Implementation Strategies to Increase Clinical Trial Enrollment in a Community-Academic Partnership and Impact on Hispanic Representation: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis.

PURPOSE: Community-academic partnerships have the potential to improve access to clinical trials for under-represented minority patients who more often receive cancer treatment in community settings. In 2017, the Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) Cancer Center began opening investigator-initiated clinical trials in radiation oncology in targeted community-based partner sites with a high potential to improve diverse population accrual. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a set of implementation strategies for increasing overall community-based enrollment and the resulting proportional enrollment of Hispanic patients on trials on the basis of availability in community-based partner sites. METHODS: An interrupted time series analysis evaluating implementation strategies was conducted from April 2018 to September 2021. Descriptive analysis ofHispanic enrollment on investigator-initiated randomized therapeutic radiation trials open at community-based sites was compared with those open only at themain academic center. RESULTS: Overall, 84 patients were enrolled in clinical trials in the MSK Alliance, of which 48 (56%) identified as Hispanic. The quarterly patient enrollment pre- vs postimplementation increased from 1.39 (95% CI, -3.67 to 6.46) to 9.42 (95% CI, 2.05 to 16.78; P5 .017). In the investigator-initiated randomized therapeutic radiation trials open in the MSK Alliance, Hispanic representation was 11.5% and 35.9% in twometastatic trials and 14.2% in a proton versus photon trial. Inmatched trials open only at the main academic center, Hispanic representation was 5.6%, 6.0%, and 4.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: A combination of practice-level and physician-level strategies implemented at community-based partner sites was associated with increased clinical trial enrollment, which translated to improved Hispanic representation. This supports the role Q:2 of strategic community-academic partnerships in addressing disparities in clinical trial enrollment.

Linear accelerator-based single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery versus hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for intact and resected brain metastases up to 3 cm: A multi-institutional retrospective analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SF-SRS) is typically used to provide local control of brain metastases. Recently, hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HF-SRT) has been utilized for large brain metastases. Data comparing these two modalities are limited for brain metastases ≤3 cm. METHODS: Patients with brain metastases receiving linear accelerator-based SF-SRS or HF-SRT were identified at three institutions. Local progression-free survival (LPFS), intracranial progression-free survival (ICPFS), overall survival (OS), and radionecrosis-free survival (RNFS) were determined from time of treatment. RESULTS: 108 patients (76 intact, 32 resected) with 184 brain metastases (142 intact, 42 resected) were included. There were no significant differences between SF-SRS and HF-SRT for intact metastases in 1-year LPFS (62.8% vs. 58.5%, p=0.631), ICPFS (56.9% vs. 55.3%, p=0.300), and OS (71.6% vs. 70.6%, p=0.096), or for resected metastases in 1-year LPFS (67.3% vs. 57.8%, p=0.288), ICPFS (64.8% vs. 57%, p=0.291), and OS (64.8% vs. 66.1%, p=0.603). There were also no significant differences in 1-year RNFS between SF-SRS and HF-SRT (92% vs. 92%, p=0.325). CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in LPFS, ICPFS, OS, and RNFS between SF-SRS and HF-SRT for brain metastases ≤3 cm suggesting SF-SRS may be preferred due to similar outcomes and reduced number of fractions.

Impact of Health Insurance Status on Prostate Cancer Treatment Modality Selection in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: A variety of treatment modalities are available for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer in the United States. In addition to clinical factors, treatment modality choice may be influenced by a patient's insurance status. Using a national data set, we investigated the relationship between insurance status and prostate cancer treatment modality selection among nonelderly men in the United States. METHODS: Nonelderly men age 18 to 64 years treated for localized prostate cancer from 2010 to 2014 were identified within the National Cancer Database. Patients with no insurance, Medicaid, or private insurance were included. The χ and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the association of insurance status, other demographic and facility factors, and D'Amico risk classification with treatment modality. RESULTS: We identified 135,937 patients with either no insurance (2.8%), Medicaid (4.2%), or private insurance (92.9%) treated for prostate cancer who underwent cancer-directed treatment or active surveillance between 2010 and 2014. Patients with private insurance were more likely to receive minimally invasive surgery (61.4% vs. 35.4%, respectively; P<0.001) and less likely to receive external beam radiotherapy (10.9% vs. 26.9%, respectively; P<0.001) than patients with no insurance. On multivariable analysis, among patients with no insurance and private insurance, private insurance was the strongest predictor of receipt of minimally invasive surgery (adjusted odds ratio, 2.61; 95% confidence interval, 2.44-2.79; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Insurance status is a strong predictor of prostate cancer treatment modality among nonelderly men in the United States.

Chemoradiation after FOLFIRINOX for borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of FOLFIRINOX (FX) followed by consolidative chemoradiation (CRT) in borderline resectable (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) has not been extensively studied. We sought to evaluate outcomes and toxicities of this regimen. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 33 patients with BRPC or LAPC treated with FX followed by CRT. Radiotherapy was directed at the primary tumor and any involved nodes (84.8% received 50-50.4 Gy with standard fractionation and concurrent capecitabine, while 15.2% of patients received 36 Gy in 15 fractions with weekly gemcitabine). Toxicities of FX and CRT were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v4.0), and radiographic response was evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Overall survival (OS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and local control (LC) were calculated using Kaplan-Meier analyses, and a Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the impact of clinicopathologic factors on OS. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 19.9 months and patients received a median of 6.4 months of chemotherapy (range, 2.2-12.0 months). There were more T4 tumors than T3 tumors (70% vs. 30%). Grade ≥3 toxicities were low, including fatigue (9.1%), diarrhea (6.1%), neuropathy (6.1%), and dehydration (6.1%). R0 surgical resection was achieved in 5 patients (15.2%) after CRT. Median OS was 22.0 months (91% at 1 year and 45% at 2 years). Median DMFS was 17.8 months (69% at 1 year and 35% at 2 years). LC was 84% at 1 year and 55% at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: OS is promising with the use of FX in BRPC and LAPC, and consolidative CRT was well tolerated in this cohort. Therefore, the role of radiation after multi-agent chemotherapy should be further evaluated in prospective trials.

Patterns of care and outcomes for use of concurrent chemoradiotherapy over radiotherapy alone for anaplastic gliomas.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The role of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for anaplastic gliomas is undefined and patterns of care are under-reported. To address the knowledge gap, we examined use of CRT for grade III gliomas compared to radiotherapy (RT) alone. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In an observational study design cohort from the National Cancer Database, we identified 4437 adult patients receiving surgery followed by either CRT or RT for supratentorial anaplastic glioma in 2003-2011. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to assess factors associated with use of CRT. Overall survival (OS) was assessed by the Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank tests, Cox proportional hazards regression modeling, and propensity score matching. RESULTS: Receipt of CRT (vs. RT) was associated with recent year of diagnosis (OR for 2011 (vs. 2003) 3.36, 95% CI 2.49-4.54) and having astrocytoma (vs. oligodendroglioma) (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.15-1.63). Patients receiving CRT had a lower adjusted hazard of death (hazard ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.65-0.79). Outcomes were worse for patients ≥60 (HR 6.94, 95% CI 6.09-7.91) and astrocytomas (HR 2.08, 95% CI 1.85-2.34). CONCLUSION: Use of concurrent CRT is associated with more recent year of diagnosis and improved survival relative to RT alone.

Role of Adjuvant Treatment in Esophageal Cancer With Incidental Pathologic Node Positivity.

BACKGROUND: The optimal adjuvant treatment for cT1-2 N0 esophageal cancer patients found to have pathologic nodal involvement after an upfront operation is unclear. This study investigated the effects of postoperative chemotherapy and chemoradiation therapy on overall survival in cT1-2 N0 patients with incidental pN+ disease stratified by margin status. METHODS: We identified cT1-2 N0 M0 esophageal carcinoma patients from 2004 to 2012 from the National Cancer Data Base. Patients were categorized as having received surgical resection alone, surgical resection followed by chemotherapy (S+CT), and surgical resection followed by concurrent chemoradiation therapy (S+CRT). Subset analyses were conducted on margin-negative and margin-positive patients. Overall survival was compared by Kaplan-Meier estimation, the log-rank test, and multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Among 443 patients, 52.6% received surgical resection alone, 18.7% received S+CT, and 28.6% received S+CRT. Significantly more adenocarcinoma patients received adjuvant treatment (50.8%) than squamous cell carcinoma patients (27.7%, p = 0.001). On multivariable analysis, S+CT (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.45 to 0.91; p = 0.014) and S+CRT (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval,. 0.55 to 0.98; p = 0.038) both were associated with significantly increased overall survival. These findings persisted among margin-negative patients. However, in margin-positive patients, S+CRT (hazard ratio, 0.29; p = 0.002) was the only treatment arm that was associated with significantly improved survival compared with surgical resection alone. CONCLUSIONS: Among cT1-2 N0 pN+ esophageal cancer patients, adjuvant chemotherapy may be sufficient for margin-negative patients, whereas adjuvant chemoradiation therapy appears necessary for margin-positive patients. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm the results.

Post-operative radiotherapy is associated with improved survival in esophageal cancer with positive surgical margins.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for early-stage esophageal cancer with positive surgical margins after an upfront esophagectomy is not well-defined. This study investigates the effect of post-operative radiotherapy (PORT) on overall survival (OS) in clinical stage I-II patients with positive margins. METHODS: We identified patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2012 with clinical stage I-II esophageal carcinoma from the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) who underwent an upfront esophagectomy. For those patients with positive margins, administration of PORT was recorded, and OS was compared by the Kaplan-Meier estimator and log-rank test. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to identify variables associated with improved survival. RESULTS: Among the 3,490 patients identified, 209 (5.8%) had positive margins. One hundred forty-two (67.9%) patients did not receive PORT while 67 (32.1%) did receive PORT. Compared to those receiving PORT, patients who did not receive PORT were significantly older (68.5 vs. 64.0 years, P=0.003), more likely to have pN0 disease (50.7% vs. 35.4%, P=0.026), and less likely to receive postoperative chemotherapy (21.1% vs. 86.6%, P<0.001). On multivariable logistic regression, only receipt of chemotherapy predicted for receipt of PORT (OR: 25.6, 95% CI: 9.9-65.8, P<0.001). OS was significantly higher for patients receiving PORT compared to those who did not (median OS: 32.2 vs. 16.9 months, log-rank P=0.008). Multivariable analysis confirmed an association with PORT and improved OS (HR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.27-0.60, P<0.001). Subset analysis demonstrated that the OS benefit of PORT persisted in those patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy (HR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.19-0.57, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PORT is associated with improved OS in clinical stage I-II esophageal cancer patients after an upfront esophagectomy with positive margins. In the absence of prospective randomized data, our findings suggest that PORT should be strongly considered in the setting of early-stage esophageal cancer resected with positive margins.

Association between access to accelerated partial breast irradiation and use of adjuvant radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The current study was performed to determine whether access to facilities performing accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) is associated with differences in the use of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT). METHODS: Using the National Cancer Data Base, the authors performed a retrospective study of women aged ≥50 years who were diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer between 2004 and 2013 and treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Facilities performing APBI in ≥10% of their eligible patients within a given year were defined as APBI facilities whereas those not performing APBI were defined as non-APBI facilities. All other facilities were excluded. The authors identified independent factors associated with RT use using multivariable logistic regression with clustering in the overall sample as well as in subsets of patients with standard-risk invasive cancer, low-risk invasive cancer, and ductal carcinoma in situ. RESULTS: Among 222,544 patients, 76.6% underwent BCS plus RT and 23.4% underwent BCS alone. The likelihood of RT receipt in the overall sample did not appear to differ significantly between APBI and non-APBI facilities (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.02; P = .61). Subgroup multivariable analysis demonstrated that among patients with standard-risk invasive cancer, there was no association between evaluation at an APBI facility and receipt of RT (AOR, 0.98; P = .69). However, patients with low-risk invasive cancer were found to be significantly more likely to receive RT (54.4% vs 59.5%; AOR, 1.22 [P<.001]), whereas patients with ductal carcinoma in situ were less likely to receive RT (56.9% vs 55.3%; AOR, 0.89 [P = .04]) at APBI facilities. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who were eligible for observation were more likely to receive RT in APBI facilities but no difference was observed among patients with standard-risk invasive cancer who would most benefit from RT. Cancer 2017;123:502-511. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

The Association Between Evaluation at Academic Centers and the Likelihood of Expectant Management in Low-risk Prostate Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with expectant management (EM) in a large cohort of men with low-risk prostate cancer based on cancer center type (community vs academic). EM, consisting of active surveillance or observation for men with low-risk prostate cancer, is an increasingly recognized management option, given the morbidity and lack of a survival benefit associated with definitive treatment. However, the influence of cancer center type on treatment selection is uncertain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Data Base from 2010 to 2013. Men with low-risk prostate cancer were divided by management strategy into groups consisting of EM or definitive treatment. The association between management strategy and facility type (community vs academic) was characterized using 2-level hierarchical mixed effects logistic regression models. RESULTS: There were 52,417 (57%) men evaluated at community centers and 39,139 men (43%) evaluated at academic centers. Patients evaluated at academic centers were significantly more likely to receive EM than those at community centers (17% vs 8%, P < .001). After adjusting for pertinent covariates, evaluation at an academic vs community facility was independently associated with increased odds of EM utilization (adjusted odds ratio 2.70, 95% confidence interval 2.00-3.66). Fifty-one percent of the total variance was explained by interfacility variation. CONCLUSION: The likelihood of receiving EM for low-risk prostate cancer was significantly lower in men evaluated at community centers. Further investigation is warranted to elucidate factors that influence the management of low-risk prostate cancer, including individual treatment center patterns.

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.

Elderly patients undergoing SBRT for inoperable early-stage NSCLC achieve similar outcomes to younger patients.

OBJECTIVES: It is unclear whether elderly patients face an increased risk of complications following stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), as has been reported following surgical resection. This study evaluates toxicity and outcomes achieved with SBRT in elderly versus non-elderly patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients treated with SBRT for cT1-3N0M0 NSCLC between 2007 and 2013. We defined elderly and non-elderly cohorts by age ≥75 and <75. We used chi-square and logistic regression analyses to compare toxicity, and employed Kaplan-Meier, log-rank, and multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses to assess overall survival (OS), local control (LC), and distant control (DC). RESULTS: We identified 251 patients (126 elderly, 125 non-elderly) with a median follow-up of 3.0 years. No differences in acute or late grade ≥3 toxicity were observed. Acute grade ≥3 toxicity was 11.1% in elderly vs. 8.0% in non-elderly (p=0.66). Late grade ≥3 toxicity was 10.3% in elderly vs. 7.2% in non-elderly (p=0.50). There was one grade 5 toxicity (hemoptysis). There were no 3-year OS or LC differences between elderly and non-elderly patients (OS 47.5% vs. 41.0%, p=0.75; LC 84.2% vs. 86.4%, p=0.89). However, 3-year DC was superior in elderly patients (89.1% vs. 76.0%, p=0.01). Improved DC remained associated with elderly age in Cox regression (HR 0.42, p=0.01). CONCLUSION: Elderly patients undergoing SBRT for early stage NSCLC appear to have similar risk of toxicity and rate of efficacy as in younger patients. These findings support the use of SBRT in appropriately selected elderly patients.

Cost-Effectiveness of Surgery, Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy, and Systemic Therapy for Pulmonary Oligometastases.

INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary oligometastases have conventionally been managed with surgery and/or systemic therapy. However, given concerns about the high cost of systemic therapy and improvements in local treatment of metastatic cancer, the optimal cost-effective management of these patients is unclear. Therefore, we sought to assess the cost-effectiveness of initial management strategies for pulmonary oligometastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A cost-effectiveness analysis using a Markov modeling approach was used to compare average cumulative costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) among 3 initial disease management strategies: video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) wedge resection, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and systemic therapy among 5 different cohorts of patient disease: (1) melanoma; (2) non-small cell lung cancer adenocarcinoma without an EGFR mutation (NSCLC AC); (3) NSCLC with an EGFR mutation (NSCLC EGFRm AC); (4) NSCLC squamous cell carcinoma (NSCLC SCC); and (5) colon cancer. One-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to analyze uncertainty with regard to model parameters. RESULTS: In the base case, SBRT was cost effective for melanoma, with costs/net QALYs of $467,787/0.85. In patients with NSCLC, the most cost-effective strategies were SBRT for AC ($156,725/0.80), paclitaxel/carboplatin for SCC ($123,799/0.48), and erlotinib for EGFRm AC ($147,091/1.90). Stereotactic body radiation therapy was marginally cost-effective for EGFRm AC compared to erlotinib with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $126,303/QALY. For colon cancer, VATS wedge resection ($147,730/2.14) was the most cost-effective strategy. Variables with the greatest influence in the model were erlotinib-associated progression-free survival (EGFRm AC), toxicity (EGFRm AC), cost of SBRT (NSCLC SCC), and patient utilities (all histologies). CONCLUSIONS: Video-assisted thoracic surgery wedge resection or SBRT can be cost-effective in select patients with pulmonary oligometastases, depending on histology, efficacy, and tolerability of treatment and patient preferences.

Cost-effectiveness assessment of lumpectomy cavity boost in elderly women with early stage estrogen receptor positive breast cancer receiving adjuvant radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Breast radiotherapy (RT) for elderly women with estrogen receptor positive early stage breast cancer (ER+ESBC) improves local recurrence (LR) rates without benefitting overall survival. Breast boost is a common practice, although the absolute benefit decreases with age. Consequently, an analysis of its cost-effectiveness in the elderly ESBC populations is warranted. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A Markov model was used to compare cost-effectiveness of RT with or without a boost in elderly ER+ESBC patients. The ten-year probability of LR with boost was derived from the CALGB 9343 trial and adjusted by the hazard ratio for LR from boost radiotherapy trial data, yielding the LR rate without boost. Remaining parameters were estimated using published data. RESULTS: Boost RT was associated with an increase in mean cost ($7139 vs $6193) and effectiveness (5.66 vs 5.64 quality adjusted life years; QALYs) relative to no boost. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for boost was $55,903 per QALY. On one-way sensitivity analysis, boost remained cost-effective if the hazard ratio of LR with boost was <0.67. CONCLUSIONS: Boost RT for ER+ESBC patients was cost-effective over a wide range of assumptions and inputs over commonly accepted willingness-to pay-thresholds, but particularly in women at higher risk for LR.

Influence of a 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay on Chemotherapy Delivery in Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: We performed an analysis to determine the relative contribution of the Oncotype DX (ODX) recurrence score (RS) results in adjuvant therapy delivery compared with traditional pathologic factors. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We performed a retrospective review of women with stage I-IIIA breast cancer treated at the Yale Comprehensive Cancer Center from 2006 to 2012 with available ODX results. We constructed separate logistic models with the clinicopathologic factors alone and also integrating RS and compared these models using the likelihood ratio test and c-statistic to determine whether integration of the RS will result in better prediction of chemotherapy (CTx) delivery. RESULTS: We identified 431 women with a median age of 58 years. The RS was low (< 18), intermediate (18-30), and high (> 30) in 56%, 37%, and 7%, respectively. CTx was delivered to 30% of the patients. Age, differentiation, lymphovascular invasion, and progesterone receptor (PR) positivity < 50% were associated with CTx delivery in multivariable logistic regression of clinicopathologic factors alone (P < .05). In the model integrating the RS, an intermediate or a high RS was the most influential factor for CTx delivery (odds ratio, 7.87 vs. 265.35, respectively; P < .0001). The PR results and grade were no longer significant (P = .74 and P = .06, respectively). The integration of the RS resulted in improved model fit and precision, indicated by the likelihood ratio test (ΔG2, 100.782; df = 2; P < .0001) and an improved c-statistic (0.720 vs. 0.856). CONCLUSION: Gene expression profiling appears to account for a substantial amount of variability in CTx delivery in current practice. Further work is needed to ensure appropriate test usage and cost-effectiveness.

Changing practice patterns of Gamma Knife versus linear accelerator-based stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases in the US.

OBJECTIVE: Single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a crucial component in the management of limited brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Intracranial SRS has traditionally been delivered using a frame-based Gamma Knife (GK) platform, but stereotactic modifications to the linear accelerator (LINAC) have made an alternative approach possible. In the absence of definitive prospective trials comparing the efficacy and toxicities of treatment between the 2 techniques, nonclinical factors (such as technology accessibility, costs, and efficiency) may play a larger role in determining which radiosurgery system a facility may choose to install. To the authors' knowledge, this study is the first to investigate national patterns of GK SRS versus LINAC SRS use and to determine which factors may be associated with the adoption of these radiosurgery systems. METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base was used to identify patients > 18 years old with NSCLC who were treated with single-fraction SRS to the brain between 2003 and 2011. Patients who received "SRS not otherwise specified" or who did not receive a radiotherapy dose within the range of 12-24 Gy were excluded to reduce the potential for misclassification. The chi-square test, t-test, and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to compare potential demographic, clinicopathologic, and health care system predictors of GK versus LINAC SRS use, when appropriate. RESULTS: This study included 1780 patients, among whom 1371 (77.0%) received GK SRS and 409 (23.0%) underwent LINAC SRS. Over time, the proportion of patients undergoing LINAC SRS steadily increased, from 3.2% in 2003 to 30.8% in 2011 (p < 0.001). LINAC SRS was adopted more rapidly by community versus academic facilities (overall 29.2% vs 17.2%, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, 4 independent predictors of increased LINAC SRS use emerged, including year of diagnosis in 2008-2011 versus 2003-2007 (adjusted OR [AOR] 2.04, 95% CI 1.52-2.73, p < 0.001), community versus academic facility type (AOR 2.04, 95% CI 1.60-2.60, p < 0.001), non-West versus West geographic location (AOR 4.50, 95% CI 2.87-7.09, p < 0.001), and distance from cancer reporting facility of < 20 versus ≥ 20 miles (AOR 1.57, 95% CI 1.21-2.04, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: GK remains the most commonly used single-fraction SRS modality for NSCLC brain metastases in the US. However, LINAC-based SRS has been rapidly disseminating in the past decade, especially in the community setting. Wide geographic variation persists in the distribution of GK and LINAC SRS cases. Further comparative effectiveness research will be needed to evaluate the impact of these shifts on SRS-related toxicities, local control, and survival, as well as treatment costs and efficiency.

Association of 21-gene recurrence score assay and adjuvant chemotherapy use in the medicare population, 2008-2011.

OBJECTIVES: The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay helps guide adjuvant chemotherapy use for patients with breast cancer, and is predicted to reduce overall chemotherapy use. Little is known about recent patterns of testing in the Medicare program and the impact of testing on chemotherapy use as a function of patient age. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a national claims-based study of Medicare beneficiaries age ≥ 66 years. We assessed trends in assay use (using multivariable regression), adjuvant chemotherapy use, and associated expenditures, for all patients and for two age strata: age 66-74 years and 75-94 years. Geographic variations in assay adoption and regional-level correlation between assay and chemotherapy use were measured. RESULTS: We identified 132,222 women who underwent breast surgery from 2008-2011. Assay use increased from 9.0% to 17.2% from 2008-2011 (p<.001), but chemotherapy use remained stable at 12.5% (p=.49). In younger patients, assay use increased from 14.3% to 23.7% (p<.001), while chemotherapy use decreased from 18.2% to 16.2% (p<.001). In older patients, assay use increased from 4.1% to 9.9% (p<.001), while chemotherapy use remained stable at 6.8% (p=.67). Mean per-beneficiary expenditures for testing and chemotherapy increased from $2030 to $2430 (p<.001). Regions with increased assay adoption were not more likely to reduce chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Despite increased RS testing for both younger and older Medicare patients, there has only been a modest decrease in chemotherapy use for younger patients and no change for older patients, resulting in an overall increase in costs associated with gene expression profiling.

Demonstration of differential radiosensitivity based upon mutation profile in metastatic melanoma treated with stereotactic radiosurgery.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic melanoma often involves the brain. Radiotherapy is an important treatment of melanoma brain metastases, although melanoma radiosensitivity is considered heterogeneous. Thus, identifying subsets with differential radiosensitivity is essential. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic melanoma were identified in a prospective stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) database. Tumor were tested for alterations in B-RAF, N-RAS, and c-KIT. Standardized imaging following SRS was reviewed for recurrence. Differences in local and distant failure were determined using modified Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: 102 patients and 1,028 brain metastases were included. N-RAS mutated patients were significantly less likely to develop local recurrence after SRS than wild type patients (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.04-0.72, p=0.017). B-RAF and c-KIT mutations were not associated with altered rates of local recurrence. Lower local recurrence rates for N-RAS mutated tumors persisted on multivariate analysis (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.04-0.84p=0.029). CONCLUSIONS: N-RAS mutation is associated with improved local control following SRS. Local recurrence is more common in wild type patients and those with B-RAF or c-KIT mutations. Further research is needed to validate these findings and integrate into practice.

Role of Chemoradiotherapy in Elderly Patients With Limited-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: To investigate outcomes for elderly patients treated with chemotherapy (CT) alone versus chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in the modern era by using a large national database. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Elderly patients (age ≥ 70 years) with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer clinical stage I to III who received CT or CRT were identified in the National Cancer Data Base between 2003 and 2011. Hierarchical mixed-effects logistic regression with clustering by reporting facility was performed to identify factors associated with treatment selection. Overall survival (OS) of patients receiving CT versus CRT was compared by using the log-rank test, Cox proportional hazards regression, and propensity score matching. RESULTS: A total of 8,637 patients were identified, among whom 3,775 (43.7%) received CT and 4,862 (56.3%) received CRT. The odds of receiving CRT decreased with increasing age, clinical stage III disease, female sex, and the presence of medical comorbidities (all P < .01). Use of CRT was associated with increased OS compared with CT on univariable and multivariable analysis (median OS, 15.6 v 9.3 months; 3-year OS, 22.0% v 6.3%; log-rank P < .001; Cox P < .001). Propensity score matching identified a matched cohort of 6,856 patients and confirmed a survival benefit associated with CRT (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.55; P < .001). Subset analysis of CRT treatment sequence showed that patients alive 4 months after diagnosis derived a survival benefit with concurrent CRT over sequential CRT (median OS, 17.0 v 15.4 months; log-rank P = .01). CONCLUSION: In elderly patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer, modern CRT appears to confer an additional OS advantage beyond that achieved with CT alone in a large population-based cohort. Our findings suggest that CRT should be the preferred strategy in elderly patients who are expected to tolerate the toxicities of the combined approach.