Radiation Fractionation Schedules Published During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review of the Quality of Evidence and Recommendations for Future Development

Use of Radiation Therapy for the Treatment of Breast Cancer in 2019 Versus 2020

Purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted medical care. Little is known about how radiation therapy (RT) ordering behavior changed during the pandemic. This study examined (1) whether there was a change in the rate at which orders for lumpectomy were followed by orders for RT and (2) whether there was a change in the percentage of RT orders for hypofractionated (HF) RT rather than conventionally fractionated (CF) RT.

Methods and Materials

Prior authorization order data from 2019 and 2020, pertaining to patients with commercial and Medicare Advantage health plans, were reviewed to determine whether patients had an order for RT in the 90 days after lumpectomy and if it was for CF or HF RT. Univariate analyses were conducted using χ2 tests, and adjusted analyses were conducted using multivariate logistic regression, controlling for patient age, urbanicity, local median income, region, if the lumpectomy facility was academic, and if the lumpectomy facility was a hospital.

Results

In 2019, 47.7% of included lumpectomy orders (2200/4610) were followed by an RT order within 90 days, in contrast to 45.6% (1944/4263) in 2020 (P = .048). Of the RT orders meeting this study's definition of CF or HF, 75.3% of orders placed in 2019 (1387/1843) and 79.0% of orders placed in 2020 (1261/1597) were for HF (P = .011). Adjusted analysis found patients receiving a lumpectomy order in the first quarter of 2020 had significantly reduced odds (odds ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-0.99) of receiving an order for RT after lumpectomy, relative to those with orders placed in the first quarter of 2019. Adjusted analysis likewise found significant evidence of increased use of HF RT during the pandemic.

Conclusions

In the population examined, physicians were less likely to order RT after lumpectomy in 2020 than in 2019, and if they did, were more likely to order HF RT.

Current status of remote radiotherapy treatment planning in Japan: findings from a national survey†

The purpose of this study was to investigate the status of remote-radiotherapy treatment planning (RRTP) in Japan through a nationwide questionnaire survey. The survey was conducted between 29 June and 4 August 2022, at 834 facilities in Japan that were equipped with linear accelerators. The survey utilized a Google form that comprised 96 questions on facility information, information about the respondent, utilization of RRTP between facilities, usage for telework and the inclination to implement RRTPs in the respondent's facility. The survey analyzed the utilization of the RRTP system in four distinct implementation types: (i) utilization as a supportive facility, (ii) utilization as a treatment facility, (iii) utilization as a teleworker outside of the facility and (iv) utilization as a teleworker within the facility. The survey response rate was 58.4% (487 facilities responded). Among the facilities that responded, 10% (51 facilities) were implementing RRTP. 13 served as supportive facilities, 23 as treatment facilities, 17 as teleworkers outside of the facility and 5 as teleworkers within the facility. In terms of system usage between supportive and treatment facilities, 70-80% of the participants utilized the system for emergencies or as overtime work for external workers. A substantial number of facilities (38.8%) reported that they were unfamiliar with RRTP implementation. The survey showed that RRTP utilization in Japan is still limited, with a significant number of facilities unfamiliar with the technology. The study highlights the need for greater understanding and education about RRTP and financial funds of economical compensation.

Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Hematologic Malignancies during the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond

PURPOSE

Radiotherapy is integral in the management of hematological malignancies (HM). Standard radiotherapy dose fractionation regimens range between 20 and 50 Gy in 10-25 fractions over 2-5 weeks. This study presents the outcomes of patients with HM treated with hypofractionation radiotherapy (HFRT) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Patients (n = 36) were treated with HFRT between January 2020 and September 2022. The outcomes measured were the overall response rate (ORR), freedom from local progression (FFLP), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 13.2 months. Thirty-three patients (92%) had non-Hodgkin (NHL) or Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Eighteen patients (50%) had aggressive and nine (25%) had indolent NHL. Nineteen patients (53%) presented with stage I/II and fifteen (42%) with stage III/IV disease. Twenty-five (69.4%) and eleven (30%) received consolidative and definitive RT, respectively. Twenty patients (56%) received treatment to the neck and/or thorax and nine (25%) to the abdomen or pelvis. The total dose ranged from 18 to 42.5 Gy in 6-17 fractions/2.67-5 Gy per fraction. The median dose in 2 Gy fractions for an alpha/beta (α/β) ratio of 10 amounted to 39 Gy (SD ± 13.86) and 43.6 Gy (SD ± 12) for an α/β of 3. The most commonly used fractionation scheme was 39 Gy in 13 fractions. ORR was 94.4% for the entire cohort, and 100, 94.4, and 83.3% for indolent NHL, aggressive NHL, and HL patients. The two-year FFLP was 76% (95% CI: 34-93%) for the entire cohort and 100, 87 (95% CI: 56.4-96.5%), and 42% (95% CI: 1.1-84.3%) for the indolent NHL, aggressive NHL, and HL patients. Two-year OS for the entire cohort was 80% (95% CI: 59.9-90.5%) and 100, 66.1 (95% CI: 36.4-84.4%), and 100% for the indolent NHL, aggressive NHL, and HL patients. Only one patient presented with grade two pulmonary toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

HFRT in HM provides excellent local control to be validated in a larger prospective study.

Nursing Care for Metastatic Bone Cancer: Trends for the Future

To effectively treat patients and minimize viral exposure, oncology nurses and radiology departments during COVID-19 had to re-examine the ability to offer palliative radiation treatments to people with metastatic bone cancer. Decreasing potential exposure to the virus resulted in extra measures to keep patients and personnel safe. Limiting radiotherapy treatments, social distancing, and limiting caregivers were a few of the ways that oncology patients were impacted by the pandemic. Hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT), or the delivery of fewer higher-dose treatments, was a method of providing care but also limiting exposure to infection for immunocompromised patients as well as healthcare staff. As oncology radiation centers measure the impact of patient care during the pandemic, a trend toward HFRT may occur in treating the painful symptoms of bone cancer. In anticipation that HFRT may be increasingly used in patient treatment plans, oncology nurses should consider patient perspectives and outcomes from the pandemic to further determine how to manage future trends in giving personalized care, and supportive care.

Looking Back: International Practice Patterns in Breast Radiation Oncology From a Case-Based Survey Across 54 Countries During the First Surge of the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected cancer care worldwide, including radiation therapy (RT) for breast cancer (BC), because of risk-based resource allocation. We report the evolution of international breast RT practices during the beginning of the pandemic, focusing on differences in treatment recommendations between countries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between July and November 2020, a 58-question survey was distributed to radiation oncologists (ROs) through international professional societies. Changes in RT decision making during the first surge of the pandemic were evaluated across six hypothetical scenarios, including the management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), early-stage, locally advanced, and metastatic BC. The significance of changes in responses before and during the pandemic was examined using chi-square and McNemar-Bowker tests.

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred three ROs from 54 countries completed the survey. Incomplete responses (254) were excluded from the analysis. Most respondents were from the United States (285), Japan (117), Italy (63), Canada (58), and Brazil (56). Twenty-one percent (230) of respondents reported treating at least one patient with BC who was COVID-19-positive. Approximately 60% of respondents reported no change in treatment recommendation during the pandemic, except for patients with metastatic disease, for which 57.7% (636/1,103; P < .0005) changed their palliative practice. Among respondents who noted a change in their recommendation during the first surge of the pandemic, omitting, delaying, and adopting short-course RT were the most frequent changes, with most transitioning to moderate hypofractionation for DCIS and early-stage BC.

CONCLUSION

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, significant changes in global RT practice patterns for BC were introduced. The impact of published results from the FAST FORWARD trial supporting ultrahypofractionation likely confounded the interpretation of the pandemic's independent influence on RT delivery.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on delivery of pediatric radiotherapy: A critical review

The COVID-19 pandemic has prevented the timely diagnosis and treatment of many diseases, including pediatric cancer. Its impact on pediatric oncologic treatments warrants investigation. As radiotherapy is an integral component of cancer care, we reviewed the published data regarding the impact of COVID-19 on the delivery of pediatric radiotherapy to inform actions for future global events. We found that disruptions in radiotherapy were reported amongst interruptions in other therapies. Disruptions were more common in low-income countries (78%) and low middle-income countries (68%) compared with upper middle-income countries (46%) and high-income countries (10%). Several papers included recommendations for mitigation strategies. Altered treatment regimens were common, including increasing the use of active surveillance and systemic therapy to delay local therapies, and accelerated/hypofractionated dose delivery. Our findings suggest that COVID-19 has impacted radiotherapy delivery in the pediatric population globally. Countries with limited resources may be more affected. Various mitigation strategies have been developed. The efficacy of mitigation measures warrants further investigation.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on older cancer patients: Proposed solution by the International Geriatric Radiotherapy Group

Older cancer patients are disproportionally affected by the Coronavirus 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. A higher rate of death among the elderly and the potential for long-term disability have led to fear of contracting the virus in these patients. This fear can, paradoxically, cause delay in diagnosis and treatment that may lead to a poor outcome that could have been prevented. Thus, physicians should devise a policy that both supports the needs of older patients during cancer treatment, and serves to help them overcome their fear so they seek out to cancer diagnosis and treatment early. A combination of telemedicine and a holistic approach, involving prayers for older cancer patients with a high level of spirituality, may improve vaccination rates as well as quality of life during treatment. Collaboration between health care workers, social workers, faith-based leaders, and cancer survivors may be crucial to achieve this goal. Social media may be an important component, providing a means of sending the positive message to older cancer patients that chronological age is not an impediment to treatment.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Number of Cancer Patients and Radiotherapy Procedures in the Warmia and Masuria Voivodeship

(1) Background: It was suspected that the COVID-19 pandemic would negatively affect health care, including cancer treatment. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of radiotherapy procedures and patients treated with radical and palliative radiotherapy in Poland. (2) Methods: The study was carried out in Warmia and Masuria voivodeship. The number of procedures and treated patients one year before and in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic were compared. (3) Results: In the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of radiotherapy procedures and cancer patients treated with radiotherapy in Warmia and Masuria voivodeship in Poland was stable compared to the period before the pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has not affected the ratio of palliative to radical procedures. The percentage of ambulatory and hostel procedures significantly increased with the reduction of inpatient care in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. (4) Conclusion: No significant decrease in patients treated with radiotherapy during the first year of the pandemic in Warmia and Masuria voivodeship in Poland could indicate the rapid adaptation of radiotherapy centers to the pandemic situation. Future studies should be carried out to monitor the situation because the adverse effects of the pandemic may be delayed.

Hypofractionation in Breast Cancer Radiotherapy Across World Bank Income Groups: Results of an International Survey

PURPOSE

Hypofractionated breast radiotherapy has been found to be equivalent to conventional fractionation in many clinical trials. Using data from the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology Global Impact of Radiotherapy in Oncology survey, we identified preferences for hypofractionation in breast cancer across World Bank income groups and the perceived facilitators and barriers to its use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An international, electronic survey was administered to radiation oncologists from 2018 to 2019. Demographics, practice characteristics, preferred hypofractionation regimen for specific breast cancer scenarios, and facilitators and barriers to hypofractionation were reported and stratified by World Bank income groups. Variables associated with hypofractionation were assessed using multivariate logistic regression models.

RESULTS

One thousand four hundred thirty-four physicians responded: 890 (62%) from high-income countries (HICs), 361 (25%) from upper-middle-income countries (UMICs), 183 (13%) from low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs). Hypofractionation was preferred most frequently in node-negative disease after breast-conserving surgery, with the strongest preference reported in HICs (78% from HICs, 54% from UMICs, and 51% from LLMICs, P < .001). Hypofractionation for node-positive disease postmastectomy was more frequently preferred in LLMICs (28% from HICs, 15% from UMICs, and 35% from LLMICs, P < .001). Curative doses of 2.1 to < 2.5 Gy in 15-16 fractions were most frequently reported, with limited preference for ultra-hypofractionation, but significant variability in palliative dosing. In adjusted analyses, UMICs were significantly less likely than LLMICs to prefer hypofractionation across all curative clinical scenarios, whereas respondents with > 1 million population catchments and with intensity-modulated radiotherapy were more likely to prefer hypofractionation. The most frequently cited facilitators and barriers were published evidence and fear of late toxicity, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Preference for hypofractionation varied for curative indications, with greater acceptance in earlier-stage disease in HICs and in later-stage disease in LLMICs. Targeted educational interventions and greater inclusivity in radiation oncology clinical trials may support greater uptake.

Prostate brachytherapy utilization in the COVID-19 era: A cross-sectional study of radiation oncologists in the United States

PURPOSE

Despite advantages such as abbreviated treatment course, brachytherapy (BT) utilization rates for prostate cancer (PC) in the United States (US) are declining. We surveyed practicing US radiation oncologists (ROs) to determine the proportion who offer BT for PC and whether the COVID-19 pandemic influenced practice patterns.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From July-October 2021, we surveyed practicing US ROs. Provider demographic and practice characteristics were collected. Questions assessing utilization of BT and external beam (EBRT) for patients of varying risk groups and the effect of the pandemic on practice patterns were administered. Descriptive statistics were reported. The bivariate relationships between provider characteristics and likelihood of offering BT were assessed using the Chi-square test (α < 0.05).

RESULTS

Six percent of surveyed ROs responded, with 203 meeting inclusion criteria (72% male, 72% white, 53% non-academic, 69% >10 years in practice) and 156 (77%) treating PC. For low-risk, fewer providers offered BT (41% total; 25% low dose rate [LDR], 10% high dose rate [HDR], 6% both) than stereotactic body (SBRT) (54%) and moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy (MHFRT) (83%). For favorable intermediate risk, fewer offered BT (37% total; 21% LDR, 10% HDR, 6% both) than SBRT (48%), MHFRT (87%), and conventionally fractionated EBRT (38%). For high (44%) and very-high (37%) risk, fewer offered EBRT+BT than EBRT alone. For every risk group, academic ROs were significantly more likely to offer BT (all p-values<0.05). <1% of respondents reported increased pandemic-related BT usage.

CONCLUSIONS

US ROs, particularly in non-academic settings, do not routinely offer BT monotherapy or boost (<50%). Practice patterns were unaffected by COVID-19. Retraining may be critical to increasing utilization.

Covid-19 and radiotherapy: a systematic review after 2 years of pandemic

Introduction

Following the Covid-19 pandemic spread, changes in clinical practice were necessary to limit the pandemic diffusion. Also, oncological practice has undergone changes with radiotherapy (RT) treatments playing a key role.Although several experiences have been published, the aim of this review is to summarize the current evidence after 2 years of pandemic to provide useful conclusions for clinicians.

Methods

A Pubmed/MEDLINE and Embase systematic review was conducted. The search strategy was "Covid AND Radiotherapy" and only original articles in the English language were considered.

Results

A total of 2.733 papers were obtained using the mentioned search strategy. After the complete selection process, a total of 281 papers were considered eligible for the analysis of the results.

Discussion

RT has played a key role in Covid-19 pandemic as it has proved more resilient than surgery and chemotherapy. The impact of the accelerated use of hypofractionated RT and telemedicine will make these strategies central also in the post-pandemic period.

Trends in Radiation Oncology Treatment Fractionation at a Single Academic Center, 2010-2020

Purpose

Recent clinical trials suggest hypofractionated treatment regimens are appropriate for treatment of many cancers. It is important to understand and document hypofractionation adoption because of its implications for treatment center patient volumes. There is no recent U.S. study of trends in hypofractionation adoption that includes comparisons of multiple disease sites and data since the onset of COVID-19. In this context, this study describes trends in treatment fractionation at a single academic center from 2010 to 2020.

Methods and Materials

From an institutional database, records were extracted for treatment of 4 disease site categories: all cancers, breast cancer, prostate cancer, and bone metastases. For each disease site, the mean number of fractions per treatment course was reported for each year of the study period. To explore whether the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased hypofractionation adoption, piecewise linear regression models were used to estimate a changepoint in the time trend of mean monthly number of fractions per treatment course and to evaluate whether this changepoint coincided with pandemic onset.

Results

The data set included 22,865 courses of radiation treatment and 375,446 treatment fractions. The mean number of fractions per treatment course for all cancers declined from 17.5 in 2010 to 13.6 in 2020. There was increased adoption of hypofractionation at this institution for all cancers and specifically for both breast and prostate cancer. For bone metastases, hypofractionation had largely been adopted before the study period. For most disease sites, adoption of hypofractionated treatment courses occurred before pandemic onset. Bone metastases was the only disease site where a pandemic-driven increase in hypofractionation adoption could not be ruled out.

Conclusions

This study reveals increasing use of hypofractionated regimens for a variety of cancers throughout the study period, which largely occurred before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic at this institution.

Prospective assessment of stress and health concerns of radiation oncology staff during the COVID-19 pandemic

•

The COVID-19 pandemic required continuous adjustment of radiotherapy practice.

•

Global stress levels and health concerns of staff followed COVID-19 infection waves.

•

Frontline workers with direct patient contact were most affected by the pandemic.

•

Beyond COVID-19, weekly regular online surveys can help to monitor staff well-being.

Introduction and background

The COVID-19 pandemic has required rapid and repetitive adjustment of radiotherapy practice, hospital-level and department-level organization and hygiene measures. To prospectively monitor and manage stress levels and health concerns, employees of a radiation oncology department were invited to participate in weekly online surveys during the first year of the pandemic.

Materials and methods

Starting March 31st, 2020, cross-sectional online surveys were distributed to all employees of the Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich. The survey included questions about the profession, the work setting, the global stress level as well as the health concerns during the past work week. Stress levels and health concerns were assessed on a 10-point scale. SurveyMonkey® was used to conduct the survey. Distribution was performed via email. Participation was anonymous and voluntary.

Results

Between March 2020 and February 2021, 50 weekly surveys were distributed to 127 employees on average and resulted in 1,877 individual responses. The average response rate was 30%. The mean global stress level varied significantly by profession, ranging from 2.7 (±2.5) points for administrative staff to 6.9 (±2.3) points for radiation therapy technicians (p < 0.001). The mean global stress level was highest with 4.8 (±2.9) points for in-hospital work with direct patient contact. Health concerns were highest regarding family and friends with 4.0 (±3.1) points on average. Changes of the stress level varied in correlation with infection waves.

Conclusion

Weekly online surveys for prospective assessment of stress levels and health concerns were successfully conducted during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, indicating their feasibility and value to monitor profession and workplace specific stress patterns and to allowed for tailored interventions. The physical and mental health of frontline healthcare workers in radiation oncology should remain a top priority for departmental leadership beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

The impact of COVID-19 on a high-volume incident learning system: A retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this work was to assess how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impacted our incident learning system data and communicate the impact of a major exogenous event on radiation oncology clinical practice.

METHODS

Trends in our electronic incident reporting system were analyzed to ascertain the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, including any direct clinical changes. Incident reports submitted in the 18 months prior to the pandemic (September 14, 2018 to March 13, 2020) and reports submitted during the first 18 months of the pandemic (March 14, 2020 to September 13, 2021) were compared. The incident reports include several data elements that were evaluated for trends between the two time periods, and statistical analysis was performed to compare the proportions of reports.

RESULTS

In the 18 months prior to COVID-19, 192 reports were submitted per 1000 planning tasks (n = 832 total). In the first 18 months of the pandemic, 147 reports per 1000 planning tasks were submitted (n = 601 total), a decrease of 23.4%. Statistical analysis revealed that there were no significant changes among the data elements between the pre- and during COVID-19 time periods. An analysis of the free-text narratives in the reports found that phrases related to pretreatment imaging were common before COVID-19 but not during. Conversely, phrases related to intravenous contrast, consent for computed tomography, and adaptive radiotherapy became common during COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

The data elements captured by our incident learning system were stable after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, with no statistically significant findings after correction for multiple comparisons. A trend toward fewer reports submitted for low-risk issues was observed. The methods used in the work can be generalized to events with a large-scale impact on the clinic or to monitor an incident learning system to drive future improvement activities.

Change in the Use of Fractionation in Radiotherapy Used for Early Breast Cancer at the Start of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Population-Based Cohort Study of Older Women in England and Wales

Aims

Adjuvant radiotherapy is recommended for most patients with early breast cancer (EBC) receiving breast-conserving surgery and those at moderate/high risk of recurrence treated by mastectomy. During the first wave of COVID-19 in England and Wales, there was rapid dissemination of randomised controlled trial-based evidence showing non-inferiority for five-fraction ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) regimens compared with standard moderate-HFRT, with guidance recommending the use of five-fraction HFRT for eligible patients. We evaluated the uptake of this recommendation in clinical practice as part of the National Audit of Breast Cancer in Older Patients (NABCOP).

Materials and methods

Women aged ≥50 years who underwent surgery for EBC from January 2019 to July 2020 were identified from the Rapid Cancer Registration Dataset for England and from Wales Cancer Network data. Radiotherapy details were from linked national Radiotherapy Datasets. Multivariate mixed-effects logistic regression models were used to assess characteristics influential in the use of ultra-HFRT.

Results

Among 35 561 women having surgery for EBC, 71% received postoperative radiotherapy. Receipt of 26 Gy in five fractions (26Gy5F) increased from <1% in February 2020 to 70% in April 2020. Regional variation in the use of 26Gy5F during April to July 2020 was similar by age, ranging from 49 to 87% among women aged ≥70 years. Use of 26Gy5F was characterised by no known nodal involvement, no comorbidities and initial breast-conserving surgery. Of those patients receiving radiotherapy to the breast/chest wall, 85% had 26Gy5F; 23% had 26Gy5F if radiotherapy included regional nodes. Among 5139 women receiving postoperative radiotherapy from April to July 2020, nodal involvement, overall stage, type of surgery, time from diagnosis to start of radiotherapy were independently associated with fractionation choice.

Conclusions

There was a striking increase in the use of 26Gy5F dose fractionation regimens for EBC, among women aged ≥50 years, within a month of guidance published at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in England and Wales.

Similar long-term swallowing outcomes for accelerated, mildly-hypofractionated radiotherapy compared to conventional fractionation in oropharynx cancer: a multi-centre study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There is renewed interest in hypofractionated radiotherapy, but limited data and a lack of consensus to support use for head and neck cancer. In this multicentre analysis we compared outcomes for patients with oropharynx squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) treated with conventional and accelerated, mildly hypofractionated radiotherapy without chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multi-centre, observational study of consecutive OPSCCs treated between 2015 and 2018. Patients underwent curative-intent radiotherapy (oropharynx and bilateral neck) using conventionally fractionated (70 Gy in 35 fractions over 7 weeks, n = 97) or accelerated, mildly hypofractionated (65-66 Gy in 30 fractions over 6 weeks, n = 136) radiotherapy without chemotherapy. Locoregional control (LRC) and overall survival (OS) were compared. Patients alive and cancer-free at a minimum of 2 years post-radiotherapy (n = 151, 65%) were sent an MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) questionnaire to assess swallow function.

RESULTS

LRC and OS were similar across schedules (p = 0.78 and 0.95 respectively, log-rank test). Enteral feeding rates during radiotherapy appeared higher in the 7-week group though this did not reach statistical significance (59% vs 48%, p = 0.08). Feeding rates were similar at 1 year post radiotherapy for both groups (10% vs 6%, p = 0.27). 107 patients returned MDADI questionnaires (71%); there were no differences between the 6- and 7-week groups for median global (60.0 vs 60.0, p = 0.99) and composite (65.8 vs 64.2, p = 0.44) MDADI scores.

CONCLUSION

Patients with OPSCC treated with radiotherapy alone have similar swallowing outcomes, LRC and OS following accelerated, mild hypofractionation and standard fractionation schedules, supporting its use as a standard-of-care option for patients unsuitable for concurrent chemotherapy.

Longitudinal Remote SBRT/SRS Training in Latin America: A Prospective Cohort Study

Background

Continuing medical education in stereotactic technology are scarcely accessible in developing countries. We report the results of upscaling a longitudinal telehealth training course on stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), after successfully developing a pilot course in Latin America.

Methods

Longitudinal training on SBRT and SRS was provided to radiation oncology practitioners in Peru and Colombia at no cost. The program included sixteen weekly 1-hour live conferencing sessions with interactive didactics and a cloud-based platform for case-based learning. Participant-reported confidence was measured in 16 SBRT/SRS practical domains, based on a 1-to-5 Likert scale. Pre- and post-curriculum exams were required for participation credit. Knowledge-baseline, pre- and post-curriculum surveys, overall and single professional-group confidence changes, and exam results were assessed.

Results

One hundred and seventy-three radiotherapy professionals participated. An average of 56 (SD ±18) attendees per session were registered. Fifty (29.7%) participants completed the pre- and post-curriculum surveys, of which 30% were radiation oncologists (RO), 26% radiation therapists (RTT), 20% residents, 18% medical physicists and 6% neurosurgeons. Significant improvements were found across all 16 domains with overall mean +0.55 (SD ±0.17, p&lt;0.001) Likert-scale points. Significant improvements in individual competences were most common among medical physicists, RTT and residents. Pre- and post-curriculum exams yielded a mean 16.15/30 (53.8 ± 20.3%) and 23.6/30 (78.7 ± 19.3%) correct answers (p&lt;0.001).

Conclusion

Longitudinal telehealth training is an effective method for improving confidence and knowledge on SBRT/SRS amongst professionals. Remote continuing medical education should be widely adopted in lower-middle income countries.

Metastatic bone cancer: Consideration for optimal dose fractionation in radiation therapy

The bones are one of the most common sites for metastatic cancer spread. Unfortunately, there is no current known cure for many people affected by bone metastasis. Therefore, the treatment intent for radiotherapy remains a palliative objective, whereby treatments are meant to provide pain relief and alleviate symptoms. However, some debate has arisen in recent decades regarding the most appropriate dose prescription pertaining to dose protraction and fractionation. By delivering a larger dose in fewer fractions, patients can spend less time at the hospital and more time with loved ones. Additionally, many dose prescriptions were prioritized to be shortened during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may offer retrospective data on the treatment outcomes from providing shortened courses of radiotherapy.

Breast Cancer Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic: the Radiation Oncology Perspective

Purpose of Review

The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused disruption in healthcare throughout the world. The limitations placed on hospital resources and the need to limit potential exposure to SARS-CoV-2 for both patients and healthcare staff have affected oncologic care for patients with breast cancer (BC), including radiation therapy (RT). This review highlights published guidelines regarding the provision of radiotherapy for BC patients and their adoption by radiation oncology centers.

Recent Findings

Multiple international and national consortiums plus select institutions have published formal recommendations regarding radiation therapy for BC during the COVID-19 pandemic. They embody the principles of limiting in-person visits, proper triage, and the judicious use of delay, abbreviation, or omission of RT as appropriate.

Summary

Since the start of the pandemic, multiple publications have provided guidance regarding RT for BC during this challenging time. The pandemic has led to increased use of telemedicine and abbreviated radiation therapy courses in the setting of BC, which are likely to persist. Future research is needed to establish the effect of these changes on oncologic outcomes.

Systematic Review of Single-Fraction Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Early Stage Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer and Lung Oligometastases: How to Stop Worrying and Love One and Done

Adoption of single-fraction lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for patients with medically inoperable early stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or oligometastatic lung disease, even during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, was limited despite encouraging phase II trial results. Barriers to using single-fraction SBRT may include lack of familiarity with the regimen and lack of clarity about the expected toxicity. To address these concerns, we performed a systematic review of prospective literature on single-fraction SBRT for definitive treatment of early stage and oligometastatic lung cancer. A PubMed search of prospective studies in English on single-fraction lung SBRT was conducted. A systematic review was performed of the studies that reported clinical outcomes of single-fraction SBRT in the treatment of early stage non-small-cell lung cancer and lung oligometastases. The current prospective literature including nine trials supports the use of single-fraction SBRT in the definitive treatment of early stage peripheral NSCLC and lung oligometastases. Most studies cite local control rates of >90%, mild toxicity profiles, and favorable survival outcomes. Most toxicities reported were grade 1–2, with grade ≥3 toxicity in 0–17% of patients. Prospective trial results suggest potential consideration of utilizing single-fraction SBRT beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

One Fraction Size Does Not Fit All: Patient Preferences for Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy From a Discrete Choice Experiment

PURPOSE

Hypofractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is a standard of care option for localized prostate cancer. To inform clinical practice we quantified patients' preferences for convenience, efficacy, and toxicity risks, of conventional, moderate hypofractionation, and stereotactic radiation therapy regimens.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We used a discrete choice experiment with a voluntary sample consisting of patients treated with EBRT for localized prostate cancer at our academic cancer center. In 2019, 58 participants, mean (SD) age of 72.9 (7.1) years, agreed to complete an in-person 1:1 discrete choice experiment. Each participant made 12 choices between 2 unique EBRT scenarios, each described by 5 attributes: (1) treatment time; (2) fiducial markers; and risk of (3) prostate specific antigen recurrence; (4) acute and (5) late GI or GU toxicity. Patient preferences were estimated using mixed multinomial logistic regression, and prespecified subgroups with conditional logistic regression.

RESULTS

All attributes were statistically significant, thus influenced participants' choices. Risks of prostate specific antigen recurrence (β = -2.581), late (β = -1.854), and acute (β = -1.005) toxicity were most important to participants (P < .001 for each), followed by EBRT length (β = -0.728; P = .017) and fiducial marker implantation (β = -0.563; P = .004). Older (β = -0.063; 95% confidence interval, -0.12, -0.01) and rural (β = -0.083; 95% CI -0.14, -0.02) participants significantly preferred shorter EBRT and were less willing-to-extend treatment to reduce toxicity risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with prostate cancer place importance on EBRT attributes, and some are willing to trade-off increased risk of toxicity for improved convenience. Our findings promote shared clinical decision-making because patients are interested in learning about the trade-offs involved.

Learning through a Pandemic: The Current State of Knowledge on COVID-19 and Cancer

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has left patients with current or past history of cancer facing disparate consequences at every stage of the cancer trajectory. This comprehensive review offers a landscape analysis of the current state of the literature on COVID-19 and cancer including the immune response to COVID-19, risk factors for severe disease, and impact of anticancer therapies. We also review the latest data on treatment of COVID-19 and vaccination safety and efficacy in patients with cancer, as well as impact of the pandemic on cancer care, including the urgent need for rapid evidence generation and real-world study designs.

Breast cancer survivorship care during the COVID-19 pandemic within an urban New York Hospital System

Purpose

To examine clinicodemographic determinants associated with breast cancer survivorship follow-up during COVID-19.

Methods

We performed a retrospective, population-based cohort study including early stage (Stage I-II) breast cancer patients who underwent resection between 2006 and 2018 in a New York City hospital system. The primary outcome was oncologic follow-up prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Secondary analyses compared differences in follow-up by COVID-19 case rates stratified by ZIP code.

Results

A total of 2942 patients with early-stage breast cancer were available for analysis. 1588 (54%) of patients had attended follow-up in the year prior to the COVID-19 period but failed to continue to follow-up during the pandemic, either in-person or via telemedicine. 1242 (42%) patients attended a follow-up appointment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Compared with patients who did not present for follow-up during COVID-19, patients who continued their oncologic follow-up during the pandemic were younger (p = 0.049) more likely to have received adjuvant radiation therapy (p = 0.025), and have lower household income (p = 0.031) on multivariate modeling. When patients who live in Bronx, New York, were stratified by ZIP code, there was a modest negative association (r = −0.56) between COVID-19 cases and proportion of patients who continued to follow-up during the COVID-19 period.

Conclusion

We observed a dramatic disruption in routine breast cancer follow-up during the COVID-19 pandemic. Providers and health systems should emphasize reintegrating patients who missed appointments during COVID-19 back into regular surveillance programs to avoid significant morbidity and mortality from missed breast cancer recurrences.

•

A dramatic disruption in routine oncologic follow-up was observed during the COVID-19 period.

•

Over half of patients with breast cancer at our center did not attend routine oncologic follow-up during COVID-19.

•

Patients who were younger, had lower SES, and who received radiotherapy were more likely to follow-up during the pandemic.

•

A modest negative association was observed between local ZIP code COVID-19 infection rates and follow-up attendance rate.

Professional practice changes in radiotherapy physics during the COVID-19 pandemic

•

The experience of 433 medical physicists during COVID-19 was analysed.

•

Changes in clinical practice had an impact on treatment planning and quality assurance tasks.

•

The effects of the changes were perceived differently by management vs clinical medical physicists.

•

There is a clear willingness to learn from this experience.

Background and purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed changes in radiotherapy (RT) departments worldwide. Medical physicists (MPs) are key healthcare professionals in maintaining safe and effective RT. This study reports on MPs experience during the first pandemic peak and explores the consequences on their work.

Methods

A 39-question survey on changes in departmental and clinical practice and on the impact for the future was sent to the global MP community. A total of 433 responses were analysed by professional role and by country clustered on the daily infection numbers.

Results

The impact of COVID-19 was bigger in countries with high daily infection rate. The majority of MPs worked in alternation at home/on-site. Among practice changes, implementation and/or increased use of hypofractionation was the most common (47% of the respondents). Sixteen percent of respondents modified patient-specific quality assurance (QA), 21% reduced machine QA, and 25% moved machine QA to weekends/evenings. The perception of trust in leadership and team unity was reversed between management MPs (towards increased trust and unity) and clinical MPs (towards a decrease). Changes such as home-working and increased use of hypofractionation were welcomed. However, some MPs were concerned about pressure to keep negative changes (e.g. weekend work).

Conclusion

COVID-19 affected MPs through changes in practice and QA procedures but also in terms of trust in leadership and team unity. Some changes were welcomed but others caused worries for the future. This report forms the basis, from a medical physics perspective, to evaluate long-lasting changes within a multi-disciplinary setting.

European radiation oncology after one year of COVID-19 pandemic

•

Survey of European radiotherapy department heads after 1 year of Covid-pandemic.

•

A decrease in patient volume was reported in 53%.

•

Enrollment in clinical studies was decreased in 58%.

•

Concerns were expressed related to well-being of staff in 76% of the departments.

Radiation treatment of hemato-oncological patients in times of the COVID-19 pandemic : Expert recommendations from the radiation oncology panels of the German Hodgkin Study Group and the German Lymphoma Alliance

PURPOSE

The coronavirus pandemic is affecting global health systems, endangering daily patient care. Hemato-oncological patients are particularly vulnerable to infection, requiring decisive recommendations on treatment and triage. The aim of this survey amongst experts on radiation therapy (RT) for lymphoma and leukemia is to delineate typical clinical scenarios and to provide counsel for high-quality care.

METHODS

A multi-item questionnaire containing multiple-choice and free-text questions was developed in a peer-reviewed process and sent to members of the radiation oncology panels of the German Hodgkin Study Group and the German Lymphoma Alliance. Answers were assessed online and analyzed centrally.

RESULTS

Omission of RT was only considered in a minority of cases if alternative treatment options were available. Hypofractionated regimens and reduced dosages may be used for indolent lymphoma and fractures due to multiple myeloma. Overall, there was a tendency to shorten RT rather than to postpone or omit it. Even in case of critical resource shortage, panelists agreed to start emergency RT for typical indications (intracranial pressure, spinal compression, superior vena cava syndrome) within 24 h. Possible criteria to consider for patient triage are the availability of (systemic) options, the underlying disease dynamic, and the treatment rationale (curative/palliative).

CONCLUSION

RT for hemato-oncological patients receives high-priority and should be maintained even in later stages of the pandemic. Hypofractionation and shortened treatment schedules are feasible options for well-defined constellations, but have to be discussed in the clinical context.

Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Cancer: Critical Review of Local Treatment Options Including Recommendations during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Simple Summary

Options for the curative treatment of locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma include surgery or re-irradiation. Both approaches have been scientifically explored, yet there is no consensus on the indication or definitive preference of the above two salvage treatments. The aim of this review is to summarize the current evidence on the local treatment of recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. The feasibility, safety, and efficacy of salvage surgery and radical re-irradiation are discussed. Recommendations on treatment modifications during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic are included as well.

Abstract

Recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma represents an extremely challenging therapeutic situation. Given the vulnerability of the already pretreated neurological structures surrounding the nasopharynx, any potential salvage retreatment option bears a significant risk of severe complications that result in high treatment-related morbidity, quality of life deterioration, and even mortality. Yet, with careful patient selection, long-term survival may be achieved after local retreatment in a subgroup of patients with local or regional relapse of nasopharyngeal cancer. Early detection of the recurrence represents the key to therapeutic success, and in the case of early stage disease, several curative treatment options can be offered to the patient, albeit with minimal support in prospective clinical data. In this article, an up-to-date review of published evidence on modern surgical and radiation therapy treatment options is summarized, including currently recommended treatment modifications of both therapeutic approaches during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.