1
|
Mackenzie P, Vajdic C, Delaney G, Comans T, Agar M, Gabriel G, Barton M. Assessing a Suitable Radiotherapy Utilisation Benchmark for Older Patients With Head and Neck Cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2024; 36:e381-e387. [PMID: 39013658 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2024.05.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2023] [Revised: 03/31/2024] [Accepted: 05/29/2024] [Indexed: 07/18/2024]
Abstract
AIMS To (i) determine the actual radiotherapy utilization (RTU) stratified by age, (ii) develop an age- and co-morbidity adjusted optimal RTU model and (iii) examine the tolerance and toxicity of treatment of older patients with head and neck cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS A retrospective cohort study based on New South Wales Cancer Registry records (2010-2014) linked to radiotherapy data (2010-2015) and admitted patient data (2008-2015) for patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer. We calculated the actual RTU, defined as the proportion of patients who received at least one course of radiotherapy within a year of diagnosis, by age group, including patients aged 80+ years. We also calculated the age and comorbidity-adjusted optimal RTU. For treatment tolerance, the radiotherapy dose for each age group and the completion rate for a seven week 70 Gray (Gy) course of curative intent radiotherapy were computed. The number of emergency department (ED) presentations were used as a surrogate measure of acute treatment toxicity for patients receiving 70 Gy. RESULTS Of the 5966 patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer, 814 (13.6%) were aged 80+ years. For all age groups, the actual RTU was less than the optimal RTU. The age- and comorbidity-adjusted optimal RTU for patients aged 80+ was 52% (95% CI: 51%-53%), and the actual RTU was 40% (95% CI: 37%-44%). Only 4.4% of patients aged 80+ received 70 Gy, and the completion rate for a 70 Gy course of radiotherapy for these patients was 92%. The ED presentation rate was similar for all age groups. CONCLUSION The actual RTU was less in the 80+ years patients and across all age groups. Fewer patients in the 80+ group received curative intent schedules compared to the actual RTU rate for younger age groups, despite similar rates of completion of curative intent radiotherapy and acute toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P Mackenzie
- FRANZCR, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, University of QLD, Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
| | - C Vajdic
- The Kirby Institute, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - G Delaney
- FRANZCR, Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - T Comans
- Centre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Australia
| | - M Agar
- FRACP, The University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
| | - G Gabriel
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), The University of New South Wales, Australia
| | - M Barton
- FRANZCR, Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mackenzie P, Vajdic C, Delaney G, Comans T, Agar M, Gabriel G, Barton M. Development of an age- and comorbidity- adjusted optimal radiotherapy utilisation rate for lung, rectal, prostate and cervical cancers. Radiother Oncol 2023; 188:109862. [PMID: 37619661 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109862] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2023] [Revised: 08/17/2023] [Accepted: 08/18/2023] [Indexed: 08/26/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Optimal radiotherapy utilisation (RTU) modelling estimates the proportion of people with cancer who would benefit from radiotherapy. Assessment of comorbidities is an important component of the assessment of suitability for radiotherapy in addition to chronological age and life expectancy. Comorbidities have not been considered in previous optimal RTU models. We aimed to develop an age- and comorbidity- adjusted optimal RTU model for patients with lung, rectal, prostate, and cervical cancer, and compare them to actual RTU rates, with a particular focus on those aged 80+ years, METHODS: New South Wales (NSW) Cancer Registry data (2010-2014) linked to radiotherapy data (2010-2015) and hospitalisation data (2008-2015) were used to determine the number of patients diagnosed with lung, rectal, prostate and cervical cancer. The Cancer Specific C3 'all sites' comorbidity index was calculated from hospital diagnosis data for each patient to determine suitability for radiotherapy. The index was then incorporated into a tumour site-specific decision tree model. The actual RTU was also calculated using the linked datasets. RESULTS 14,696 patients were diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), 1839 with small cell lung cancer (SCLC), 5551 with rectal cancer, 30,935 with prostate cancer and 1216 with cervical cancer in New South Wales from 2010-2014. The proportion of patients aged 80+ years at cancer diagnosis was 25% (3603 patients), 15% (279 patients), 17% (943 patients), 12% (3745 patients), and 7% (88 patients) respectively. The age- and comorbidity- adjusted optimal RTU rates for patients aged 80+ years using the C3 index were 49% (NSCLC), 49% (SCLC), 43% (rectal), 51% (prostate) and 40% (cervical). The corresponding actual RTU rates for patients aged 80+ years were 25%, 32%, 27%, 16%, and 56%. CONCLUSION Even after adjusting for age and comorbidities, the actual radiotherapy utilisation rates were lower than optimal radiotherapy utilisation rates in patients aged 80+ years except for patients with cervical cancer. This warrants further assessment and research into reasons and solutions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Penny Mackenzie
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia; The Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Queensland, Australia.
| | - Claire Vajdic
- The Kirby Insitute, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Geoff Delaney
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Tracy Comans
- Centre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Australia
| | - Meera Agar
- The University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
| | - Gabriel Gabriel
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Michael Barton
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mackenzie P, Vajdic C, Delaney G, Comans T, Morris L, Agar M, Gabriel G, Barton M. Radiotherapy utilisation rates for patients with cancer as a function of age: A systematic review. J Geriatr Oncol 2022; 14:101387. [PMID: 36272958 DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2022.10.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2022] [Revised: 09/16/2022] [Accepted: 10/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
4
|
Hande V, Chan J, Polo A. Value of Geographical Information Systems in Analyzing Geographic Accessibility to Inform Radiotherapy Planning: A Systematic Review. JCO Glob Oncol 2022; 8:e2200106. [PMID: 36122318 PMCID: PMC9812498 DOI: 10.1200/go.22.00106] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Vulnerable populations face geographical barriers in accessing radiotherapy (RT) facilities, resulting in heterogeneity of care received and cancer burden faced. We aimed to explore the current use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) in access to RT and use these findings to create sustainable solutions against barriers for access in low- and middle-income countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic review using the PRISMA search strategy was done for studies using GIS to explore outcomes among patients with cancer. Included studies were reviewed and classified into three umbrella categories of how GIS has been used in studying access to RT. RESULTS Forty articles were included in the final review. Thirty-eight articles were set in high-income countries and two in upper-middle-income countries. Included studies were published from 2000 to 2020, and were comprised of patients with all-cancers combined, breast, colon, skin, lung, prostate, ovarian, and rectal carcinoma patients. Studies were categorized under three groups on the basis of how they used GIS in their analyses: to describe geographic access to RT, to associate geographic access to RT with outcomes, and for RT planning. Most studies fell under multiple categories. CONCLUSION Although this field is relative nascent, there is a wide array of functions possible through GIS for RT planning, including identifying high-risk populations, improving access in high-need areas, and providing valuable information for future resource allocation. GIS should be incorporated in future studies, especially set in low- and middle-income countries, which evaluate access to RT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Varsha Hande
- Applied Radiation Biology and Radiotherapy Section, Division of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Jessica Chan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada,Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Alfredo Polo
- Applied Radiation Biology and Radiotherapy Section, Division of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria,Alfredo Polo, MD, PhD, Applied Radiation Biology and Radiotherapy Section, Division of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna International Centre, PO Box 100, 1400 Vienna, Austria; e-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Mackenzie P, Vajdic C, Delaney G, Comans T, Agar M, Gabriel G, Barton M. Development of an age- and comorbidity adjusted- optimal radiotherapy utilisation rate for women with breast cancer. J Geriatr Oncol 2022; 13:844-849. [PMID: 35514015 DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2022.04.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2021] [Revised: 03/07/2022] [Accepted: 04/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Optimal radiotherapy utilisation (RTU) modelling estimates the proportion of people with cancer who would benefit from radiotherapy. Older adults with cancer may have comorbidities that can impact physiological reserve and affect radiotherapy recommendations. These have not been considered in previous models. We aimed to develop an age- and comorbidity-adjusted optimal RTU model for breast cancer. METHODS New South Wales (NSW) Cancer Registry data (2010-2014) linked to radiotherapy data (2010-2015) and hospitalisation data (2008-2015) was used to determine the number of women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in four pre-specified age groups. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), Cancer-Specific C3 'all sites' index and the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) were derived for each woman from diagnostic codes in hospital records. Women were deemed unfit, and thus unsuitable candidates for radiotherapy, if the comorbidity indices were as follows: CCI ≥2; C3 score ≥ 3; and HFRS ≥5. The proportions of women suitable for radiotherapy in each age group were then incorporated into a breast cancer decision tree model. The actual RTU was also calculated using the linked datasets. RESULTS 23,601 women were diagnosed with breast cancer in NSW from 2010 to 2014 and 2526 were aged 80+ years. The overall comorbidity adjusted- RTU for women of all ages was 85·9% (CCI), 83·7% (C3) and 81·9% (HFRS). The optimal comorbidity adjusted- RTU for women aged 80+ was 76·1% (CCI), 70·1% (C3) and 61·8% (HFRS). The actual RTU for women aged 80+ years was 24.7%. CONCLUSION The vast majority of older Australian women with breast cancer are fit for radiotherapy. The overall optimal RTU is only slightly reduced when adjusted for age and comorbidities and was similar using each of the three indices examined. Our data suggest radiotherapy is markedly underutilised for older women with breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Penny Mackenzie
- Icon Cancer Centre, St Andrew's Hospital, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia; The University of New South Wales, Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, Sydney, Australia.
| | - Claire Vajdic
- Cancer Epidemiology Research Unit, Centre for BIG Data Research in Health, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Geoff Delaney
- The University of New South Wales, Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, Sydney, Australia; Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - Tracy Comans
- Centre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Australia
| | - Meera Agar
- Centre for Improving Palliative, Aged and Chronic Care through Clinical Research and Translation, The University of Technology, Sydney, Australia; Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - Gabriel Gabriel
- The University of New South Wales, Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, Sydney, Australia
| | - Michael Barton
- The University of New South Wales, Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, Sydney, Australia; Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Delaney GP, Barton MB. Great expectations or waiting for Godot? Time for development of a near real-time national reporting system of radiotherapy utilisation. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2022; 66:826-829. [PMID: 35610753 DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.13437] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2022] [Accepted: 05/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Geoff P Delaney
- South Western Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW, Australia.,South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Michael B Barton
- South Western Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW, Australia.,South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Ong WL, Finn N, Te Marvelde L, Hornby C, Milne RL, Hanna GG, Pitson G, Elsaleh H, Millar JL, Foroudi F. Disparities in radiation therapy utilization for cancer patients in Victoria. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2022; 66:830-839. [PMID: 35357080 PMCID: PMC9543524 DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.13407] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2021] [Revised: 02/28/2022] [Accepted: 03/09/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Introduction To evaluate the proportion of cancer patients who received radiation therapy (RT) within 12 months of cancer diagnosis (RTU12) and identify factors associated with RTU12. Methods This is a population‐based cohort of individuals with incident cancer, diagnosed between 2013 and 2017 in Victoria. Data linkages were performed between the Victorian Cancer Registry and Victorian Radiotherapy Minimum Dataset. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had RTU12. For the three most common cancers (i.e., prostate, breast and lung cancer), the time trend in RTU12 and factors associated with RTU12 were evaluated. Results The overall RTU12 in our study cohort was 26–20% radical RT and 6% palliative RT. Of the 21,735 men with prostate cancer, RTU12 was 17%, with no significant change over time (P‐trend = 0.53). In multivariate analyses, increasing age and lower socioeconomic status were independently associated with higher RTU12 for prostate cancer. Of the 20,883 women with breast cancer, RTU12 was 64%, which increased from 62% in 2013 to 65% in 2017 (P‐trend < 0.05). In multivariate analyses, age, socioeconomic status and area of residency were independently associated with RTU12 for breast cancer. Of the 13,093 patients with lung cancer, RTU12 was 42%, with no significant change over time (P‐trend = 0.16). In multivariate analyses, younger age, male and lower socioeconomic status were independently associated with higher RTU12. Conclusion In this large population‐based state‐wide cohort of cancer patients, only 1 in 4 had RT within 12 months of diagnosis. There were marked sociodemographic disparities in RTU12 for prostate, breast and lung cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wee Loon Ong
- Alfred Health Radiation Oncology Services, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness and Research Centre, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Victoria, UK
| | - Norah Finn
- Victorian Cancer Registry, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Department of Health, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Luc Te Marvelde
- Victorian Cancer Registry, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Department of Health, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Colin Hornby
- Department of Health, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Roger L Milne
- Cancer Epidemiology Division, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Center for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences, Monash Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Gerard G Hanna
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Graham Pitson
- Department of Cancer Services, Barwon Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
| | - Hany Elsaleh
- Alfred Health Radiation Oncology Services, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jeremy L Millar
- Alfred Health Radiation Oncology Services, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Farshad Foroudi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness and Research Centre, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|