Challenges and Opportunities With the Use of Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy in Cancer Care: Regional Perspectives From South Korea, Japan, Singapore, and Australia.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy schedules provide higher per-fraction radiation doses delivered in fewer fractions than conventional schedules. This novel delivery method is supported by a large body of clinical trial evidence across various cancer sites in both curative and palliative settings. Hypofractionation is associated with benefits such as lower costs, improved patient access and increased treatment precision, which has led to its inclusion in various treatment guidelines. Despite this, utilization is not uniform across cancer sites and geographic regions due to reasons such as reimbursement models, nuances in healthcare systems, and professional culture. Key factors to ensure patients benefit from access to high quality radiotherapy include publishing clinical evidence, cross-country collaboration to fill knowledge gaps, reviewing reimbursement models, and improving patient advocacy in treatment decision-making.

Radiotherapy utilisation rates for patients with cancer as a function of age: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: There is an increasing incidence of cancer in older people, but limited data on radiotherapy uptake, and in particular, radiotherapy utilisation (RTU) rates. The RTU rate for older adults with cancer may be lower than recommended due to lower tolerance for radiotherapy as well as additional comorbidities, reduced life expectancy and travel for treatment. Radiotherapy use must be aligned with best available, age-specific evidence to ensure older adults with cancer receive optimal benefit without harms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to synthesise the published data on the actual RTU rate for patients with cancer as a function of age. MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched to identify relevant population-based and hospital-based cohort studies on radiotherapy utilisation for all age groups, published in English, from 1 January 1990 to 1 July 2020. We focused on the following common cancers in older adults for which radiotherapy is recommended: breast, prostate, lung, rectal cancer, glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), and cervical cancer. Age-specific radiotherapy utilisation data were extracted and analysed as a narrative synthesis. RESULTS: From 2606 studies screened, 75 cohort and population-based studies were identified with age-specific radiotherapy utilisation data. The total number of patients in the 75 studies was 4,792,138. The RTU rate decreased with increasing age for all tumour sites analysed, except for patients receiving curative radiotherapy as definitive treatment for prostate or cervical cancer. This reduction with increasing age was demonstrated in both palliative and curative settings. DISCUSSION: There is a global reduction in radiotherapy utilisation with increasing age for most tumour sites. The reduction in delivery of radiotherapy warrants further examination and evidence-based guidelines specific to this population.

A new wave of leaders: Early evaluation of the interdisciplinary Foundations of Leadership in Radiation Oncology (FLiRO) program.

Purpose: Effective leadership across all areas of radiation oncology (RO) is vital to fully realise the benefits of radiation therapy in cancer care. We report outcomes of a novel interdisciplinary leadership program designed for RO professionals under a global joint society initiative. Methods: The Foundations of Leadership in RO (FLiRO) program was designed for aspiring RO leaders. Initially delivered in a blended learning format, it was adapted to fully virtual in 2021. It comprised a webinar tutorial, on-line modules and homework followed by 'live' in-person/virtual workshops over an approximately 6-week period. Topics included personal awareness, effective teamwork, quality improvement skills, leading change and conflict management. An immediate post-program online survey was performed using Likert scales to measure self-reported educational value, interaction with others and the likely application of learning to practice. Open comments were invited. Results: 170 participants from 36 countries and 6 continents took part from 2018 to 2021 (99 doctors, 36 physicists, 32 radiation therapists/RTTs and 3 others). 141 (83%) participants responded to the post-program survey. Average weightings for responders' views on whether pre-determined learning objectives were met ranged from 4.30 to 4.61 on a 5-point scale (1 = 'not met at all' and 5 = completely met). For the question addressing potential value of learning for application to their workplace, 124 of 130 (95%) of responders indicated that FLIRO would be 'very useful' or 'extremely useful'. Conclusion: Initial evaluation of the FLiRO program supports its continuation and expansion with ongoing evolution based on emerging evidence around leadership education and participant feedback.

Older adults and the unique role of the radiation therapist: Future directions for improving geriatric oncology training and education.

There is widespread recognition that the provision of high quality, appropriate and equitable care to older adults with cancer is a growing challenge in oncology practice. Radiation therapy (RT) is an effective and localised treatment that represents an attractive curative or palliative option for many older adults, and radiation therapists (RTT) play an important role in the delivery, support and quality of care for people during RT. The need to develop an evidence-based, global approach to improving all radiation oncology (RO) professionals' knowledge and clinical practice in geriatric oncology (GO) has been previously identified. This article specifically focusses on the status quo of GO clinical practice and education for RTT worldwide. We explore the unique clinical role that RTT play in the management of older adults with cancer and define multiple clinical care points in which RTT could potentially participate in geriatric screening, geriatric assessment and intervention to optimise the care of older adults, with a focus on dementia. Directions for future efforts to improve the knowledge and clinical skills of RTT in caring for older adults are discussed.

An International Expert Delphi Consensus to Develop Dedicated Geriatric Radiation Oncology Curriculum Learning Outcomes.

PURPOSE: The management of older adults with cancer is rapidly becoming a significant challenge in radiation oncology (RO) practice. The education of future radiation oncologists in geriatric oncology is fundamental to ensuring that older adults receive high-quality care. Currently RO trainees receive little training and education in geriatric oncology. The objective of this study was to define core geriatric RO curriculum learning outcomes relevant to RO trainees worldwide. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 2-stage modified Delphi consensus was conducted. Stage 1 involved the formation of an expert reference panel (ERP) of multiprofessional experts in geriatric oncology and/or RO and the compilation of a potential geriatric RO learning outcomes set. Stage 2 involved 3 iterative rounds: round 1 and round 2 (both online surveys), and an intervening ERP round. These aimed at identifying and refining ideal geriatric RO learning outcomes. Invited participants for round 1 and 2 included oncology health care professionals with expertise across RO, geriatric oncology, and/or education and consumers. Predefined Delphi consensus definitions were applied to the results of rounds 1 and 2. RESULTS: An ERP of 11 experts in geriatric oncology and/or RO was formed. Seventy potential knowledge- and skill-based learning outcomes were identified. In round 1, 103 of 179 invited eligible Delphi participants completed the survey (58% response rate). The ERP round was conducted, resulting in the exclusion of 28 learning outcomes. In round 2, 54 of 103 completed the survey (52% response rate). This identified a final total of 33 geriatric RO learning outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The geriatric RO learning outcomes described in this study form an international consensus that can inform RO training bodies worldwide. This represents the first fundamental step in developing a global educational framework aimed at improving RO trainee knowledge and skills in geriatric oncology.

Radiation Therapy in Older Adults With Cancer: A Critical Modality in Geriatric Oncology.

Radiation therapy (RT) is a commonly used modality in the treatment of older adults with cancer, and RT represents an attractive oncologic treatment option, providing a noninvasive local therapy with limited systemic side effects. The Journal of Clinical Oncology (JCO) recently published a special series on Geriatric Oncology providing a comprehensive overview of multiple treatment modalities available to older adults with cancer. The purpose of this short review is to highlight the importance of RT in the treatment of older adults and encourage multidisciplinary participation in their care.

Improving medical student education in radiation oncology: Integrating and evaluating an experiential interdisciplinary workshop into the medical student curriculum.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate a novel interactive educational workshop designed to improve medical student knowledge and awareness of radiation oncology (RO). METHOD: A 2.5-h pilot workshop in RO was introduced in 2018 for one teaching hospital cohort of postgraduate medical students. Students participated in a voluntary interactive programme of learning 'stations' situated in the RO department, introducing students to practical aspects of RO planning, delivery and patient care. Students were surveyed before and immediately after the workshop to assess their perceptions of its educational value and the impact on RO knowledge and awareness. RESULTS: Forty-four of 51 students participated in the RO workshop with 44 students (100%) completing the preworkshop survey and 38 students completing postworkshop survey (86%). Twenty-three of 44 students had prior RO teaching, and 11/23 students (48%) had received between 30 and 60 min of teaching with only 4/44 (9%) confident in their knowledge of RO. Following the workshop, 22/38 (58%) felt their knowledge now met expectations for their level of training. Preworkshop, objective RO knowledge was low, regarding optimal use of RT (25%) and bone pain response (41%) and improved to 100% and 86% respectively. Overall, feedback around workshop value was highly positive with regard to enjoyment (97%) and students commented on the enthusiasm and multidisciplinarity of teachers. CONCLUSION: There remain large gaps in medical student knowledge and confidence in RO, and intervention is necessary to address these discrepancies. A novel interactive RO workshop for medical students has demonstrated improved awareness and knowledge with high levels of self-reported learner satisfaction.

Improving the Education of Radiation Oncology Professionals in Geriatric Oncology: Where Are We and Where Should We Be?

As the global population ages, the care of older adults with cancer is increasingly recognised as a growing challenge in oncology practice worldwide. At present, outcomes for older adults with cancer are worse than younger counterparts. The need for improved clinician education around geriatric oncology is internationally recognised as being fundamental to addressing this problem. Radiation therapy represents an excellent localised treatment modality for older adults due to its limited systemic toxicity, especially in circumstances in which surgery and chemotherapy are deemed inappropriate. Thus, the education of future radiation oncologists and other radiation oncology professionals (including radiation therapists, nurses, and physicists) in geriatric oncology is crucial to ensuring the complex needs of this patient population are met. However, evidence shows that within the specialty of radiation oncology, knowledge levels around key concepts in geriatric oncology are low and there is limited educational focus on the specific issues important for the care of older adults. An evidence-based, global approach to improving radiation oncology professionals' knowledge and clinical practice in geriatric oncology is needed to provide optimal care for older adults undergoing radiation therapy. This article provides an overview of the current status of geriatric oncology training and education in the specialty of radiation oncology and future directions to improve the knowledge and skills of radiation oncology professionals in caring for older adults.

International efforts in geriatric radiation oncology.

INTRODUCTION: Geriatric assessment (GA) has been recommended to form part of treatment decision making for older adults with cancer. However despite consensus guidelines from various organizations, GA does not appear to be a part of routine practice in radiation oncology. The aim of the current study was to explore the implementation of GA in radiation oncology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This anonymous international survey investigated current use of GA in patients presenting for radiation therapy aged 65 years and over, in accordance with Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) guidelines. The survey was designed, using Qualitrics™, an online survey tool. It was distributed via SIOG, social media and radiation oncology professional organizations. Survey responses were analyzed using simple descriptive statistics. An additional analysis by creating a dichotomous variable based on awareness of major clinical practice guidelines and current use of GA. RESULTS: Among 158 respondents, there was relatively low awareness of GA guidelines and low uptake of validated tools and processes. A minority of participants, only 16%, stated that they had a specialized geriatric oncology program in their institution. Approximately a third (34%) of respondents were unaware of any GA clinical practice guidelines. With regard to what way participants assess older patients differently to younger patients, 16% reported formally using specific validated tools, whereas 73% reported an informal assessment based on their own judgment, with 5% reporting no difference between younger and older patients. Regarding the use of validated screening tools for geriatric impairments, over half reported using none (57%). Regarding GA implementation, the main barriers highlighted included a lack of clinical/support staff, a lack of training, knowledge, understanding or experience about GA and a lack of time. DISCUSSION: Relatively low awareness of guidelines and low uptake of formal GA tools and processes were found. The integration of GA principles into radiation oncology appears to be ad hoc and very much in its infancy. There is a clear need for increased interdisciplinary education and collaboration between the disciplines of radiation oncology and geriatric medicine.

Using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in routine head and neck cancer care: What do health professionals perceive as barriers and facilitators?

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are direct reports from patients about their health status. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are validated tools assessing PROs and completed by patients. Though commonly used in research, implementing PROMs into routine clinical care has been challenging. We aimed to examine health professionals' (HPs') perceptions of barriers and facilitators to PRO and PROM use in the routine care of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. METHODS: A custom survey was created, pilot-tested and disseminated to all HPs involved in the care of HNC patients in Western Sydney Local Health District, Australia. Participants were asked to rate the degree to which they believed the survey items were barriers or facilitators to routine PRO use by answering 'not at all', 'very little', 'quite a bit' and 'very much'. RESULTS: Of 129 HPs, 86% had never routinely used PROs. Key barriers perceived were low workplace awareness of PROs (73%), HPs' lack of knowledge on PRO use (63%) and lack of PROMs in patient preferred languages (63%). Insufficient time, staff and infrastructure to support routine PRO collection and non-integrated PROMs in patient electronic medical records were also highlighted. Top facilitators were time for PRO administration and interpretation (86%), clear definition of staff roles (84%) and automatic scoring and interpretation of PROMs (81%). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlighted key barriers and facilitators to PRO use in routine HNC patient care as perceived by HPs. The findings will be useful in guiding the successful and sustainable implementation of routine PRO collection in clinical settings.

The physical and psychological sexual well-being of women with pelvic malignancy: how can we understand and improve our practice?

How can we better understand and improve our practice around the physical and psychological well-being of women treated with radiation therapy for pelvic malignancy? In this issue, Summerfield et al report the results of a nationwide survey capturing practices around the management of radiation therapy-induced vaginal adhesions and stenosis (RTVAS) across New Zealand. This study highlights the need for oncologists to improve care around a challenging but critically important aspect of women's health beyond a cancer diagnosis.

Can radiation oncologists learn to be better leaders? Outcomes of a pilot Foundations of Leadership in Radiation Oncology program for trainees delivered via personal electronic devices.

INTRODUCTION: There has been no systematic attempt to enhance leadership capacity within radiation oncology as an integrated component of training. This pilot study examines an intervention to introduce basics of leadership learning to radiation oncology trainees. METHODS: A case-based learning tool was designed for delivery via trainees' personal electronic devices. Eight typical workplace case scenarios representing leadership challenges were followed by multiple choice questions, key learning points and hyperlinks to relevant resources. Cases were automatically sent every few days over 4 weeks and participants' responses anonymously collated by the delivery platform (QStream). In addition, an online survey was sent at completion of the program to capture trainees' perspectives on the utility of this tool. RESULTS: Thirty-seven of 45 (82%) trainees participated: 21 females and 16 males. Twenty-six of 37 (70%) starting the program completed it. Sixteen (62% of 'completers') responded to the post-program survey. Fourteen of 16 (87.5%) agreed to the program and helped them identify ways they were already exhibiting leadership. Eleven of 16 (68.8%) agreed they had acquired knowledge that could assist them in being better leaders. Fifteen of 16 said the program made them consider future leadership possibilities in radiation oncology. Fourteen of 15 enjoyed the digital format. Most suggestions for improvement linked to a desire for more interactivity in learning these skills. CONCLUSION: Piloting an online tool designed to introduce foundation leadership concepts to radiation oncology trainees has provided useful feedback to guide further development in this area. Although this method had high feasibility, it revealed the need for additional interactive methods for leadership learning.

Targeting general practitioners: Prospective outcomes of a national education program in radiation oncology.

INTRODUCTION: We report on learning outcomes of a standardized national education program aimed at improving general practitioner (GP) knowledge about radiation therapy (RT) and referral pathways to radiation oncologists (ROs). METHODS: In 2014, a GP education program was developed through the Targeting Cancer public awareness campaign of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) Faculty of Radiation Oncology. The sessions were held in RT departments and comprised of RO-led case-based group learning and a department tour. Pre- and immediate post-session surveys assessed four domains: Objective knowledge about RT, understanding of referral pathways to ROs, self-reported referral behaviours, feedback on the session. A 6-month follow up survey assessed ongoing knowledge retention. RESULTS: Eighteen sessions were held nationwide between October 2014 and March 2016. One hundred and seventy-four were surveyed. Pre-session, 96% of GPs reported their knowledge of RT required improvement. Post-session, 95% rated their knowledge as 'excellent', 'above average' or 'competent'. 32.5% of GPs were not aware of the location of their local RT department. 81% reported patients would benefit from having clearer referral pathways to ROs. 96% agreed the GP's role is to refer cancer patients to relevant specialists to discuss treatment options. However, only 49% were comfortable referring directly to an RO. Post-session rose to 92%. All respondents felt the session improved their understanding of RT. In the follow up survey, 17 respondents (94%) reported the session had improved their ability to care for cancer patients. CONCLUSION: A national GP education program improves GP knowledge about RT and may influence patient referrals for RT.

Radiation-induced vaginal stenosis: current perspectives.

Treatment of gynecological cancer commonly involves pelvic radiation therapy (RT) and/or brachytherapy. A commonly observed side effect of such treatment is radiation-induced vaginal stenosis (VS). This review analyzed the incidence, pathogenesis, clinical manifestation(s) and assessment and grading of radiation-induced VS. In addition, risk factors, prevention and treatment options and follow-up schedules are also discussed. The limited available literature on many of these aspects suggests that additional studies are required to more precisely determine the best management strategy of this prevalent group after RT.

Are Future Radiation Oncologists Equipped With the Knowledge to Manage Elderly Patients With Cancer?

PURPOSE: To assess radiation oncology (RO) trainee knowledge, attitudes, and clinical practice relating to geriatric oncology. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A custom online survey was anonymously administered to RO trainees across Australia, New Zealand, and Singapore. The survey assessed 3 domains: (1) trainee demographics and prior training in geriatric medicine; (2) current clinical practice and attitudes regarding elderly cancer patients and radiation therapy; and (3) opinions regarding educational opportunities around geriatric oncology. The survey was developed and reviewed by radiation oncologists with expertise in education and training. RESULTS: A total of 61 trainees (52%) responded to the survey. More than half had not undertaken a geriatric medicine term before RO speciality training. A total of 91.8% of respondents had not received teaching during RO training specifically regarding geriatric oncology. The use of geriatric assessment (GA) tools for determining suitability for radiation therapy was uncommon, with 80.3% of respondents rarely or never using them. More than two-thirds of respondents reported not seeking or rarely seeking multidisciplinary input from a geriatrician when assessing suitability for treatment. Trainees had low confidence levels in managing complex issues commonly observed in the elderly. Only 39.3% felt they had the confidence to manage these issues, with 31.2% not confident/not at all confident. Respondents reported functional status, assessment of comorbidity, physiologic age, and cognition as the major factors applied to treatment decisions. Input from a geriatrician was lowest ranked. Of factors influencing choice of dose/fractionation schedule, physiologic age ranked highest, whereas use of GA tool ranked the lowest. The majority of trainees (85.3%) agreed or strongly agreed they would benefit from more training around RO in elderly patients, and 65.6% felt the addition of learning objectives to RO curriculum around geriatric oncology would be valuable. CONCLUSIONS: Radiation oncology trainees report inadequate training and experience in geriatric oncology and geriatric medicine. Radiation oncology trainees rarely use and poorly understand the rationale for GA tools and geriatrician input in clinical practice. Trainees strongly support improved education in geriatric oncology.

Methods of conducting effective outreach to private well owners - a literature review and model approach.

Educational outreach programs have the potential to increase the occurrence of private well testing and maintenance behaviors, but are not always able to successfully engage the intended audience and overcome their barriers to change. We conducted a review of literature regarding behavior change and risk communication to identify common barriers to private well stewardship and motivational strategies to encourage change, as well as best practices for communicating with well owners. Results indicated that no specific strategy will be appropriate for all audiences, as different groups of well owners will have different barriers to change. For this reason, educators must develop an understanding of their audience so they are able to identify the most significant barriers to change and select motivational strategies that will directly reduce barriers. Implications for private well outreach programs are discussed.

Does prostate-specific antigen nadir predict longer-term outcomes of prostate cancer after neoadjuvant and adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy in conjunction with brachytherapy?

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether nadir prostate-specific antigen (nPSA), time to nPSA (TnPSA), and nPSA 3-years post-treatment are prognostic for prostate cancer (PC) in patients treated with temporary brachytherapy plus external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and hormonal manipulation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively analyzed our database of 253 patients with Stage T1-T3 N0M0 PC who underwent brachytherapy with temporary brachytherapy plus EBRT. All patients received neoadjuvant androgen deprivation for a median of 6 months. Treatment consisted of three pulses of pseudo pulsed-dose-rate brachytherapy to a median dose of 18Gy with 50.4Gy in 28 fractions of EBRT. Treatment took place between December 1999 and March 2006. RESULTS: At a median of 6-years followup, nPSA value was a predictor of biochemical control. Rising nPSA categories of <0.01, 0.01-<0.05, 0.05-≤0.1, 0.1-≤ 1.0, or >1.0 ng/mL correlated with a deteriorating 5-year biochemical control (nBED) by the Phoenix definition of 100%, 90.0%, 82.5%, 64.3%, and 10%, respectively. A highly statistically significant relationship between nPSA value and subsequent clinical failure is also demonstrated. The relationship between TnPSA and nBED was strongly significant (p<0.0001), with a significantly longer nPSA for patients who had Phoenix nBED. A PSA of <1.5 ng/mL achieved 3-year post radiation therapy was prognostic for biochemical and clinical disease control (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: The nPSA, TnPSA, and reaching a PSA cutoff level of <1.5 ng/mL at 3 years post-treatment can provide useful prognostic information on long-term biochemical and clinical control of PC in patients treated with pseudo PDR, EBRT, and hormone manipulation.

Long-term outcome for prostate cancer using pseudo pulse-dosed rate brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, and hormones.

PURPOSE: We report the long-term outcomes of pulse-dose rate (PDR) brachytherapy used in a nonstandard style (pseudo-PDR) with an high-dose rate brachytherapy technique in conjunction with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and hormonal manipulation on prostate cancer (PC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: We treated 253 patients with Stage T1-T3 N0M0 PC, between December 1999 and March 2006. All patients received neoadjuvant androgen deprivation for a median 6 months. Treatment consisted of three pulses of pseudo-PDR brachytherapy to a median dose of 18Gy with 50.4Gy in 28 fractions of EBRT. RESULTS: At a median 6 years followup, (range, 1-11 years), 5-year overall survival was 92%, and PC-specific survival was 96%. The 5-year biochemical control (biochemical no evidence of disease) by the Phoenix definition for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups was 95%, 90%, and 71%, respectively (p<0.00001). At 6 years, the incidence of Radiotherapy Oncology Group Grade 2 and 3 genitourinary toxicity was 1% and 6%; Radiotherapy Oncology Group Grade 2 and 3 gastrointestinal toxicity was 4% and 0%. Erectile preservation at 3 years was 58%. The Phoenix definition best predicted clinical failure with a high specificity (94%). CONCLUSIONS: Pseudo-PDR brachytherapy plus EBRT with limited neoadjuvant hormonal manipulation is an effective treatment option in localized PC, with minimal and tolerable morbidity and provides excellent control. This technique of a modified PDR-delivery technique appears as effective as high-dose rate therapy.