Evolution in the Presence and Evidence Category of Radiation Therapy Treatment Recommendations in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Purpose: The changes in the recommended use of radiation therapy (RT) in the presence of expanding systemic cancer therapies and technological advances are poorly characterized. We sought to understand the recommended utilization of RT across a broad range of malignancies by examining National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines. Methods and Materials: We conducted a comprehensive review and categorization of RT recommendations, with their subsequent supporting evidence categories, in 3 versions of NCCN Guidelines, specifically years 2000, 2009, and 2019. These NCCN Guidelines were individually examined for RT-specific recommendations among the 10 most common tumors. The presence of RT as a recommended modality was recorded for each tumor type in each guideline. Recommendation categories including Category 1, 2A, 2B, and 3 were tallied and compared with examine totals and percentage distributions in each tumor type. Results: A total of 3858 NCCN recommendations were individually reviewed. The presence of a recommendation inclusive of RT increased from incidence of 205 in the year 2000 to 992 in the year 2019 (383%). In the 2019 NCCN Guidelines, the most Category 1 RT recommendations were found within small cell lung (13%), non-small cell lung (5%), breast (5%), bladder (2%), rectal (2%), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (1%). Pancreatic, uterine, prostate, melanoma, kidney, and colon cancer guidelines had no Category 1 RT recommendations. Rectal cancer had 31 (27%) preferred recommendations. The majority (89%) of 2019 RT recommendations were for initial therapy, and 9% were specific to salvage therapy. Tumor sites with the highest proportion of RT Category 1 evidence were small cell lung (29%), non-small cell lung (24%), and breast cancer (24%). Conclusions: The frequency of recommendations for using RT in NCCN Guidelines has increased by >300% in the past 20 years among the 10 most common malignancies. Consideration of the quality of evidence supporting these recommendations by tumor type is useful to identify specific malignancies in need of higher-level evidence supporting the role of RT.

Assessment of Differences in Academic Rank and Compensation by Gender and Race/Ethnicity Among Academic Radiation Oncologists in the United States.

Purpose: Advancing equity, diversity, and inclusion in the physician workforce is essential to providing high-quality and culturally responsive patient care and has been shown to improve patient outcomes. To better characterize equity in the field of radiation oncology, we sought to describe the current academic radiation oncology workforce, including any contemporary differences in compensation and rank by gender and race/ethnicity. Methods and Materials: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the Society of Chairs of Academic Radiation Oncology Programs (SCAROP) 2018 Financial Survey. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify factors associated with associate or full professor rank. Compensation was compared by gender and race/ethnicity overall and stratified by rank and was further analyzed using multivariable linear regression models. Results: Of the 858 academic radiation oncologists from 63 departments in the United States in the sample, 33.2% were female, 65.2% were White, 27.2% were Asian, and 7.6% were underrepresented in medicine (URiM). There were 44.0% assistant professors, 32.0% associate professors, and 22.8% full professors. Multivariable logistic regression analysis for factors associated with associate or full professor rank did not reveal statistically significant associations between gender or race/ethnicity with academic rank (odds ratio [OR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-1.32; P = .48 for gender; OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.5-1.30; P = .37 for Asian vs White; and OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.31-1.55; P = .37 for URiM vs White), but CIs were wide due to sample size, and point estimates were <1. Similarly, multivariable linear regression analysis modeling the log relative total compensation did not detect statistically significant differences between radiation oncologists by gender (-1.7%; 95% CI, -6.8% to 3.4%; P = .51 for female vs male) or race/ethnicity (-1.6%; 95% CI, -7.3% to 4.0%; P = .57 for Asian vs White and -3.0%; 95% CI, -12.1% to 6.0%; P = .51 for URiM vs White). Conclusions: The low numbers of women and faculty with URiM race/ethnicity in this radiation oncology faculty sample limits the ability to compare career trajectory and compensation by those characteristics. Given that point estimates were <1, our findings do not contradict larger multispecialty studies that suggest an ongoing need to monitor equity.

Radiation Oncology Residency Training Program Integration of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: An Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee Inaugural Program Director Survey.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate United States (US) radiation oncology (RO) program directors' (PDs) attitudes and practices regarding racial/ethnic diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) to better understand potential effects on underrepresented in medicine (UIM) residents in RO. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 28-item survey was developed using the validated Ethnic Harassment Experiences Scale and the Daily Life Experiences subscale, as well as input from DEI leaders in RO. The survey was institutional review board-approved and administered to RO PDs. PDs were provided with the American Association of Medical Colleges definition of UIM, that is, "Underrepresented in medicine means those racial and ethnic populations that are underrepresented in the medical profession relative to their numbers in the general population." Descriptive statistics were used in analysis. RESULTS: The response rate was 71% (64/90). Institutional Culture and Beliefs: 42% responded that they had a department DEI director. A minority (17%, n = 11) agreed "I believe that people from UIM backgrounds have equal access to quality tertiary education in the US." The majority (97%, n = 62) agreed "My program values residents from UIM backgrounds." Support and Resources: The majority (78%, n = 50) agreed "My program has resources in place to assist/provide support for resident physicians from UIM backgrounds." Interview and Recruitment: Most PDs (53%) had not taken part in activities aimed at recruiting UIM residents and 17% had interviewed no UIM applicants in the past 5 years for residency. Resident Experiences of Racism: 17% (n = 11) agreed "UIM residents in my program have reported incidents of racism to me," and 28% (n = 18) agreed "I believe that UIM residents in my program have been treated differently because of their race/ethnicity by faculty, staff, coresidents or patients." CONCLUSIONS: Most PDs reported that they did not believe that UIM residents were treated differently in their department because of their race/ethnicity, and only a minority had received reports of racial discrimination experienced by residents. These data contrast resident experiences and suggest a disconnect between DEI perceptions and resident experiences among US RO PDs that should be addressed through increased programmatic action and evaluation.

Radiation Oncology Resident Perspectives on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: An Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee Inaugural Resident Survey.

PURPOSE: In this study, radiation oncology residents were surveyed on perceptions of diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in their residency training programs. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 23-item survey was developed by the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee resident members and faculty advisors. The survey was divided into 4 sections: institutional culture, support and resources, interview and recruitment, and experiences of bias. The survey was sent individually to residents from all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited radiation oncology programs. RESULTS: The survey was issued to 757 residents. A total of 319 residents completed the survey, for a response rate of 42%. All postgraduate years and geographic regions were represented. Significant racial, ethnic, and gender differences were present in survey response patterns. White residents (94%, 164 of 174) and male residents (96%, 186 of 194) were more likely to strongly agree/agree that they were treated with respect by their colleagues and their coworkers than other racial groups (P < .005) or gender groups (P < .008). Only 3% (5 of 174) of White residents strongly agreed/agreed that they were treated unfairly because of their race/ethnicity, while 31% (5 of 16) of Black residents and 10% (9 of 94) of Asian residents strongly agreed/agreed (P < .0001). Similarly, Hispanic residents were more likely to strongly agree/agree (24%, 5 of 21) than non-Hispanic residents (7%, 20 of 298) (P = .003). Regarding mentorship, there were no differences by gender or ethnicity. There were differences by race in residents reporting that they had a supportive mentor (P = .022), with 89% (154 of 174) of White residents who strongly agreed/agreed, 88% (14 of 16) of Black residents, and 91% of Asian residents (86 of 94). CONCLUSIONS: This survey reveals that experiences of support, mentorship, inclusion, and bias vary significantly among radiation oncology residents based on race, ethnicity, and gender. Radiation oncology has opportunity for growth to ensure an equitable experience for all residents.

Demographics of ASTRO Student Members and Potential Implications for Future U.S. Radiation Oncology Workforce Diversity.

PURPOSE: The radiation oncology workforce in the United States is comparatively less diverse than the U.S. population and U.S. medical school graduates. Workforce diversity correlates with higher quality care and outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine whether student members of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) are any more diverse than resident members-in-training using the recently established medical student membership category. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Self-reported sex, race and Hispanic ethnicity, medical school, and degree(s) earned for all medical students (n = 268) and members-in-training (n = 713) were collected from the ASTRO membership database. International members were excluded. The χ2 test was used to assess for differences between subgroups. RESULTS: Compared with members-in-training, student members were more likely to be female (40.0% vs 31.5%, P = .032), black or African American (10.7% vs 4.8%, P = .009), candidates for or holders of a DO rather than MD degree (5.2% vs 1.5%, P = .002), and from a U.S. medical school that is not affiliated with a radiation oncology residency program (30.5% vs 20.9%, P = .001). There was no significant difference in self-reported Hispanic ethnicity (7.3% vs 5.4%, P = .356). There were no indigenous members in either category assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Medical student members of ASTRO are more diverse in terms of black race, female sex, and osteopathic training, though not in terms of Hispanic ethnicity or nonmultiracial indigenous background, than the members-in-training. Longitudinal engagement with these students and assessment of the factors leading to specialty retention versus attrition may increase diversity, equity, and inclusion in radiation oncology.

Characterization of Underrepresented Populations in Modern Era Clinical Trials Involving Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: The demographic composition of modern radiation therapy (RT) clinical trials is incompletely studied. Understanding and minimizing disparities in clinical trials is critical to ensure health equity and the generalizability of research findings. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Clinicaltrials.gov was searched to identify RT clinical trials that occurred from 1996 to 2019. A total of 1242 trials were reviewed for patient characteristics. The demographic composition of the studies was summarized by the frequency and percentage of patients by race, gender, and ethnicity. The racial composition of the study population was compared with the 2018 US Census using a 1-sample χ2 test. Subgroup racial composition was compared using χ2 tests of independence. Analyses used a complete case approach. RESULTS: A total of 122 trials met the inclusion criteria, and 121 of these (99.1%) reported race. Trial subgroups included 63 trials in the United States (51.6%), 9 proton therapy trials (7.4%), 34 RT toxicity mitigation or prevention trials (27.9%), 24 trials for female cancer (19.7%), and 17 trials for male cancer (13.9%). US clinical trials overall, US RT toxicity mitigation or prevention trials, US trials for female cancer, and US trials for male cancer had significantly different racial compositions compared with the 2018 US Census data (P < .001 for all). Compared with all clinical trials, those for proton therapy had the largest magnitude of significantly lower enrollment of participants who identified their race as Black, Asian, or other (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This study characterized the racial composition of prospective RT clinical trials in a modern cohort. The racial population represented across multiple categories in the United States differed significantly from US census data and was most pronounced in trials evaluating proton therapy. This is a benchmark study for future efforts to characterize and balance the participation of underrepresented populations in RT clinical trials.

Overcoming Barriers to Radiation Oncology Access in Low-Resource Settings in the United States.

Providing high-quality radiation therapy in medically underserved, low-resource environments can be challenging in the United States. During the American Society of Radiation Oncology 2020 Annual Meeting, the American Society for Radiation Oncology Committee on Health Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion hosted 4 radiation oncologists from both academic and community practices in an educational session. Speakers discussed creative ways to overcome barriers to equitable cancer care and outcomes for their vulnerable patient populations in both rural and urban settings. Successful tactics have included applying for state-sponsored grants, lobbying hospital leadership for equipment upgrades, implementing quality improvement programs specifically targeting the needs of the patient population, studying novel hypofractionation schedules, monitoring toxicities using wearable devices, and expanding transportation options.

Improving the Clinical Treatment of Vulnerable Populations in Radiation Oncology.

The increasing role of radiation oncology in optimal cancer care treatment brings to mind the adage that power is never a gift, but a responsibility. A significant part of the responsibility we in radiation oncology bear is how to ensure optimal access to our services. This article summarizes the discussion initiated at the 2019 American Society for Radiation Oncology Annual Meeting educational panel entitled "Improving the Clinical Treatment of Vulnerable Populations in Radiation Oncology: Latin, African American, Native American, and Gender/Sexual Minority Communities." By bringing the discussion to the printed page, we hope to continue the conversation with a broader audience to better define the level of responsibility our field bears in optimizing cancer care to the most vulnerable patient populations within the United States.

Pulsed Reduced Dose Rate Radiotherapy in Conjunction With Bevacizumab or Bevacizumab Alone in Recurrent High-grade Glioma: Survival Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Dismal prognosis and limited treatment options for recurrent high-grade glioma have provoked interest in various forms of reirradiation. Pulsed reduced dose rate radiation therapy (pRDR) is a promising technique that exploits low-dose hyper-radiosensitivity of proliferating tumor cells while sparing adjacent nonproliferating normal brain tissue. Large radiation treatment volumes can thus be used to target both contrast-enhancing and FLAIR abnormalities thought to harbor recurrent gross and microscopic disease, respectively. The aim of this retrospective study was to determine whether the addition of pRDR to bevacizumab improves survival over bevacizumab alone for recurrent high-grade glioma. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eighty patients with recurrent high-grade glioma were included in this study; 47 patients received bevacizumab monotherapy (BEV), and 33 patients received pRDR with bevacizumab (BEV/pRDR). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were compared between the BEV and BEV/pRDR groups. Regression analysis was performed to identify and control for confounding influences on survival analyses. RESULTS: Significant (P < .05) advantages in PFS (12 vs 4 months; hazard ratio = 2.37) and OS (16 vs. 9 months; hazard ratio = 1.68) were observed with BEV/pRDR compared with BEV alone. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis suggests that treatment with pRDR in addition to bevacizumab could significantly prolong PFS and overall survival compared with bevacizumab alone for recurrent high-grade glioma.

Semicontinuous low-dose-rate teletherapy for the treatment of recurrent glial brain tumors: final report of a phase I/II study.

PURPOSE: Semicontinuous low-dose-rate teletherapy (SLDR) is a novel irradiation strategy that exploits the increased radiosensitivity of glial cells in a narrow range of reduced dose rate. We present the final report of a prospective Phase I/II study testing the feasibility of SLDR for the treatment of recurrent gliomas. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with previously irradiated recurrent gliomas were enrolled from November 1993 to March 1998. Patients received SLDR, delivered 6 to 8 hours/day at a dose rate of 40 to 50 cGy/hour for a total dose of 30 to 35 Gy given over 12 days using a modified cobalt-60 treatment unit. Acute central nervous system toxicity after SLDR treatment was the primary endpoint. Overall survival was a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled (14 World Health Organization Grade 4 glioma, 5 Grade 2 glioma, 1 ependymoma). No patients developed ≥ Grade 3 central nervous system toxicity at 3 months without radiographic evidence of tumor progression. Overall survival after SLDR was 56% at 6 months, 28% at 12 months, and 17% at 24 months. One patient survived >48 months, and 1 patient survived >60 months after SLDR treatment. Re-resection before SLDR treatment significantly improved 1-year overall survival for all patients and patients with Grade 4 glioma. CONCLUSION: The delivery of SLDR is feasible in patients with recurrent gliomas and resulted in improved outcomes for patients who underwent re-resection. There were 2 long-term survivors (>48 months). This pilot study supports the notion that reduced dose rate influences the efficacy and tolerance of reirradiation in the treatment of recurrent gliomas.

Age as an independent prognostic factor in patients with glioblastoma: a Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and American College of Surgeons National Cancer Data Base comparison.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is rare in early adulthood and little information is available on this subgroup. We investigated whether young age (18-30 years) had an independent effect on survival. We retrospectively reviewed patients from two large databases: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and American College of Surgeons National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). In the RTOG evaluation, we analyzed all eligible GBM cases from 17 RTOG studies from 1974 to 2002. All patients with GBM during 1985-1998 in the NCDB were examined for comparison. Patients were divided into three cohorts: ages 18-30, 31-49, and ≥50. Overall survival, as a function of age (discreet and continuous), was assessed. The RTOG review included 3,136 patients: 112 (3.6%) were 18-30, 780 (24.9%) were 31-49, and 2,244 (71.6%) were ≥50. The median survival times of the three groups were 21.0, 13.5, and 9.1 months (P < 0.0001). Significant improvement in survival for younger patients was demonstrated with adjustment for recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) class. Of the 37,260 patients analyzed in the NCDB, 796 (2.1%) were 18-30, 5,711 (15.3%) were 31-49, and 30,753 (82.5%) were ≥50. The median survival times of the three groups were 18.0, 12.8, and 6.3 months (P < 0.0001). Data were not available for RPA class from this series. GBM is rare in young adulthood, comprising 2.1-3.6% of our patients. They have superior survival, even when adjusted for RPA class. More investigations on the unique biologic and clinical characteristics of tumors in this population are needed.

Role of radiation therapy in cutaneous melanoma.

Cutaneous melanoma is a disease that often has an aggressive and unpredictable course. It was historically thought to be a radioresistant neoplasm; however, substantial radiobiologic and clinical evidence has emerged to refute this notion. Improved local control has been demonstrated with the use of adjuvant radiation therapy delivered to the primary site or regional lymphatics in patients with high-risk clinical or pathologic features. Despite improved local control, high-risk cutaneous melanoma often spreads systemically, leading to poor survival. In the setting of systemic progression, radiation therapy can frequently palliate symptomatic sites of metastatic disease.

Resection versus radiosurgery for patients with brain metastases.

Brain metastases occur in 20-40% of adult cancer patients and the incidence is apparently increasing. Despite advances in treatment, the prognosis of these patients is poor, with a median survival of approximately 4 months. Whole brain radiation therapy is the standard of care for most patients with brain metastases. Randomized trials have demonstrated that focal treatments, such as resection and radiosurgery, yield significant improvement in the survival of patients with a single metastasis. The utility of these strategies, specifically in terms of increased survival, is unclear in patients with more than one metastasis. In addition to focal treatments, future directions in the treatment of brain metastases include the development of intraoperative imaging capabilities, improved methods of identifying patients who are likely to benefit from treatment, systemic agents, such as chemotherapy and radiosensitizers, and the incorporation of targeted and antiangiogenic therapies.

Should concomitant and adjuvant treatment with temozolomide be used as standard therapy in patients with anaplastic glioma?

Malignant gliomas are devastating tumors associated with poor prognosis. Standard treatment has been surgery followed by radiotherapy while the role of chemotherapy has remained controversial. Concomitant and adjuvant treatment with temozolomide has recently been shown to improve survival in patients with glioblastoma. While it seems intuitive to apply this regimen to patients with anaplastic gliomas which have traditionally been considered more chemosensitive, chemotherapy has not been shown to prolong life in patients with anaplastic gliomas. Despite promising preclinical and early clinical results, there is currently not enough level 1 evidence to justify concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide as standard therapy for patients with newly diagnosed anaplastic gliomas. Further investigation is needed to better define the role of chemotherapy in patients with anaplastic gliomas. Trials evaluating chemoradiotherapy as well as targeted therapeutic agents are the subject of further research.

Tumor volume changes on serial imaging with megavoltage CT for non-small-cell lung cancer during intensity-modulated radiotherapy: how reliable, consistent, and meaningful is the effect?

PURPOSE: Adaptive radiotherapy allows treatment plan modification based on data obtained during treatment. Assessing volume changes during treatment is now possible with intratreatment imaging capabilities on radiotherapy devices. This study assesses non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) volume changes during treatment with conformal intensity-modulated radiotherapy by evaluating serial megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) scans, with a specific emphasis on the frequency, reliability, and meaningfulness of these changes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Megavoltage CTs were retrospectively reviewed for 25 patients treated with the TomoTherapy Hi-Art system at the University of Wisconsin. Twenty-one patients received definitive radiotherapy, 4 with extracranial stereotactic radioablation (60 Gy in five fractions) and 17 on a dose-per-fraction escalation protocol (57-80.5 Gy in 25 fractions). Four patients were treated palliatively (22-30 Gy in 8 to 10 fractions). Gross tumor volumes were contoured on serial MVCTs at weekly intervals. Each patient had 4 to 25 scans, including at least one at the beginning, midway, and one at the end of treatment. RESULTS: At completion of treatment, no patient demonstrated a complete response. Partial response occurred in 3 (12%) and marginal response was noted in 5 (20%). The remaining 17 patients (68%) showed stable disease. The minimum "scorable threshold" for volume discrepancy between scans to account for interscan assessment variability was set at >25% volume change; 10 patients (40%) had >25% tumor regression. None of the patients treated ablatively or palliatively showed tumor regression during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Although gross tumor regression during treatment may be objectively measured using MVCTs, substantial volumetric decrease occurs only in a minority. The clinical significance of this regression is questionable, because there is no way to document histologic tumor clearance, and therefore field reductions during radiotherapy cannot be recommended.