Estimating the optimal utilization rates of radiotherapy for hematologic malignancies from a review of the evidence

Rates of adherence to cancer treatment guidelines in Australia and the factors associated with adherence: A systematic review

Adherence to cancer treatment clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) varies enormously across Australia, despite being associated with improved patient outcomes. This systematic review aims to characterize adherence rates to active-cancer treatment CPGs in Australia and related factors to inform future implementation strategies. Five databases were systematically searched, abstracts were screened for eligibility, a full-text review and critical appraisal of eligible studies performed, and data extracted. A narrative synthesis of factors associated with adherence was conducted, and the median adherence rates within cancer streams calculated. A total of 21,031 abstracts were identified. After duplicates were removed, abstracts screened, and full texts reviewed, 20 studies focused on adherence to active-cancer treatment CPGs were included. Overall adherence rates ranged from 29% to 100%. Receipt of guideline recommended treatments was higher for patients who were younger (diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [DLBCL], colorectal, lung, and breast cancer); female (breast and lung cancer), and male (DLBCL and colorectal cancer); never smokers (DLBCL and lung cancer); non-Indigenous Australians (cervical and lung cancer); with less advanced stage disease (colorectal, lung, and cervical cancer), without comorbidities (DLBCL, colorectal, and lung cancer); with good-excellent Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (lung cancer); living in moderately accessible places (colon cancer); and; treated in metropolitan facilities (DLBLC, breast and colon cancer). This review characterized active-cancer treatment CPG adherence rates and associated factors in Australia. Future targeted CPG implementation strategies should account for these factors, to redress unwarranted variation particularly in vulnerable populations, and improve patient outcomes (Prospero number: CRD42020222962).

What is access to radiation therapy? A conceptual framework and review of influencing factors

OBJECTIVES

Optimal radiation therapy (RT) utilisation rates (RURs) have been defined for various cancer indications through extensive work in Australia and overseas. These benchmarks remain unrealised. The gap between optimal RUR and actual RUR has been attributed to inadequacies in 'RT access'. We aimed to develop a conceptual framework for the consideration of 'RT access' by examining the literature for existing constructs and translating it to the context of RT services. We further aimed to use this framework to identify and examine factors influencing 'RT access'.

METHODS

Existing models of health care access were reviewed and used to develop a multi-dimensional conceptual framework for 'RT access'. A review of the literature was then conducted to identify factors reported to affect RT access and utilisation. The electronic databases searched, the host platform and date range of the databases searched were Ovid MEDLINE, 1946 to October 2014 and PsycINFO via OvidSP,1806 to October 2014.

RESULTS

The framework developed demonstrates that 'RT access' encompasses opportunity for RT as well as the translation of this opportunity to RT utilisation. Opportunity for RT includes availability, affordability, adequacy (quality) and acceptability of RT services. Several factors at the consumer, referrer and RT service levels affect the translation of this opportunity for RT to actual RT utilisation.

CONCLUSION

'Access' is a term that is widely used in the context of health service related research, planning and political discussions. It is a multi-faceted concept with many descriptions. We propose a conceptual framework for the consideration of 'RT access' so that factors affecting RT access and utilisation may be identified and examined. Understanding these factors, and quantifying them where possible, will allow objective evaluation of their impact on RT utilisation and guide implementation of strategies to modify their effects.

Hierarchy of evidence referring to the central nervous system in a high-impact radiation oncology journal: a 10-year assessment. Descriptive critical appraisal study

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE

To the best of our knowledge, there has been no systematic assessment of the classification of scientific production within the scope of radiation oncology relating to central nervous system tumors. The aim of this study was to systematically assess the status of evidence relating to the central nervous system and to evaluate the geographic origins and major content of these published data.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Descriptive critical appraisal study conducted at a private hospital in São Paulo, Brazil.

METHODS

We evaluated all of the central nervous system studies published in the journal Radiotherapy & Oncology between 2003 and 2012. The studies identified were classified according to their methodological design and level of evidence. Information regarding the geographical location of the study, the institutions and authors involved in the publication, main condition or disease investigated and time of publication was also obtained.

RESULTS

We identified 3,004 studies published over the 10-year period. Of these, 125 (4.2%) were considered eligible, and 66% of them were case series. Systematic reviews and randomized clinical trials accounted for approximately 10% of all the published papers. We observed an increase in high-quality evidence and a decrease in low-quality published papers over this period (P = 0.036). The inter-rater reliability demonstrated significant agreement between observers in terms of the level of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Increases in high-level evidence and in the total number of central nervous system papers were clearly demonstrated, although the overall number of such studies remained relatively small.

Recommendations for the use of radiotherapy in nodal lymphoma

These guidelines have been developed to define the use of radiotherapy for lymphoma in the current era of combined modality treatment taking into account increasing concern over the late side-effects associated with previous radiotherapy. The role of reduced volume and reduced doses is addressed, integrating modern imaging with three-dimensional planning and advanced techniques of treatment delivery. Both wide-field and involved-field techniques have now been supplanted by the use of defined volumes based on node involvement shown on computed tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET) imaging and applying the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements concepts of gross tumour volume (GTV), clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV). The planning of lymphoma patients for radical radiotherapy should now be based upon contrast enhanced 3 mm contiguous CT with three-dimensional definition of volumes using the convention of GTV, CTV and PTV. The involved-site radiotherapy concept defines the CTV based on the PET-defined pre-chemotherapy sites of involvement with an expansion in the cranio-caudal direction of lymphatic spread by 1.5 cm, constrained to tissue planes such as bone, muscle and air cavities. The margin allows for uncertainties in PET resolution, image registration and changes in patient positioning and shape. There is increasing evidence in both Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma that traditional doses are higher than necessary for disease control and related to the incidence of late effects. No more than 30 Gy for Hodgkin and aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma and 24 Gy for indolent lymphomas is recommended; lower doses of 20 Gy in combination therapy for early-stage low-risk Hodgkin lymphoma may be sufficient. As yet there are no large datasets validating the use of involved-site radiotherapy; these will emerge from the current generation of clinical trials. Radiotherapy remains the most effective single modality in the treatment of lymphoma. A reduction in both treatment volume and overall treatment dose should now be considered to minimise the risks of late sequelae. However, it is important that this is not at the expense of the excellent disease control currently achieved.

Referral rates and trends in radiotherapy as part of primary treatment of cancer in South Netherlands, 1988–2002

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To study referral rates and time trends in the use of primary radiotherapy (RT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The proportion and number of irradiated patients were calculated in a population-based setting among 58,436 cancer patients diagnosed between 1988 and 2002.

RESULTS

The number of patients receiving RT within 6 months of diagnosis (RT6mo) increased by about 3.3% annually, the proportion of all incident cases that received RT6mo remained stable (+/-30%). Only 20% of elderly patients (75+) received RT6mo. The proportion of cancer patients that received RT6mo increased markedly between 1988-1992 and 1998-2002 for patients with prostate cancer (15 and 28%, respectively), rectal cancer (33 and 43%) and brain tumours (48 and 67%). The absolute number of irradiated breast cancer patients increased 30% between 1988 and 2002. Among patients with rectal cancer, a shift occurred from postoperative to preoperative RT since 1995. The percentage of irradiated patients with stage I endometrial cancer decreased from 47% in 1988-1992 to 15% in 1998-2002.

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of cancer patients who received primary RT remained stable throughout 1988-2002, being consistently lower for older patients. The increased number of irradiated patients was due mainly to earlier detection and the ageing of the population. To clarify the overall percentage of patients irradiated, population-based studies on RT given after 6 months since diagnosis are warranted.

Estimating the optimal radiotherapy utilization for carcinoma of the central nervous system, thyroid carcinoma, and carcinoma of unknown primary origin from evidence-based clinical guidelines

BACKGROUND

In this one in a series of articles, the objective was to estimate the ideal proportion of patients with cancer who should receive radiotherapy at least once during the course of their illness based on the best available evidence. This estimate should be useful in planning for future radiotherapy facilities. Optimal rates of radiotherapy for patients with central nervous system (CNS) carcinoma, thyroid carcinoma, or carcinoma of unknown primary site (CUP) have not been studied previously.

METHODS

A systematic review of evidence-based treatment guidelines for the treatment of CNS carcinoma, CUP, and thyroid carcinoma was undertaken. An optimal radiotherapy utilization tree was constructed for each of these malignancies depicting the indications for radiotherapy at various stages of disease. The proportion of patients who had clinical attributes that indicated a possible benefit from radiotherapy was calculated by adding epidemiological data to the radiotherapy utilization tree. The optimal proportion of patients who should receive radiotherapy was then calculated using specialized decision-analysis software. Sensitivity analyses using univariate analysis and Monte Carlo simulations were performed.

RESULTS

The optimal rates of radiotherapy utilization for carcinoma of the CNS, thyroid carcinoma, and CUP were 92%, 10%, and 61%, respectively. Comparison with actual rates of utilization in South Australia, Sweden, and the U.S. suggested an under-utilization of radiotherapy for CNS carcinoma and CUP. However, the actual rates of radiotherapy for thyroid carcinoma exceeded the optimal rate for some jurisdictions, although some data may have included radioactive iodine, which was not included in the current project.

CONCLUSIONS

It was possible to estimate optimal radiotherapy utilization rates based on evidence. This methodology allowed a comparison of optimal rates with actual rates to identify areas in which improvements in the evidence-based use of radiotherapy can be made, and it may provide valuable data for future radiotherapy service planning.

The role of radiotherapy in cancer treatment: estimating optimal utilization from a review of evidence-based clinical guidelines

Radiotherapy utilization rates for cancer vary widely internationally. It has previously been suggested that approximately 50% of all cancer patients should receive radiation. However, this estimate was not evidence-based. The aim of this study was to estimate the ideal proportion of new cases of cancer that should receive radiotherapy at least once during the course of their illness based on the best available evidence. An optimal radiotherapy utilization tree was constructed for each cancer based upon indications for radiotherapy taken from evidence-based treatment guidelines. The proportion of patients with clinical attributes that indicated a possible benefit from radiotherapy was obtained by adding epidemiologic data to the radiotherapy utilization tree. The optimal proportion of patients with cancer that should receive radiotherapy was then calculated using TreeAge (TreeAge Software, Williamstown, MA) software. Sensitivity analyses using univariate analysis and Monte Carlo simulations were performed. The proportion of patients with cancer in whom external beam radiotherapy is indicated according to the best available evidence was calculated to be 52%. Monte Carlo analysis indicated that the 95% confidence limits were from 51.7% to 53.1%. The tightness of the confidence interval suggests that the overall estimate is robust. Comparison with actual radiotherapy utilization data suggests a shortfall in actual radiotherapy delivery. This methodology allows comparison of optimal rates with actual rates to identify areas where improvements in the evidence-based use of radiotherapy can be made. It provides valuable data for radiotherapy service planning. Actual rates need to be addressed to ensure better radiotherapy utilization.

Estimating the optimal utilization rates of radiotherapy for hematologic malignancies from a review of the evidence

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to estimate the ideal proportion of new patients with leukemia and myeloma who should receive radiotherapy at some time during the course of their illness based on the best evidence.

METHODS

Available evidence of the efficacy of radiotherapy in most clinical situations for leukemia and myeloma was identified through extensive literature reviews and treatment guideline searches. Epidemiologic data concerning the distribution of types, disease stages, and other factors that influence the use of radiotherapy were identified. Decision trees were constructed to merge the evidence-based recommendations with the epidemiological data to calculate the optimal proportion of patients who should receive radiotherapy according to the best available evidence. Actual radiotherapy utilization rates also were identified.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients diagnosed with myeloma in Australia who should receive radiotherapy based on the evidence was 38%. There was wide variation in the proportion of patients who actually received radiotherapy for myeloma from 24% up to 55%. The recommended proportion of patients diagnosed with myeloma in Australia who, according to the best available evidence, should receive at least a single course of radiotherapy was 38%. The proportion of patients diagnosed in Australia with leukemia who should receive radiotherapy at some point in their management, according to the best available evidence, was calculated at 4%, which corresponded with actual practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Further research will be required to determine why more patients who are diagnosed with myeloma are not treated with radiotherapy.