Hype or hope? A review of challenges in balancing tumor control and treatment toxicity in breast cancer from the perspective of the radiation oncologist.

The aim of this article is to discuss the challenges and new strategies in managing breast cancer patients, with a specific focus on radiation oncology and the importance of balancing oncologic outcomes with quality of life and post-treatment morbidity. A comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify advances in the management of breast cancer, exploring de-escalation strategies, hypofractionation schemes, predictors and tools for reducing toxicity (radiation-induced lymphocyte apoptosis, deep inspiration breath-hold, adaptive radiotherapy), enhancer treatments (hyperthermia, immunotherapy) and innovative diagnostic modalities (PET-MRI, omics). Balancing oncologic outcomes with quality of life and post-treatment morbidity is crucial in the era of personalized medicine. Radiotherapy plays a critical role in the management of breast cancer patients. Large randomized trials are necessary to generalize some practices and cost remains the main obstacle for many innovations that are already applicable.

Making Radiation Oncology specialty more attractive to young medical graduates: pulling back the invisibility curtain.

PURPOSE: Radiation Oncology is one of the least-known medical specialties for young graduates at the end of their studies. An in-depth analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the Radiation Oncology visibility, the training plan, and why it is less attractive for new medical residents during the last years appears as the initial need to turn out this lack of knowledge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An anonymous pilot survey of 24 questions addressed to specialists in-training in Radiation Oncology in Spain during August and September of 2022. RESULTS: A total of 50 in-training radiation oncologists answered the questionnaire and 90% of them believe that a lack of knowledge, mainly at the School of Medicine, was a major reason why choosing Radiation Oncology was unattractive. All responders were satisfied by choosing Radiation Oncology, and 76% were in favor of extending the residency to 5 years to improve their training. Research activity was considered essential (78%) to complete their training. CONCLUSION: Increasing the presence of Radiation Oncology at the School of Medicine may be one solution to achieve greater attractiveness among future residents. Likewise, extending the training period to five years could help to enhance the learning of all radiotherapy techniques while promoting clinical research.

Postoperative radiotherapy after upfront radical prostatectomy: debated issues at a turning point-a survey exploring management trends on behalf of AIRO (Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology).

OBJECTIVES: Postoperative prostate cancer patients are a heterogeneous population, and many prognostic factors (e.g., local staging, PSA kinetics, margin status, histopathological features) may influence their clinical management. In this complex scenario, univocal recommendations are often lacking. For these reasons, the present survey was developed by the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) to collect the opinion of Italian radiation oncologists and delineate a representation of current clinical practice in our country. METHODS: A questionnaire was administered online to AIRO (Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology) members registered in 2020 with a clinical interest in uro-oncological disease. RESULTS: Sixty-one per cent of AIRO members answered the proposed survey. Explored topics included career and expertise, indications to adjuvant RT, additional imaging in biochemical recurrence setting, use of salvage radiotherapy (SRT), management of clinically evident locoregional recurrence and future considerations. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, good level of agreement was found between participants for most of the topics. Most debated issues regarded, as expected, implementation of new imaging methods in this setting. Notably, trend in favour of early SRT vs. immediate adjuvant RT was underlined, and preference for global evaluation rather than isolated risk factors for RT indications was noticed.

Cross-Sectional International Survey to Determine the Educational Interests of Spanish-Speaking Latin American Radiation Oncologists.

PURPOSE: With the existing oncology disparities in Latin America, physician expertise has been cited as a possible contributor to inferior oncologic outcomes in some cancers. As two-dimensional radiotherapy rapidly evolved to intensity-modulated radiation therapy in Latin America, adequate contouring education is an actionable target to improving physician knowledge and clinical outcomes. Yet, topics of interest to Latin American radiation oncologists are underreported. We assessed Latin American interest in a virtual platform for case discussion and identified the educational topics of most interest to them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Spanish-language online survey was designed by a team of Latin American educators. The questions assessed professional nationality, desire for an online educational platform for case presentation, career length, and topics of interest. Educational topics included head and neck (H&N), CNS, GI, lung, gynecologic, breast, and pediatric cancers, lymphoma, sarcoma, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), brachytherapy, and medical physics. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-three surveys were included for analysis. Overall, 127 respondents (98%) affirmed interest in participating in a virtual platform for case discussion and treatment advances. The most popular educational themes were H&N cancers (24%), SBRT (14%), and CNS cancers (13%). Of countries with > 10 respondents, the most popular educational topic remained H&N cancers for Argentina, Chile, and Mexico, but the most popular topic among Peruvian respondents was CNS cancer (27%). CONCLUSION: With international collaboration and a large sample size, we present the first survey results describing Latin American radiation oncology educational interests. Participants were overwhelmingly interested in a virtual platform, and most were specifically interested in H&N cancer education. These results can be used for focused didactic preparation in Latin America. Future efforts should expand on improving representation and outreach among Central American radiation oncologists.

Are there enough radiation oncologists to lead the new Spanish radiotherapy?

AIM: Radiation oncology services in Spain are undergoing a process of technical modernization, but-in a context of increasing demand by an ageing population-it is unclear whether there are enough radiation oncologists to staff the newly equipped units. This study aims to assess the number of specialists working in radiation oncology services in Spain relative to current and future needs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the second half of 2017, the Commission on Infrastructures of the Spanish Society for Radiation Oncology (SEOR) sent a questionnaire on radiation oncology staff to the heads of all 122 public (n = 76, 62%) and private (n = 46, 38%) radiation oncology services in Spain. Data collected were the number of professionals, their position, and their year of birth for specialists and residents in each service. In the descriptive analysis, for continuous variables we calculated means, standard deviations and ranges for each Spanish region and work post. For qualitative variables, we constructed frequency tables. All analyses were performed with R statistical software, version 3.5.1. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 100% among service heads across all 122 centers. The total number of radiation oncologists working in these centers is 721, or 15.4 per million population, with considerable variations between regions. Given the national recommendations to have 20 radiation oncologists per million population, there is currently a deficit of 204 specialists. If the 163 upcoming retirements are also taken into account, there will be 367 fewer radiation oncologists than required to meet the 25% increase in indications for radiotherapy projected for 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The classic model for calculating staff needs based on the number of treatments is outdated, and recommendations should be revised to reflect the current reality. A new model should integrate the most complex technological advances and emerging plans in radiotherapy, without neglecting the other activities carried out in radiation oncology services that are not directly linked to patient care.

Added value of diffusion-weighted MRI for nodal radiotherapy planning in pelvic malignancies.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the added value of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) to T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) for improved identification of pelvic lymph nodes (LN) by radiation oncologists. METHODS/PATIENTS: This retrospective study included 20 patients with histopathologically proven node-negative prostate cancer. All patients underwent 3T-MRI of the prostate; matched axial T2WI and DWI sequences were assessed by an experienced uro-radiologist as the reference standard. Consultant and specialist registrar radiation oncologists were asked to identify all LN first on T2WI alone (read 1) and then on T2WI and DWI combined (read 2); LN were measured in size and divided into true positives (TP), false positives (FP) and false negatives (FN). Sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV) and false negative rate (FNR) were then calculated and compared using Pearson's Chi square test. RESULTS: A total of 177 LN comprised the reference standard. 16 TP, 16 FP and 161 FN LN (sensitivity 9.0%, PPV 50.0%, FNR 91.0%) and 124, 15 and 53 LN (70.1%, 89.2%, 30%) were identified by reader 1 on reads 1 and 2, respectively; χ2 (2, N = 385) = 137.8, p < 0.0001. 27, 21 and 150 LN (15.3%, 56.3%, 84.8%) and 120, 13 and 57 LN (67.8%, 90.2%, 32.2%) were identified by reader 2 on the two reads; χ2 (2, N = 388) = 102.4, p < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: Adding DWI to T2WI significantly improved identification of pelvic LN by radiation oncologists and can therefore be regarded as a useful LN contouring technique for RT planning in pelvic malignancies.

Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer: a national survey of patterns of practice among radiation oncologists in Spain.

PURPOSE: To investigate patterns of practice among Spanish radiation oncologists in the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa). We evaluated (1) access to mpMRI, (2) current clinical practices, and (3) physician expectations of mpMRI. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of 118 radiation oncologists at 75 Radiation Oncology (RO) departments in Spain. RESULTS: A total of 55 radiation oncologists from 52 RO departments (52/75; 69%) completed the survey. Prostate mpMRI is performed at 94.5% of the centres that provided data. The most common indications for mpMRI in routine clinical practice were: (1) detection/localization of the tumour prior to second biopsy (82.7%), (2) cancer staging (80.8%), and (3) detection of recurrence after definitive treatment (80.8%). Most respondents (72.7%) reported modifying the primary radiotherapy treatment when mpMRI findings indicate a more advanced T stage with a resultant change in the risk group. Most respondents (90.5%) treat macroscopic local recurrence after prostatectomy with high doses, ranging from 71 to 83 Gy; in 37.7% of cases, the full dose is delivered to the entire prostate bed. In pelvic nodal recurrence, more than half (59.3%) of the respondents reported performing elective pelvic radiotherapy, including the prostate bed, with a boost to the involved nodes. CONCLUSIONS: This survey shows that prostate mpMRI is routinely used by radiation oncologists in Spain in a wide range of clinical scenarios. The findings reported here underscore the need to standardize treatment protocols for definitive and salvage radiotherapy in patients evaluated with mpMRI.

On thin ice: barriers to adoption of surveillance for patients with stage I testicular seminoma. Survey of US radiation oncologists

ABSTRACT Purpose: Most men with stage I testicular seminoma are cured with surgery alone, which is a preferred strategy per national guidelines. The current pattern of practice among US radiation oncologists (ROs) is unknown. Materials and Methods: We surveyed practicing US ROs via an online questionnaire. Respondent's characteristics, self-rated knowledge, perceived patient compliance rates with observation were analyzed for association with treatment recommendations. Results: We received 353 responses from ROs, of whom 23% considered themselves experts. A vast majority (84%) recommend observation as a default strategy, however this rate drops to 3% if the patient is believed to be noncompliant. 33% of respondents believe that survival is jeopardized in case of disease recurrence, and among these respondents only 5% support observation. 22% of respondents over-estimate the likelihood of noncompliance with observation to be in the 50-80% range. Responders with a higher perceived noncompliance rate are more likely to recommend adjuvant therapy (Fisher's exact p<0.01). Only 7% of respondents recommend observation for stage IS seminoma and 45% administer adjuvant RT in patients with elevated pre-orchiectomy alpha-fetal protein levels. Conclusions: Many US ROs over-estimate the likelihood that stage I testicular seminoma patients will be noncompliant with surveillance and incorrectly believe that overall survival is jeopardized if disease recurs on surveillance. Observation is quickly dismissed for patients who are not deemed to be compliant with observation, and is generally not accepted for patients with stage IS disease. There is clearly an opportunity for improved physician education on evidence-based management of stage I testicular seminoma.

On thin ice: barriers to adoption of surveillance for patients with stage I testicular seminoma. Survey of US radiation oncologists.

PURPOSE: Most men with stage I testicular seminoma are cured with surgery alone, which is a preferred strategy per national guidelines. The current pattern of practice among US radiation oncologists (ROs) is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We surveyed practicing US ROs via an online questionnaire. Respondent's characteristics, self-rated knowledge, perceived patient compliance rates with observation were analyzed for association with treatment recommendations. RESULTS: We received 353 responses from ROs, of whom 23% considered themselves experts. A vast majority (84%) recommend observation as a default strategy, however this rate drops to 3% if the patient is believed to be noncompliant. 33% of respondents believe that survival is jeopardized in case of disease recurrence, and among these respondents only 5% support observation. 22% of respondents over-estimate the likelihood of noncompliance with observation to be in the 50-80% range. Responders with a higher perceived noncompliance rate are more likely to recommend adjuvant therapy (Fisher's exact p<0.01). Only 7% of respondents recommend observation for stage IS seminoma and 45% administer adjuvant RT in patients with elevated pre-orchiectomy alpha-fetal protein levels. CONCLUSIONS: Many US ROs over-estimate the likelihood that stage I testicular seminoma patients will be noncompliant with surveillance and incorrectly believe that overall survival is jeopardized if disease recurs on surveillance. Observation is quickly dismissed for patients who are not deemed to be compliant with observation, and is generally not accepted for patients with stage IS disease. There is clearly an opportunity for improved physician education on evidence-based management of stage I testicular seminoma.

Reputation Management and Content Control: An Analysis of Radiation Oncologists' Digital Identities.

INTRODUCTION: Google is the most popular search engine in the United States, and patients are increasingly relying on online webpages to seek information about individual physicians. This study aims to characterize what patients find when they search for radiation oncologists online. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Physician Comparable Downloadable File was used to identify all Medicare-participating radiation oncologists in the United States and Puerto Rico. Each radiation oncologist was characterized by medical school education, year of graduation, city of practice, gender, and affiliation with an academic institution. Using a custom Google-based search engine, up to the top 10 search results for each physician were extracted and categorized as relating to: (1) physician, hospital, or health care system; (2) third-party; (3) social media; (4) academic journal articles; or (5) other. RESULTS: Among all health care providers in the United States within CMS, 4443 self-identified as being radiation oncologists and yielded 40,764 search results. Of those, 1161 (26.1%) and 3282 (73.9%) were classified as academic and nonacademic radiation oncologists, respectively. At least 1 search result was obtained for 4398 physicians (99.0%). Physician, hospital, and health care-controlled websites (16,006; 39.3%) and third-party websites (10,494; 25.7%) were the 2 most often observed domain types. Social media platforms accounted for 2729 (6.7%) hits, and peer-reviewed academic journal websites accounted for 1397 (3.4%) results. About 6.8% and 6.7% of the top 10 links were social media websites for academic and nonacademic radiation oncologists, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Most radiation oncologists lack self-controlled online content when patients search within the first page of Google search results. With the strong presence of third-party websites and lack of social media, opportunities exist for radiation oncologists to increase their online presence to improve patient-provider communication and better the image of the overall field. We discuss strategies to improve online visibility.

Radiotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer in Mexico: Results from the 2015 National Survey.

BACKGROUND: Radiation therapy is a keystone to improve survival and quality of life in breast cancer patients. In Mexico, however, scarce information is available on the obstacles faced by radio-oncologists to provide appropriate treatment. OBJECTIVE: To determine the most frequent issues faced by physicians to provide radiation therapy for metastatic breast cancer in Mexico. METHODS: A survey of 16 multiple-choice questions to be answered electronically by 167 radio-oncologists currently working in Mexico was designed and thereafter analyzed for differences between private and public practices, based on the responses from the surveyed participants. RESULTS: 98.5% of surveyed responders attended patients with breast cancer. We observed a significant difference between private vs. public practice for the main difficulties in providing radiation therapy, with an increased frequency (85.8%) of "treatment cost by itself" in private practice vs. 50.7% in public practice (p < 0.05). Significant differences were observed in the "Time to initiate treatment" question, with "Less than one week" as the response in 86% of those physicians in private practice vs. 50% for those in public practice (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Using a survey targeted at radio-oncologists, we analyzed the most important obstacles for accessing radiation therapy for metastatic breast cancer in Mexico. This information may be useful for healthcare decisions related to radiation therapy in women with breast cancer in Mexico.

Postoperative Radiation Therapy after Nipple-Sparing or Skin-Sparing Mastectomy: A Survey of European, North American, and South American Practices.

Skin sparing mastectomy, a surgical procedure sparing a large portion of the overlying skin of the breast, and nipple-sparing mastectomy, sparing the whole nipple-areolar complex, are increasingly used, although their oncologic efficacy remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the radiation oncologists' opinions regarding the indications of radiation therapy (RT) after skin-sparing mastectomy and nipple-sparing mastectomy. Radiation oncology members of four national and international societies were invited to complete a questionnaire comprising of 22 questions to assess their opinions regarding RT indications in the context of skin-sparing and nipple-sparing mastectomy. A total of 298 radiation oncologists answered the questionnaire. 90.9% of respondents affirmed that breast cancer is one of their specializations. The majority declared that post-mastectomy RT is indicated for early-stage (stages I and II) breast cancer patients who present with risk factors for recurrence after skin-sparing or nipple-sparing mastectomy (87.2% and 80.2%, respectively). All suggested risk factors (tumor size, lymph node involvement, extracapsular extension, lymphovascular space invasion, positive surgical margins, triple negative tumor, multicentric tumor, and age) were considered as major elements (important or very important). There is no consensus regarding the necessity of evaluating residual breast tissue or the definition of residual breast tissue after mastectomy. All classic factors were considered as major elements, potentially influencing the decision to advice or not postoperative RT. Many uncertainties remain about the indications for RT after skin-sparing mastectomy or nipple-sparing mastectomy.