Low-dose adjuvant vaginal cylinder brachytherapy for early-stage non-endometrioid endometrial cancer: recurrence risk and survival outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate recurrence patterns and survival outcomes for patients with early-stage non-endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma treated with adjuvant high-dose rate vaginal brachytherapy with a low-dose scheme. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I-II non-endometrioid endometrial cancer who received adjuvant vaginal brachytherapy with a low-dose regimen of 24 Gy in six fractions from November 2005 to May 2017. All patients had >6 months of follow-up. Rates of recurrence-free survival, overall survival, vaginal, pelvic, and distant recurrence were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic factors for recurrence and survival were evaluated by Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: A total of 106 patients were analyzed. Median follow-up was 49 months (range 9-119). Histologic subtypes were serous (47%, n=50), clear cell (10%, n=11), mixed (27%, n=29), and carcinosarcoma (15%, n=16). Most patients (79%) had stage IA disease, 94% had surgical nodal assessment, and 13% had lymphovascular invasion. Adjuvant chemotherapy was delivered to 75%. The 5-year recurrence-free and overall survival rates were 74% and 83%, respectively. By histology, 5-year recurrence-free/overall survival rates were: serous 73%/78%, clear cell 68%/88%, mixed 88%/100%, and carcinosarcoma 56%/60% (p=0.046 and p<0.01). On multivariate analysis, lymphovascular invasion was significantly associated with recurrence (HR 3.3, p<0.01). The 5-year vaginal, pelvic, and distant recurrence rates were 7%, 8%, and 21%, respectively. Vaginal and pelvic recurrence rates were highest for patients with carcinosarcoma, lymphovascular invasion and/or FIGO stage IB/II disease. At 5 years, vaginal and pelvic recurrence rates for patients with lymphovascular invasion were 33% and 40%, respectively. Patients with stage IA disease or no lymphovascular invasion had 5-year vaginal recurrence rates of 4% and pelvic recurrence rates of 6% and 3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant high-dose rate brachytherapy with a low-dose scheme is effective for most patients with early-stage non-endometrioid endometrial cancer, particularly stage IA disease and no lymphovascular invasion. Pelvic radiation therapy should be considered for those with carcinosarcoma, lymphovascular invasion and/or stage IB/II disease.

Low-Dose Adjuvant Cylinder Brachytherapy for Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to evaluate outcomes and sites of failure for women with early stage endometrial adenocarcinoma treated with adjuvant high-dose-rate (HDR) vaginal brachytherapy (VB) with a low dose scheme. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Retrospective review identified 318 patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I-II endometrioid endometrial cancer who received adjuvant HDR VB to a dose of 24 Gray (Gy) in 6 fractions from 2005 to 2017. Patients with <6 months follow-up were excluded. Dose was prescribed to cylinder surface and computerized tomography (CT) imaging was performed before each fraction to assess cylinder placement. Rates of vaginal relapse (VR), pelvic nodal relapse, distant metastasis, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival were calculated by Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate analysis was performed by log rank test or Cox proportional hazards. Pretreatment CT images were analyzed for patients with VR. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 42 months for 243 patients. The 3-year rates of VR, pelvic nodal relapse, distant metastasis, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival were 1.9%, 1.5%, 4.3%, 94.1%, and 98.9%, respectively. The 3-year VR rates by Gynecologic Oncology (GOG)-99 risk groups were 0%, 1.4%, and 3.2% for low risk, low-intermediate risk, and high-intermediate risk (HIR) disease (P = .5). By Post-operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma (PORTEC) risk stratification, 3-year VR rate was 1.3% for HIR disease. On review of pretreatment CT images of the 6 patients with VR, 3 patients had relapse at the introitus outside of the treated vaginal length, and 3 had in-field recurrence at the vaginal apex. Higher body mass index (BMI) was associated with VR, with a 14% increase in risk per BMI unit (kg/m2, P = .02). There were no reported grade 2 GI or any grade 3 toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant HDR VB with a low-dose regimen results in excellent clinical outcomes for patients with early stage endometrioid endometrial cancer. Patients with higher BMI may be at increased risk of VR, and additional study is needed to optimize brachytherapy treatment parameters.

Advanced Practice Providers in Radiation Oncology.

PURPOSE: The report highlights utilization of advanced practice providers (APPs) in an academic radiation oncology center and how their role benefits patient care and departmental workflow. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A self-reported workflow analysis of department APPs was conducted across 5 disease sites. A review of electronic medical records was performed to determine the percent of APP follow-ups completed independently versus in a shared capacity with the radiation oncologist. A review of the APP's didactic and clinical training program was performed. RESULTS: Across all disease sites, approximately 40% of the APP's time was spent on direct patient care, predominantly composed of independent follow-up visits (9%-35%) and telehealth (2%-30%). The breast malignancies group was an outlier with a higher focus on consults or shared visits (25%). Indirect patient care accounts for 30% to 50% of workflow with the focus on visit preparation or care coordination (13%-35%) and dictation (8%-13%). Administrative responsibilities including process improvement, research, education, and leadership account for the remainder (5%-26%) and are varied across disease sites. The central nervous system malignancies group and genitourinary malignancies group reported a greater percentage of their time (23%-26%) on administration compared with other groups (5%-9%). On average APPs see most of their visits independently from the physicians (86.41%) with 13.59% of visits being seen in a shared capacity. CONCLUSIONS: APPs can positively affect the field of radiation oncology by augmenting clinical capacity, optimizing workflow and increasing department efficiency via both direct and indirect patient care and through involvement in administrative and leadership duties. By implementing an independent-to practice model, simultaneous APP and physician clinics run parallel to each other, limiting shared visits for complex cases. This promotes APP job satisfaction and provides greater access to patient care without compromising quality. This article highlights a model for the utilization of APPs, which can be implemented by other radiation oncology departments or practices.