Brachytherapy Workflow Practices: Analysis of Different Workflow Scenarios in Patients With Cervical Cancer and Impact on IGBT Implementation-An IAEA Study.

PURPOSE: The workflow of brachytherapy (BT) is an essential aspect of treatment to consider in image-guided brachytherapy (IGBT). It has an overarching effect influencing patient throughput and the number of cancer treatments that can be performed as it occupies equipment, space, and personnel. There is limited research addressing this issue. Under the International Atomic Energy Agency's Coordinated Research Activity titled IGBT for cervix cancer: An implementation study, our study analyzes various scenarios in the clinical workflow of BT delivery for cervical cancer. It aims to determine the extent to which these scenarios allow the routine implementation of IGBT. With this information, current barriers and individualized adaptations to efficient workflows can be identified to enhance the global application of IGBT, leading to better cervical cancer treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A web-based poll of questions regarding practices in BT workflow was presented to 62 participants from low-, lower middle-, upper middle-, and high-income countries (19 countries). RESULTS: This study highlighted diversity in BT practices across countries, income levels, and regions. It identified variations in workflow, patient throughput, and resource availability, which can have implications for the efficiency and quality of BT treatments. Scenario A, utilizing multiple locations for the steps of the BT procedure, was the most commonly used. The availability of resources, such as imaging devices and trained personnel, varied among the participating centers and remained challenging for IGBT implementation and sustainability. CONCLUSION: The design of the BT facility plays a vital role in improving efficiency, with a dedicated BT suite contributing to an efficient workflow but limiting patient throughput, especially for high-volume centers. Although IGBT is effective, its implementation requires consideration of various logistical challenges and should be individualized.

Cancer Research in Vulnerable Populations: A Call for Collaboration and Sustainability From MENAT Countries.

PURPOSE: Cancer is a major burden across Middle East, North Africa, Türkiye (MENAT). Many MENAT countries experience multiple conflicts that compound vulnerabilities, but little research investigates the linkages between vulnerability and cancer research. This study examines the current level and the potential for cancer research among vulnerable populations in the MENAT region, aiming to provide direction toward developing a research agenda on the region's vulnerable populations. METHODS: Expert-driven meetings were arranged among the 10 authors. After obtaining institutional review board approval, a self-administered online survey questionnaire was circulated to more than 500 cancer practitioners working in 22 MENAT countries. RESULTS: Two hundred sixteen cancer practitioners across the MENAT region responded. Fifty percent of the respondents identified clinical research in vulnerable patients with cancer as a significant issue; 21.8% reported previous research experience that included vulnerable populations, and 60% reported encountering vulnerable populations in their daily clinical practice. The main barriers to conducting research were lack of funding (60%), protected time (42%), and research training (35%). More than half of the respondents believed that wars/conflicts constituted an important source of vulnerability. The most vulnerable cancer populations were the elderly, palliative/terminally ill, those with concomitant mental health-related issues, those with other chronic illnesses, and socioeconomically deprived patients. CONCLUSION: Results support that a major effort is needed to improve cancer research among vulnerable cancer populations in the MENAT region. We call for interdisciplinary research that accounts for the region's unique, compounding, and cumulative forms of vulnerability. This cancer research agenda on different vulnerable populations must balance sociobehavioral studies that explore sociopolitical barriers to quality care and clinical studies that gauge and refine treatment protocols. Building a research agenda through collaboration and solidarity with international partners is prime time.

Prioritizing clinical trial quality assurance for photons and protons: A failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) comparison.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Global Clinical Trials RTQA Harmonization Group (GHG) set out to evaluate and prioritize clinical trial quality assurance. METHODS: The GHG compiled a list of radiotherapy quality assurance (QA) tests performed for proton and photon therapy clinical trials. These tests were compared between modalities to assess whether there was a need for different types of assessments per modality. A failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) was performed to assess the risk of each QA failure. RESULTS: The risk analysis showed that proton and photon therapy shared four out of five of their highest-risk failures (end-to-end anthropomorphic phantom test, phantom tests using respiratory motion, pre-treatment patient plan review of contouring/outlining, and on-treatment/post-treatment patient plan review of dosimetric coverage). While similar trends were observed, proton therapy had higher risk failures, driven by higher severity scores. A sub-analysis of occurrence × severity scores identified high-risk scores to prioritize for improvements in RTQA detectability. A novel severity scaler was introduced to account for the number of patients affected by each failure. This scaler did not substantially alter the ranking of tests, but it elevated the QA program evaluation to the top 20th percentile. This is the first FMEA performed for clinical trial quality assurance. CONCLUSION: The identification of high-risk errors associated with clinical trials is valuable to prioritize and reduce errors in radiotherapy and improve the quality of trial data and outcomes, and can be applied to optimize clinical radiotherapy QA.

Practice Patterns and Perspectives on Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for the Metastatic Spine From Lower- and Middle-Income Countries.

PURPOSE: We wanted to understand the current practice patterns and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) utilization for spine metastases in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS: A questionnaire was designed to identify the current practice patterns of treating spine metastases, uptake of spine SBRT in routine care, dose fractionations commonly used, and the perceived benefits and toxicities of using ablative doses. Individuals registering for a spine SBRT workshop were requested to answer the questionnaire. RESULTS: We received 395 responses from radiation oncologists (ROs) working in 12 different LMICs. The majority of respondents were from an academic institute (57.5%). Two hundred seventy-four respondents further identified themselves from the government/public sector (44.89%), corporate/private sector (47.89%), not-for-profit organization (5.4%), or public-private partnership (5.4%). The respondents indicated that 8.43%, 27.46%, 41.73%, and 10.04% of the spine metastases patients are treated using clinical marking, X-ray-based, 3D conformal radiation therapy, and SBRT, respectively. A third of the respondents did not have any experience of spine SBRT; those with high-volume practice were predominantly from an academic institute. The majority of respondents would use spine SBRT to reduce pain severity (71.9%) and achieve durable pain control (61.01%) in the setting of oligometastases (92.73%) and reirradiation (56.69%). Respondents preferred 3- to 5-fraction regimens (64.9%) over 1-2 fractions (33.68%). The top three reasons for not using spine SBRT were resource constraints (50%), lack of machine (37.11%), and lack of training (27.34%). CONCLUSION: There is heterogeneity in spine SBRT practice and utilization between academic and nonacademic institutes. Resource and infrastructure constraints along with lack of training are limiting the use of SBRT among ROs from LMICs. Collaborative studies from LMICs will help in resolving unique challenges posed by resource constraints.

Multinational Study to Assess Stress Levels Among the Health Care Workers of Radiation Oncology Community at the Outset of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: To evaluate stress levels among the health care workers (HCWs) of the radiation oncology community in Asian countries. METHODS: HCWs of the radiation oncology departments from 29 tertiary cancer care centers of Bangladesh, India, Indonesia and Nepal were studied from May 2020 to July 2020. A total of 758 eligible HCWs were identified. The 7-Item Generalized Anxiety Disorder, 9-Item Patient Health Questionnaire, and 22-Item Impact of Events Scale-Revised were used for assessing anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Univariate and multivariate analysis was done to identify the causative factors affecting mental health. RESULTS: A total of 758 participants from 794 HCWs were analyzed. The median age was 31 years (IQR, 27-28). The incidence of moderate to severe levels of anxiety, depression, and stress was 34.8%, 31.2%, and 18.2%, respectively. Severe personal concerns were noticed by 60.9% of the staff. On multivariate analysis, the presence of commonly reported symptoms of COVID-19 during the previous 2 weeks, contact history (harzard ratio [HR], 2.04; CI, 1.15 to 3.63), and compliance with precautionary measures (HR, 1.69; CI, 1.19 to 2.45) for COVID-19 significantly predicted for increasing anxiety (HR, 2.67; CI, 1.93 to 3.70), depression (HR, 3.38; CI 2.36 to 4.84), and stress (HR, 2.89; CI, 1.88 to 4.43) (P < .001). A significant regional variation was also noticed for anxiety, stress, and personal concerns. CONCLUSION: This survey conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed that a significant proportion of HCWs in the radiation oncology community experiences moderate to severe levels of anxiety, depression, and stress. This trend is alarming and it is important to identify and intervene at the right time to improve the mental health of HCWs to avoid any long-term impacts.

The role of the radiation oncologist in quality and patient safety: A proposal of indicators and metrics.

This manuscript represents a collaboration from an international group of quality and safety expert radiation oncologists. It is a position/review paper with the specific aim of defining the role of the radiation oncologist in quality and safety management. This manuscript is unique in that we recommend specific quality assurance/control tasks and correlated quality and indicators and safety measures that are the responsibility of the radiation oncologist. The article addresses the role of the radiation oncologist in quality and safety from a strong perspective of multidisciplinarity and teamwork. Our manuscript is "cross-cutting" and applicable to radiation oncologist in any practice setting (i.e. low middle-income countries).

Quality of radiotherapy services in post-Soviet countries: An IAEA survey.

BACKGROUND: The quality of radiotherapy services in post-Soviet countries has not yet been studied following a formal methodology. The IAEA conducted a survey using two sets of validated radiation oncology quality indicators (ROIs). METHODS: Eleven post-Soviet countries were assessed. A coordinator was designated for each country and acted as the liaison between the country and the IAEA. The methodology was a one-time cross-sectional survey using a 58-question tool in Russian. The questionnaire was based on two validated sets of ROIs: for radiotherapy centres, the indicators proposed by Cionini et al., and for data at the country level, the Australasian ROIs. RESULTS: The overall response ratio was 66.3%, but for the Russian Federation, it was 24%. Data were updated on radiotherapy infrastructure and equipment. 256 radiotherapy centres are operating 275 linear accelerators and 337 Cobalt-60 units. 61% of teletherapy machines are older than ten years. Analysis of ROIs revealed significant differences between these countries and radiotherapy practices in the West. Naming, task profile and education programmes of radiotherapy professionals are different than in the West. CONCLUSIONS: Most countries need modernization of their radiotherapy infrastructure coupled with adequate staffing numbers and updated education programmes focusing on evidence-based medicine, quality, and safety.

High-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy for accelerated partial breast irradiation - trial results of Azerbaijan National Center of Oncology.

PURPOSE: To describe early results of two cohorts of patients with low and intermediate risk of early breast cancer treated with accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) using different schedules of multicatheter brachytherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with early stage breast cancer after breast conserving surgery were enrolled for a prospective analysis. The APBI, using multicatheter brachytherapy, was delivered either eight times 4 Gy in five days with a planned total dose of 32 Gy, or seven times 5 Gy in four days with a planned total dose of 35 Gy. Primary endpoints were side effects. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were enrolled between 2012 and 2014. Patients characteristics were as follow: median age of patients was 55 years, early breast cancer was defined according GEC-ESTRO recommendations. With a median follow-up period of 37 months, no significant differences regarding late side effects and cosmesis between two cohorts of patients were documented. In total, cosmesis was excellent in 13/48 (27.1%) patients, good in 34/48 (70.8%) patients, and moderate in 1/48 patient (2.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Accelerated partial breast irradiation using multicatheter brachytherapy with 32 Gy/8 fractions and 35 Gy/7 fractions for early breast cancer seems to be similar in terms of late side effects. According to our findings, APBI was also feasible for intermediate-risk of early breast cancer patients.