Multi-Institutional Analysis of Cancer Patient Exposure, Perceptions, and Trust in Information Sources Regarding Complementary and Alternative Medicine.

PURPOSE: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use during cancer treatment is controversial. We aim to evaluate contemporary CAM use, patient perceptions and attitudes, and trust in various sources of information regarding CAM. METHODS: A multi-institutional questionnaire was distributed to patients receiving cancer treatment. Collected information included respondents' clinical and demographic characteristics, rates of CAM exposure/use, information sources regarding CAM, and trust in each information source. Comparisons between CAM users and nonusers were performed with chi-squared tests and one-way analysis of variance. Multivariable logistic regression models for trust in physician and nonphysician sources of information regarding CAM were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 749 respondents, the most common goals of CAM use were management of symptoms (42.2%) and treatment of cancer (30.4%). Most CAM users learned of CAM from nonphysician sources. Of CAM users, 27% reported not discussing CAM with their treating oncologists. Overall trust in physicians was high in both CAM users and nonusers. The only predictor of trust in physician sources of information was income >$100,000 in US dollars per year. Likelihood of trust in nonphysician sources of information was higher in females and lower in those with graduate degrees. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of patients with cancer are using CAM, some with the goal of treating their cancer. Although patients are primarily exposed to CAM through nonphysician sources of information, trust in physicians remains high. More research is needed to improve patient-clinician communication regarding CAM use.

Using Holistic Residency Applicant Review and Selection in Radiation Oncology to Enhance Diversity and Inclusion-An ASTRO SCAROP-ADROP-ARRO Collaboration.

Disproportionate sex, racial, and ethnic diversity remains in the radiation oncology physician workforce despite widespread awareness and longitudinal efforts to improve representation. In this collaborative review, we define the rationale and components of holistic review and how it can be best used to provide a comprehensive evaluation of applicants to residency programs in radiation oncology. We initially discuss the current state of diversity in the field of radiation oncology and highlight the components of the residency selection process that may serve to perpetuate existing biases. Subsequently, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and Association of American Medical Colleges holistic review framework is reviewed in detail to demonstrate the balanced assessment of potential applicants. The implementation of holistic review in medical school and residency selection to date is examined to underscore the potential value of holistic review in the radiation oncology residency selection process. Finally, recommendations for the practical implementation of holistic review in radiation oncology trainee selection are outlined.

Postoperative radiotherapy is associated with improved overall survival for alveolar ridge squamous cell carcinoma with adverse pathologic features.

BACKGROUND: Alveolar ridge squamous cell carcinoma (ARSCC) is poorly represented in randomized trials. METHODS: Adults in the National Cancer Database diagnosed with ARSCC between 2010 and 2014 who should be considered for postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-defined risk factors were identified. RESULTS: Eight hundred forty-five (58%) of 1457 patients meeting the inclusion criteria received PORT. PORT was associated with improved overall survival (OS) on unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.98, P = .02) and multivariable (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.94, P = .002) analyses. PORT was associated with significantly improved 5-year OS for patients with 1 (68% vs 58%, P < .001), 2 (52% vs 31%, P < .001), and ≥3 (38% vs 24%, P < .001) NCCN-defined risk factors. Prognostic variables significantly associated with worse OS on multivariable analysis included advanced age, primary tumor size ≥3 cm, high grade, positive margin(s), stage N2-3, level IV/V nodal metastasis, and extranodal extension. CONCLUSION: PORT for resected ARSCC with adverse pathologic features is associated with significantly improved OS.

Predictors of Timely Access of Oncology Services and Advanced-Stage Cancer in an HIV-Endemic Setting.

BACKGROUND: Three-quarters of cancer deaths occur in resource-limited countries, and delayed presentation contributes to poor outcome. In Botswana, where more than half of cancers arise in HIV-infected individuals, we sought to explore predictors of timely oncology care and evaluate the hypothesis that engagement in longitudinal HIV care improves access. METHODS: Consenting patients presenting for oncology care from October 2010 to September 2014 were interviewed and their records were reviewed. Cox and logistic models were used to examine the effect of HIV and other predictors on time to oncology care and presentation with advanced cancer (stage III or IV). RESULTS: Of the 1,146 patients analyzed, 584 (51%) had HIV and 615 (54%) had advanced cancer. The initial clinic visit occurred a mean of 144 days (median 29, interquartile range 0-185) after symptom onset, but subsequent mean time to oncology care was 406 days (median 160, interquartile range 59-653). HIV status was not significantly associated with time to oncology care (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-1.06). However, patients who reported using traditional medicine/healers engaged in oncology care significantly faster (aHR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09-1.40) and those with advanced cancer entered care earlier (aHR 1.48, 95% CI 1.30-1.70). Factors significantly associated with advanced cancer included income <$50 per month (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.35, 95% CI 1.05-1.75), male sex (aOR 1.45, 95% CI 1.12-1.87), and pain as the presenting symptom (aOR 1.39, 95% CI 1.03-1.88). CONCLUSION: Longitudinal HIV care did not reduce the substantial delay to cancer treatment. Research focused on reducing health system delay through coordination and navigation is needed. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The majority (54%) of patients in this large cohort from Botswana presented with advanced-stage cancer despite universal access to free health care. Median time from first symptom to specialized oncology care was 13 months. For HIV-infected patients (51% of total), regular longitudinal contact with the health system, through quarterly doctor visits for HIV management, was not successful in providing faster linkages into oncology care. However, patients who used traditional medicine/healers engaged in cancer care faster, indicating potential for leveraging traditional healers as partners in early cancer detection. New strategies are urgently needed to facilitate diagnosis and timely treatment of cancer in low- and middle-income countries.

Establishing and Delivering Quality Radiation Therapy in Resource-Constrained Settings: The Story of Botswana.

There is a global cancer crisis, and it is disproportionately affecting resource-constrained settings, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Radiotherapy is a critical and cost-effective component of a comprehensive cancer control plan that offers the potential for cure, control, and palliation of disease in greater than 50% of patients with cancer. Globally, LMICs do not have adequate access to quality radiation therapy and this gap is particularly pronounced in sub-Saharan Africa. Although there are numerous challenges in implementing a radiation therapy program in a low-resource setting, providing more equitable global access to radiotherapy is a responsibility and investment worth prioritizing. We outline a systems approach and a series of key questions to direct strategy toward establishing quality radiation services in LMICs, and highlight the story of private-public investment in Botswana from the late 1990s to the present. After assessing the need and defining the value of radiation, we explore core investments required, barriers that need to be overcome, and assets that can be leveraged to establish a radiation program. Considerations addressed include infrastructure; machine choice; quality assurance and patient safety; acquisition, development, and retention of human capital; governmental engagement; public-private partnerships; international collaborations; and the need to critically evaluate the program to foster further growth and sustainability.

Cancer Treatment in Patients With HIV Infection and Non-AIDS-Defining Cancers: A Survey of US Oncologists.

PURPOSE: HIV-infected individuals with non-AIDS-defining cancers are less likely to receive cancer treatment compared with uninfected individuals. We sought to identify provider-level factors influencing the delivery of oncology care to HIV-infected patients. METHODS: A survey was mailed to 500 randomly selected US medical and radiation oncologists. The primary outcome was delivery of standard treatment, assessed by responses to three specialty-specific management questions. We used the χ(2) test to evaluate associations between delivery of standard treatment, provider demographics, and perceptions of HIV-infected individuals. Multivariable logistic regression identified associations using factor analysis to combine several correlated survey questions. RESULTS: Our response rate was 60%; 69% of respondents felt that available cancer management guidelines were insufficient for the care of HIV-infected patients with cancer; 45% never or rarely discussed their cancer management plan with an HIV specialist; 20% and 15% of providers were not comfortable discussing cancer treatment adverse effects and prognosis with their HIV-infected patients with cancer, respectively; 79% indicated that they would provide standard cancer treatment to HIV-infected patients. In multivariable analysis, physicians comfortable discussing adverse effects and prognosis were more likely to provide standard cancer treatment (adjusted odds ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.12 to 2.07). Physicians with concerns about toxicity and efficacy of treatment were significantly less likely to provide standard cancer treatment (adjusted odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.85). CONCLUSION: Provider-level factors are associated with delivery of nonstandard cancer treatment to HIV-infected patients. Policy change, provider education, and multidisciplinary collaboration are needed to improve access to cancer treatment.

Effect of practice integration between urologists and radiation oncologists on prostate cancer treatment patterns.

PURPOSE: National attention has focused on whether urology-radiation oncology practice integration, known as integrated prostate cancer centers, contributes to the use of intensity modulated radiation therapy, a common and expensive prostate cancer treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined prostate cancer treatment patterns before and after conversion of a urology practice to an integrated prostate cancer center in July 2006. Using the SEER (Statistics, Epidemiology and End Results)-Medicare database, we identified patients 65 years old or older in 1 statewide registry diagnosed with nonmetastatic prostate cancer between 2004 and 2007. We classified patients into 3 groups, including 1--those seen by integrated prostate cancer center physicians (exposure group), 2--those living in the same hospital referral region who were not seen by integrated prostate cancer center physicians (hospital referral region control group) and 3--those living elsewhere in the state (state control group). We compared changes in treatment among the 3 groups, adjusting for patient, clinical and socioeconomic factors. RESULTS: Compared with the 8.1 ppt increase in adjusted intensity modulated radiation therapy use in the state control group, the use of this therapy increased 20.3 ppts (95% CI 13.4, 27.1) in the integrated prostate cancer center group and 19.2 ppts (95% CI 9.6, 28.9) in the hospital referral region control group. Androgen deprivation therapy, for which Medicare reimbursement decreased sharply, similarly decreased in integrated prostate cancer center and hospital referral region controls. Prostatectomy decreased significantly in the integrated prostate cancer center group. CONCLUSIONS: Coincident with the conversion of a urology group practice to an integrated prostate cancer center, we observed an increase in intensity modulated radiation therapy and a decrease in androgen deprivation therapy in patients seen by integrated prostate cancer center physicians and those seen in the surrounding health care market that were not observed in the remainder of the state.