·31-0·72; p<0·001). The boost group had higher rates of grade 2 or higher breast pain (10% [8-12%] vs 14% [12-17%], p=0·003) and induration (6% [5-8%] vs 14% [11-16%], p<0·001). INTERPRETATION: In patients with resected non-low-risk DCIS, a tumour bed boost after WBI reduced local recurrence with an increase in grade 2 or greater toxicity. The results provide the first randomised trial data to support the use of boost radiation after postoperative WBI in these patients to improve local control. The international scale of the study supports the generalisability of the results. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Susan G Komen for the Cure, Breast Cancer Now, OncoSuisse, Dutch Cancer Society, Canadian Cancer Trials Group.

Infrastructure platform for privacy-preserving distributed machine learning development of computer-assisted theragnostics in cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Emerging evidence suggests that data-driven support tools have found their way into clinical decision-making in a number of areas, including cancer care. Improving them and widening their scope of availability in various differing clinical scenarios, including for prognostic models derived from retrospective data, requires co-ordinated data sharing between clinical centres, secondary analyses of large multi-institutional clinical trial data, or distributed (federated) learning infrastructures. A systematic approach to utilizing routinely collected data across cancer care clinics remains a significant challenge due to privacy, administrative and political barriers. METHODS: An information technology infrastructure and web service software was developed and implemented which uses machine learning to construct clinical decision support systems in a privacy-preserving manner across datasets geographically distributed in different hospitals. The infrastructure was deployed in a network of Australian hospitals. A harmonized, international ontology-linked, set of lung cancer databases were built with the routine clinical and imaging data at each centre. The infrastructure was demonstrated with the development of logistic regression models to predict major cardiovascular events following radiation therapy. RESULTS: The infrastructure implemented forms the basis of the Australian computer-assisted theragnostics (AusCAT) network for radiation oncology data extraction, reporting and distributed learning. Four radiation oncology departments (across seven hospitals) in New South Wales (NSW) participated in this demonstration study. Infrastructure was deployed at each centre and used to develop a model predicting for cardiovascular admission within a year of receiving curative radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer. A total of 10,417 lung cancer patients were identified with 802 being eligible for the model. Twenty features were chosen for analysis from the clinical record and linked registries. After selection, 8 features were included and a logistic regression model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve of 0.70 and C-index of 0.65 on out-of-sample data. CONCLUSION: The infrastructure developed was demonstrated to be usable in practice between clinical centres to harmonize routinely collected oncology data and develop models with federated learning. It provides a promising approach to enable further research studies in radiation oncology using real world clinical data.

The complexities, coordination, culture and capacities that characterise the delivery of oncology services in the common areas of ambulatory settings.

BACKGROUND: Relatively little is understood about real-world provision of oncology care in ambulatory outpatient clinics (OPCs). This study aimed to: 1) develop an understanding of behaviours and practices inherent in the delivery of cancer services in OPC common areas by characterising the organisation and implementation of this care; and 2) identify barriers to, and facilitators of, the delivery of this care in OPC common areas. METHODS: A purpose-designed ethnographic study was employed in four public hospital OPCs. Informal field scoping activities were followed by in-situ observations, key informant interviews and document review. A view of OPCs as complex adaptive systems was used as a scaffold for the data collection and interpretation, with the intent of understanding 'work as done'. Data were analysed using an adapted "Qualitative Rapid Appraisal, Rigorous Analysis" approach. RESULTS: Field observations were conducted over 135 h, interviews over 6.5 h and documents were reviewed. Analysis found six themes. Staff working in OPCs see themselves as part of small local teams and as part of a broader multidisciplinary care team. Professional role boundaries could be unclear in practice, as duties expanded to meet demand or to stop patients "falling through the cracks." Formal care processes in OPCs were supported by relationships, social capital and informal, but invaluable, institutional expertise. Features of the clinic layout, such as the proximity of departments, affected professional interactions. Staff were aware of inter- and intra-service communication difficulties and employed strategies to minimise negative impacts on patients. We found that complexity, coordination, culture and capacity underpin the themes that characterise this care provision. CONCLUSIONS: The study advances understanding of how multidisciplinary care is delivered in ambulatory settings and the factors which promote or inhibit effective care practice. Time pressures, communication challenges and competing priorities can pose barriers to care delivery. OPC care is facilitated by: self-organisation of participants; professional acumen; institutional knowledge; social ties and relationships between and within professional groups; and commitment to patient-centred care. An understanding of the realities of 'work-as-done' may help OPCs to sustain high-quality care in the face of escalating service demand.

What are the attitudes of health professionals regarding patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in oncology practice? A mixed-method synthesis of the qualitative evidence.

BACKGROUND: The adoption of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in cancer care has been widely advocated, but little is known about the evidence for the implementation of PROMs in practice. Qualitative research captures the perspectives of health professionals as end-users of PROMs and can be used to inform adoption efforts. This paper presents a systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research conducted to address the question: What are the attitudes of health professionals towards PROMs in oncology, including any barriers and facilitators to the adoption of PROMS, reported in qualitative evidence? METHODS: Systematic searches of qualitative evidence were undertaken in four databases and reviewed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies published in English between 1998 and 2018, which reported qualitative findings about the attitudes of health professionals working in oncology towards PROMs were eligible. Studies were assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme's Qualitative Research Checklist. A sentiment analysis was conducted on primary text to examine the polarity (neutral, positive or negative) of health professionals' views of PROMs. Qualitative meta-synthesis was conducted using a constant comparative analysis. RESULTS: From 1227 articles after duplicates were removed, with 1014 excluded against the screening criteria, 213 full text articles remained and were assessed; 34 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. The majority of studies were of good quality. Sentiment analysis on primary text demonstrated an overall positive polarity from the expressed opinions of health professionals. The meta-synthesis showed health professionals' attitudes in four domains: identifying patient issues and needs using PROMs; managing and addressing patient issues; the care experience; and the integration of PROMs into clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: From the accounts of health professionals, the fit of PROMs with existing practice, how PROMs are valued, capacity to respond to PROMs and the supports in place, formed the key factors which may impede or promote adoption of PROMs in routine practice. To assist policy-makers and services involved in implementing these initiatives, further evidence is required about the relationship between PROMs data collection and corresponding clinical actions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42019119447, 6th March, 2019.

Web-Based Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Personalized Treatment and Care (PROMPT-Care): Multicenter Pragmatic Nonrandomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the acceptability and efficacy of e-patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems, implementation in routine clinical care remains challenging. OBJECTIVE: This pragmatic trial implemented the PROMPT-Care (Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Personalized Treatment and Care) web-based system into existing clinical workflows and evaluated its effectiveness among a diverse population of patients with cancer. METHODS: Adult patients with solid tumors receiving active treatment or follow-up care in four cancer centers were enrolled. The PROMPT-Care intervention supported patient management through (1) monthly off-site electronic PRO physical symptom and psychosocial well-being assessments, (2) automated electronic clinical alerts notifying the care team of unresolved clinical issues following two consecutive assessments, and (3) tailored online patient self-management resources. Propensity score matching was used to match controls with intervention patients in a 4:1 ratio for patient age, sex, and treatment status. The primary outcome was a reduction in emergency department presentations. Secondary outcomes were time spent on chemotherapy and the number of allied health service referrals. RESULTS: From April 2016 to October 2018, 328 patients from four public hospitals received the intervention. Matched controls (n=1312) comprised the general population of patients with cancer, seen at the participating hospitals during the study period. Emergency department visits were significantly reduced by 33% (P=.02) among patients receiving the intervention compared with patients in the matched controls. No significant associations were found in allied health referrals or time to end of chemotherapy. At baseline, the most common patient reported outcomes (above-threshold) were fatigue (39%), tiredness (38.4%), worry (32.9%), general wellbeing (32.9%), and sleep (24.1%), aligning with the most frequently accessed self-management domain pages of physical well-being (36%) and emotional well-being (23%). The majority of clinical feedback reports were reviewed by nursing staff (729/893, 82%), largely in response to the automated clinical alerts (n=877). CONCLUSIONS: Algorithm-supported web-based systems utilizing patient reported outcomes in clinical practice reduced emergency department presentations among a diverse population of patients with cancer. This study also highlighted the importance of (1) automated triggers for reviewing above-threshold results in patient reports, rather than passive manual review of patient records; (2) the instrumental role nurses play in managing alerts; and (3) providing patients with resources to support guided self-management, where appropriate. Together, these factors will inform the integration of web-based PRO systems into future models of routine cancer care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616000615482; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=370633. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s12885-018-4729-3.

Interpreting and Acting on the PRO Scores From the Patient-reported Outcomes for Personalized Treatment and Care (PROMPT-Care) eHealth System.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported Outcomes for Personalized Treatment and Care (PROMPT-Care) is the first eHealth system in Australia that is fully electronically integrated into hospital oncology information systems, enabling real-time, routine collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to support and enable cancer patients to achieve and maintain improved health, well-being, and cancer outcomes. Five previously published papers detail the impetus for developing this eHealth system, its development, and testing of its acceptability and feasibility, the development of algorithms to standardize the cancer care pathways which underpin patient care, and the protocol for evaluating the efficacy of PROMPT-Care. METHODS: This manuscript provides "how-to" guidance to inform future system development, focusing on selecting relevant PROs and measuring them in cancer patients, score interpretation, and determining recommended care in response to scores which are above the predetermined threshold. DISCUSSION: Electronic PRO systems are increasingly used in cancer clinical care settings, with the potential to support timely patient-centered care when implemented appropriately. KEY POINTS: PRO selection should consider patient response burden, and prioritizing PROs that are amenable to clinical intervention. Having clear, evidence-based, care pathways, and actionable recommendations in response to above-threshold PRO scores facilitate PRO integration into the clinical workflow. Centers should determine thresholds for clinical action for each PRO which provide an acceptable balance between false positives and false negatives; and develop care pathway recommendations which consider the availability of local services and resources, are feasible in the clinical setting, clear, concise, manageable, based on evidence-based guidelines, and adaptable to local environments.

Coverage of cancer services in Australia and providers' views on service gaps: findings from a national cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: In response to the increasing cancer prevalence and the evolving health service landscape across the public and private health sectors in Australia, this study aimed to map cancer services and identify factors associated with service provision and important service gaps. METHODS: A prospective, cross-sectional survey was conducted throughout 2016. Extensive search strategies identified Government or privately-owned, hospital or community-based healthcare organisations with dedicated cancer services. One nominated staff member from each organisation answered a purpose specific online/paper questionnaire. Descriptive statistics, standardised rates, and single level and multilevel multinomial logistic regression were used to analyse the data. Analysis was augmented with a qualitative descriptive analysis of open-ended questions. RESULTS: From the 295 eligible organisations with a cancer service in Australia, 93.2% participated in the survey. After adjusting for remoteness, for-profit companies were significantly more likely than Government operated services to provide only one or two types of cancer services (e.g. radiotherapy) in a limited range of settings (e.g. day hospital with no in-patient or home care) (p < 0.001) and less likely to provide comprehensive cancer services (p < 0.001). After adjusting for ownership and the respondent's role in the organisation, respondents located in remote regions of Australia were more likely to identify cancer services that are dependent upon specialist medical practitioners as the most important service gaps in their region (p = 0.003). Despite 76.0% of organisations across Australia offering some type of supportive care or survivorship services, providers identified this group of services as the most pressing service gaps in major cities, rural and remote regions alike (standardised rate: 47.9% (95%CI: 43.6-57.4%); p < .000). This included the need for improved integration, outreach and affordability. CONCLUSIONS: The broad range of cancer services, settings and ownership identified by this survey highlights the complexity of the Australian healthcare system that cancer survivors must navigate and the challenges of providing comprehensive cancer care particularly in rural and remote regions. Whilst the significant role of supportive care and survivorship services are increasingly being recognised, the findings from this survey support calls for innovative service models and funding mechanisms that expand the focus from preventing and treating cancer to supporting cancer survivors throughout the cancer continuum and promoting the delivery of integrated and equitable cancer care across the public and private sectors.

Study protocol for a controlled trial of an eHealth system utilising patient reported outcome measures for personalised treatment and care: PROMPT-Care 2.0.

BACKGROUND: Routine assessment and clinical utilisation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures can lead to improved patient outcomes. The PROMPT-Care eHealth system facilitates PRO data capture from cancer patients, data linkage and retrieval to support clinical decisions, patient self-management, and shared care. Pilot testing demonstrated acceptability and feasibility of PROMPT-Care Version 1.0. This study aims to implement PROMPT-Care Version 2.0 and determine its efficacy in reducing emergency department (ED) presentations, and improving chemotherapy delivery and health service referrals, compared to usual care. METHODS: Groups eligible to participate in the intervention arm of this controlled trial are patients receiving cancer care (including follow-up). PROMPT-Care patients will complete monthly assessments (distress, symptoms, unmet needs) until voluntary withdrawal or death. In Version 1.0, the care team accessed patients' clinical feedback reports in 'real time' to guide their care, and patients received links to support their self-management, tailored to their PRO responses. Version 2.0 was extended to include: i) an additional alert system notifying the care team of ongoing unresolved clinical issues, ii) patient self-management resources, and iii) an auto-populated Treatment Summary and Survivorship Care Plan (SCP). The control population will be patients extracted from hospital databases of the general cancer patient population who were seen at the participating cancer therapy centres during the study period, with a ratio of 1:4 of intervention to control patients. A minimum sample size of 1760 (352 intervention and 1408 control) patients will detect a 14% reduction in the number of ED presentations (primary outcome) in the PROMPT-Care group compared with the control group. Intervention patients will provide feedback on system usability and value of the self-management materials; oncology staff will provide feedback on usefulness of PROMPT-Care reports, response to clinical alerts, impact on routine care, and usefulness of the SCPs; and GPs will provide feedback on the usefulness of the SCPs and attitudes towards shared-care models of survivorship care planning. DISCUSSION: This study will inform the PROMPT-Care system's impact on healthcare utilisation and utility as an alternative model for ongoing supportive care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12616000615482 ) on 12th May 2016 ( www.anzctr.org.au ).

Guidance for establishing an integrative oncology service in the Australian healthcare setting-a discussion paper.

There is an obvious mismatch between the high reported rates of use of traditional and complementary medicines (T&CM) by Australian cancer patients and cancer survivors and the low numbers of Australian cancer services integrating T&CM. An estimated 65% of Australian cancer patients use at least one form of T&CM. Over half use T&CM in conjunction with conventional cancer therapy. Yet, less than 20% of Australian hospital cancer care facilities provide access to T&CM. This compares to around 70% of UK cancer care facilities offering at least one T&CM therapy. Barriers to developing integrative oncology services include determining an appropriate service model and revenue structure; concerns with ethical and legal issues such as regulations and credentialing; and inadequate high-quality scientific evidence demonstrating safety and effectiveness, including concerns about the possibility of adversely affecting chemotherapy or radiotherapy treatment. This paper aims to provide general guidance and practical strategies for those seeking to develop integrative oncology services in Australian cancer care facilities.

Australian integrative oncology services: a mixed-method study exploring the views of cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: The significant use of traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) by cancer survivors is well documented. The aim of this study was to explore cancer survivors' views on integrating T&CM services with conventional cancer care. METHOD: A mixed-method study design with an emphasis on qualitative methodology was used to conduct and analyse four focus group interviews and an on-line survey. Purposive sampling recruited 33 cancer survivors and caregivers from Arabic, Vietnamese, Chinese and Anglo-European Australian backgrounds who participated in one of four focus group interviews, and 121 cancer survivors who responded to an on-line survey. The inductive thematic analysis was augmented with a descriptive statistical analysis. RESULTS: Most participants had used T&CM therapies or consulted T&CM practitioners as an adjuvant during and/or after their initial cancer treatment. Two themes emerged: 'positive perceptions and experiences' and 'barriers and unmet needs'. Participants emphasised that T&CM was not a 'luxury item', rather it was considered important for managing side effects and comorbidities, rehabilitation and quality of life. A wide range of complex, interrelated barriers and solutions to IO service provision and access were identified. Structural barriers included inadequate service provision, medical practitioner attitudes, logistical constraints and funding. Personal barriers were influenced by the severity of impairment and disability; attitudes, beliefs and knowledge about T&CM; and available resources (e.g. finances, time, transport). Unmet need and inequitable access was exacerbated by geographical location, ethnicity and ability to pay. There was a mismatch between where participants were accessing T&CM services and their preference for IO service delivery. Participants perceived hospital-based IO services availability to have several benefits, including the T&CM practitioners having more expert knowledge about cancer care, the convenience of co-locating oncology services, and potentially lower out-of-pocket costs. CONCLUSION: Patients' use, preferences and needs for T&CM services in the oncology setting are important for informing service provision. Inequitable, unmet need reflected the increasing demand and expectation from patients for their oncology teams to be well informed about the benefits, risks and indications for T&CM use, and for the public and private health sectors to formally integrate and fund IO services.

Integrative oncology and complementary medicine cancer services in Australia: findings from a national cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Individuals living with and beyond a cancer diagnosis are increasingly using complementary therapies and medicines (CM) to enhance the effectiveness of cancer treatment, manage treatment-related side effects, improve quality-of-life, and promote self-efficacy. In response to the increasing use and demand for CM by cancer patients, interest in the implementation of Integrative Oncology (IO) services that provide CM alongside conventional cancer care in Australia and abroad has developed. The extent that cancer services in Australia are integrating CM is uncertain. Thus, the aim of this study was to identify IO services in Australia and explore barriers and facilitators to IO service provision. METHODS: A national, cross-sectional survey of healthcare organisations was conducted in 2016. Organisations in the public and private sectors, including not-for-profit organisations that provided cancer care in hospital or community setting, were included. RESULTS: A response rate of 93.2% was achieved (n = 275/295). Seventy-one organisations (25.8%) across all states/territories, except the Northern Territory, offered IO albeit in a limited amount by many. Most common IO services included massage, psychological-wellbeing, and movement modalities in hospital outpatient or inpatient settings. There were only a few instances where biological-based complementary medicine (CM) therapies were prescribed. Funding was often mixed, including patient contributions, philanthropy, funding by the organisation, and volunteer practitioners. Of the 204 non-IO providers, 80.9% had never provided any IO service. Overwhelmingly, the most common barrier to IO was a lack of funding, followed by uncertainty about patient demand, choice of services, and establishing such services. Less-common barriers were a lack of evidence, and support from oncologists or management. More funding, education and training, and building the evidence-base for CM were the most commonly suggested solutions. CONCLUSION: IO is increasingly being provided in Australia, although service provision remains limited or non-existent in many areas. Mismatches appear to exist between low IO service provision, CM evidence, and high CM use by cancer patients. Greater strategic planning and policy guidance is indicated to ensure the appropriate provision of, and equitable access to IO services for all Australian cancer survivors.

eHealth System for Collecting and Utilizing Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Personalized Treatment and Care (PROMPT-Care) Among Cancer Patients: Mixed Methods Approach to Evaluate Feasibility and Acceptability.

BACKGROUND: Despite accumulating evidence indicating that collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and transferring results to the treating health professional in real time has the potential to improve patient well-being and cancer outcomes, this practice is not widespread. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of PROMPT-Care (Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Personalized Treatment and Care), a newly developed electronic health (eHealth) system that facilitates PRO data capture from cancer patients, data linkage and retrieval to support clinical decisions and patient self-management, and data retrieval to support ongoing evaluation and innovative research. METHODS: We developed an eHealth system in consultation with content-specific expert advisory groups and tested it with patients receiving treatment or follow-up care in two hospitals in New South Wales, Australia, over a 3-month period. Participants were recruited in clinic and completed self-report Web-based assessments either just before their upcoming clinical consultation or every 4 weeks if in follow-up care. A mixed methods approach was used to evaluate feasibility and acceptability of PROMPT-Care; data collected throughout the study informed the accuracy and completeness of data transfer procedures, and extent of missing data was determined from participants' assessments. Patients participated in cognitive interviews while completing their first assessment and completed evaluation surveys and interviews at study-end to assess system acceptability and usefulness of patient self-management resources, and oncology staff were interviewed at study-end to determine the acceptability and perceived usefulness of real-time PRO reporting. RESULTS: A total of 42 patients consented to the study; 7 patients were withdrawn before starting the intervention primarily because of changes in eligibility. Overall, 35 patients (13 on treatment and 22 in follow-up) completed 67 assessments during the study period. Mean completeness of patient-reported data was 93%, with 100% accuracy of data transfer. Ten patients completed cognitive interviews, 28 completed evaluation surveys, and 14 completed evaluation interviews at study-end. PROMPT-Care patient acceptability was high-100% (28/28) reported the time to complete the Web-based assessments (average 15 min) as about right, most willing to answer more questions (79%, 22/28 yes), 96% (27/28) found the Web-based assessment easier or same as completing a paper copy, and they valued the self-management resources . Oncology staff (n=5) also reported high acceptability and potential feasibility of the system. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and oncology staff found the PROMPT-Care system to be highly acceptable, and the results suggest that it would be feasible to implement it into an oncology setting. Suggested modifications to the patient assessment survey, clinician access to the reports, and system requirements will be made as part of the next stage of large-scale testing and future implementation of the system as part of routine care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN1261500135294; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=369299&isReview=true (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6lzylG5A0).

MRI geometric distortion: Impact on tangential whole-breast IMRT.

The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) geometric distortions when using MRI for target delineation and planning for whole-breast, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Residual system distortions and combined systematic and patient-induced distortions are considered. This retrospective study investigated 18 patients who underwent whole-breast external beam radiotherapy, where both CT and MRIs were acquired for treatment planning. Distortion phantoms were imaged on two MRI systems, dedicated to radiotherapy planning (a wide, closed-bore 3T and an open-bore 1T). Patient scans were acquired on the 3T system. To simulate MRI-based planning, distortion maps representing residual system distortions were generated via deformable registration between phantom CT and MRIs. Patient CT images and structures were altered to match the residual system distortion measured by the phantoms on each scanner. The patient CTs were also registered to the corresponding patient MRI scans, to assess patient and residual system effects. Tangential IMRT plans were generated and optimized on each resulting CT dataset, then propagated to the original patient CT space. The resulting dose distributions were then evaluated with respect to the standard clinically acceptable DVH and visual assessment criteria. Maximum residual systematic distortion was measured to be 7.9 mm (95%<4.7mm) and 11.9 mm (95%<4.6mm) for the 3T and 1T scanners, respectively, which did not result in clinically unacceptable plans. Eight of the plans accounting for patient and systematic distortions were deemed clinically unacceptable when assessed on the original CT. For these plans, the mean difference in PTV V95 (volume receiving 95% prescription dose) was 0.13±2.51% and -0.73±1.93% for right- and left-sided patients, respectively. Residual system distortions alone had minimal impact on the dosimetry for the two scanners investigated. The combination of MRI systematic and patient-related distortions can result in unacceptable dosimetry for whole-breast IMRT, a potential issue when considering MRI-only radiotherapy treatment planning. PACS number(s): 87.61.-c, 87.57.cp, 87.57.nj, 87.55.D.

Experience of patients considering or using checkpoint inhibitors in cancer treatment: a systematic review of qualitative research.

Increasing numbers of patients with cancer are considering or undergoing immunotherapy, however, little is known about patients' perspectives on this treatment. We undertook a systematic review for use by clinicians and researchers, consolidating published qualitative research studies on patient experience of checkpoint inhibitor therapy. A search of Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO was carried out for publications in English to 30 June 2022. Publications were selected if they reported a qualitative study of patient experience with checkpoint inhibitor therapy for cancer, either by patients or their families or carers. Quality was appraised using the Johanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tool for qualitative studies. A thematic synthesis was conducted. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standard was followed. We identified 17 eligible studies published between 2017 and 2022, 9 using mixed methods, and 8 solely using qualitative methods. Most studies reported on the experiences of patients with advanced stage melanoma and were using the earliest approved checkpoint inhibitors for cancer therapy. Studies met most formal quality criteria but varied in the extent of their qualitative explorations of data; some mixed methods studies had limited reporting of qualitative results. Through thematic synthesis, we categorized study findings into four domains: (1) treatment decision-making; (2) success with immunotherapy; (3) treatment-related adverse events (AEs); and (4) quality of life on immunotherapy. Our review identified several areas with potential for improving the care system. These include, for example: routinely linking patients to peers who have experienced this therapy; improving the capacity of patients and carers to identify and report AEs faster; and supporting patients and carers to live with changed circumstances after successful treatment. Most studies focused on patients who had successful treatment, effectively excluding those who do not respond or who discontinue due to serious side effects; future research targets are suggested.

Multidisciplinary team meeting Chairs' attitudes and perceived facilitators, barriers and ideal improvements to meeting functionality: A qualitative study.

AIM: Oncology care provision by multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) is widely acknowledged as best practice. Formal team meetings, led by chairpersons, coordinate decisions on diagnosis, staging, treatment planning, and review. This study addresses a gap in meeting Chairs' perspectives on factors affecting functionality across the meeting cycle, from pre-meeting patient list triage to post-meeting dissemination of recommendations. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted in person with Chairs within two urban geographical regions in New South Wales, Australia as part of a larger project. Though the population of oncology MDT Chairs in Australia is small, the richness and depth of data from nine Chairs were considered to be valuable knowledge in support of extant literature on meeting functionality. An integrated deductive-inductive approach was applied to data analysis. RESULTS: Perceived facilitators, barriers, and ideals relating to pre-meeting, in-meeting, and post-meeting functionality were identified across five pre-determined analytic categories: the team; meeting infrastructure; meeting organization and logistics; patient-centered clinical decision-making, and; team governance. Key barriers included inadequate information technology, limited support staff, and lack of dedicated time for Chair duties. Corresponding facilitators included robust Information Technology infrastructure and support, provision of clinically knowledgeable MDT meeting coordinators, and formal employment recognition of Chairs' responsibilities and skill sets. CONCLUSION: Chairs across various tumor streams develop workarounds to overcome barriers and ensure quality meeting outcomes. With more robust support they could enhance value by sharing evidence, conducting audits, and engaging in research. The findings highlight the need for healthcare systems to support tumor stream clinical networks by allocating greater resources to prioritize multidisciplinary meetings and cancer care decision-making.

The impact of breast cosmetic and functional outcomes on quality of life: long-term results from the St. George and Wollongong randomized breast boost trial.

The aims of this study were to evaluate the impact of cosmetic and functional outcomes after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and radiation on quality of life (QOL). In this exploratory analysis; baseline, 5 and 10 years data of patient's assessment of breast cosmesis, arm swelling/pain, limitation of movement, loss of feeling in fingers and breast sensitivity/tenderness were dichotomized and their impact on QOL (QLQ-C30) were assessed. Multivariable modelling was also performed to assess associations with QOL. The St. George and Wollongong randomized trial randomized 688 patients into the boost and no boost arms. 609, 580, and 428 patients had baseline, 5 and 10 years cosmetic data available, respectively. Similar numbers had the various functional assessments in the corresponding period. By univariate analysis, cosmesis and a number of functional outcomes were highly associated with QOL. Adjusted multivariate modelling showed that cosmesis remained associated with QOL at 5 and 10 years. Breast sensitivity, arm pain, breast separation, age and any distant cancer event were also associated with QOL on multivariate modelling at 10 years. This study highlights the importance of maintaining favorable cosmetic and functional outcomes following BCS. In addition, the clinically and statistically significant relationship between functional outcomes and QOL shows the importance for clinicians and allied health professionals in identifying, discussing, managing, and limiting these effects in women with breast cancer in order to maintain QOL.

Development of an age- and comorbidity- adjusted optimal radiotherapy utilisation rate for lung, rectal, prostate and cervical cancers.

INTRODUCTION: Optimal radiotherapy utilisation (RTU) modelling estimates the proportion of people with cancer who would benefit from radiotherapy. Assessment of comorbidities is an important component of the assessment of suitability for radiotherapy in addition to chronological age and life expectancy. Comorbidities have not been considered in previous optimal RTU models. We aimed to develop an age- and comorbidity- adjusted optimal RTU model for patients with lung, rectal, prostate, and cervical cancer, and compare them to actual RTU rates, with a particular focus on those aged 80+ years, METHODS: New South Wales (NSW) Cancer Registry data (2010-2014) linked to radiotherapy data (2010-2015) and hospitalisation data (2008-2015) were used to determine the number of patients diagnosed with lung, rectal, prostate and cervical cancer. The Cancer Specific C3 'all sites' comorbidity index was calculated from hospital diagnosis data for each patient to determine suitability for radiotherapy. The index was then incorporated into a tumour site-specific decision tree model. The actual RTU was also calculated using the linked datasets. RESULTS: 14,696 patients were diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), 1839 with small cell lung cancer (SCLC), 5551 with rectal cancer, 30,935 with prostate cancer and 1216 with cervical cancer in New South Wales from 2010-2014. The proportion of patients aged 80+ years at cancer diagnosis was 25% (3603 patients), 15% (279 patients), 17% (943 patients), 12% (3745 patients), and 7% (88 patients) respectively. The age- and comorbidity- adjusted optimal RTU rates for patients aged 80+ years using the C3 index were 49% (NSCLC), 49% (SCLC), 43% (rectal), 51% (prostate) and 40% (cervical). The corresponding actual RTU rates for patients aged 80+ years were 25%, 32%, 27%, 16%, and 56%. CONCLUSION: Even after adjusting for age and comorbidities, the actual radiotherapy utilisation rates were lower than optimal radiotherapy utilisation rates in patients aged 80+ years except for patients with cervical cancer. This warrants further assessment and research into reasons and solutions.

Radiotherapy utilisation rates for patients with cancer as a function of age: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: There is an increasing incidence of cancer in older people, but limited data on radiotherapy uptake, and in particular, radiotherapy utilisation (RTU) rates. The RTU rate for older adults with cancer may be lower than recommended due to lower tolerance for radiotherapy as well as additional comorbidities, reduced life expectancy and travel for treatment. Radiotherapy use must be aligned with best available, age-specific evidence to ensure older adults with cancer receive optimal benefit without harms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to synthesise the published data on the actual RTU rate for patients with cancer as a function of age. MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched to identify relevant population-based and hospital-based cohort studies on radiotherapy utilisation for all age groups, published in English, from 1 January 1990 to 1 July 2020. We focused on the following common cancers in older adults for which radiotherapy is recommended: breast, prostate, lung, rectal cancer, glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), and cervical cancer. Age-specific radiotherapy utilisation data were extracted and analysed as a narrative synthesis. RESULTS: From 2606 studies screened, 75 cohort and population-based studies were identified with age-specific radiotherapy utilisation data. The total number of patients in the 75 studies was 4,792,138. The RTU rate decreased with increasing age for all tumour sites analysed, except for patients receiving curative radiotherapy as definitive treatment for prostate or cervical cancer. This reduction with increasing age was demonstrated in both palliative and curative settings. DISCUSSION: There is a global reduction in radiotherapy utilisation with increasing age for most tumour sites. The reduction in delivery of radiotherapy warrants further examination and evidence-based guidelines specific to this population.

Patterns of curative treatment for non-small cell lung cancer in New South Wales, Australia.

INTRODUCTION: There is a lack of large population-based studies examining patterns of curative treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in Australia. This study aimed to evaluate the utilization of curative treatment for NCSLC at a population level and identify factors associated with its use in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with localized or locoregional NSCLC between 2009 and 2014 were identified from the NSW Central Cancer Registry. Curative treatment was defined as surgery or radiotherapy with a 45 Gy minimum dose. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to investigate factors associated with the receipt of curative treatment. A Cox proportional-hazards regression model was used to analyze the factors associated with 2-year overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of the 5722 patients diagnosed with NSCLC in the study period, 3355 (59%) patients received curative treatment and 2367 (41%) patients did not receive curative treatment. The receipt of curative treatment was significantly associated with younger patients, female gender, localized disease, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) = 0. The use of curative treatment increased significantly over time from 2009 (55%) to 2014 (63%) and varied significantly from 24% to 70% between local health districts (LHDs) of residence. Younger age, female gender, localized disease, CCI = 0, and overseas country of birth were significantly associated with 2-year OS. The 2-year OS significantly improved from 70% in 2009 to 77% in 2014 for patients who received curative treatment. CONCLUSION: The use of curative treatment for patients with potentially curable NSCLC was low at 59%. However, the use of curative treatment and survival have increased over time. Significant variation was noted in the use of curative treatment between LHDs.