1
|
Suryanegara FDA, Iskandar D, Ekaputra E, Kuntjoro E, Setiawan D, Postma MJ, de Jong LA. Costs analysis of radiotherapy for breast cancer in Indonesia: a comparison between reimbursement tariffs and actual costs. BMC Health Serv Res 2025; 25:766. [PMID: 40437477 PMCID: PMC12117771 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-025-12849-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2024] [Accepted: 05/05/2025] [Indexed: 06/01/2025] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast cancer is the most common cancer in Indonesia, and radiotherapy plays an essential role in its treatment. However, since 2016, the INA-CBGs (Indonesian Case-Based Groups) tariffs for radiotherapy have remained unchanged. This study aimed to assess the disparity between tariffs and actual costs of outpatient radiotherapy in breast cancer, using real-world data from two Indonesian hospitals. METHODS We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a national public referral hospital and a private hospital. Breast cancer claims data were collected from 2017 to 2022 from the Department of Accounting/Finance with INA-CBGs tariff code of C-3-10-0 (radiotherapy procedures for outpatients). We estimated total actual costs, actual costs per patient and visit, and the cost-tariffs ratio. Differences between the actual costs and tariffs were analyzed using Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS A total of 3,890 breast cancer patients were included in the study, of which 74.4% were from the national public referral hospital. In the national public referral hospital and private hospital, the total actual costs of outpatient radiotherapy in breast cancer were USD 19,028,791.17 and USD 5,279,980.74, with median costs per patient of USD 6,560.00 [3,679.81;7,518.46] and USD 5,110.00 [839.15;7,552.34], and median costs per visit of USD 272.00 [253.16;274.47] and USD 272.00 [211.31;305.50], respectively. Over the study period, the cost-tariffs ratio was 86.85% and 59.07% in the national public referral hospital and private hospital, respectively. The differences between the tariffs and total actual costs were statistically significant in both hospitals and increased throughout the years. CONCLUSIONS For both hospitals, the INA-CBGs tariffs for outpatient radiotherapy services for breast cancer were insufficient to fully cover the actual costs during the review period. Furthermore, the difference between the tariffs and the actual costs increased over the years, emphasizing the need for revision of the C-3-10-0 tariffs. It is crucial to ensure coverage of all actual costs to ensure the sustainability, accessibility, and availability of radiotherapy treatment for breast cancer patients in Indonesia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fithria Dyah Ayu Suryanegara
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
- Department of Pharmacy, Universitas Islam Indonesia, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
| | - Deni Iskandar
- Faculty of Pharmacy, Bhakti Kencana University, Bandung, Indonesia
| | - Ericko Ekaputra
- Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
- Rumah Sakit Umum Pusat Dr. Sardjito, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
| | | | - Didik Setiawan
- Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto, Purwokerto, Indonesia
| | - Maarten Jacobus Postma
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- Center of Excellence for Pharmaceutical Care Innovation, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
- Department of Economics, Econometrics & Finance, Faculty of Economics & Business, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- Division of Pharmacology and Therapy, Department of Anatomy, Histology, and Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia
| | - Lisa Aniek de Jong
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Portik D, Lacombe D, Faivre-Finn C, Achard V, Andratschke N, Correia D, Spalek M, Guckenberger M, Ost P, Ehret F. The 2024 State of Science report from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer's Radiation Oncology Scientific Council. Eur J Cancer 2025; 220:115334. [PMID: 40127505 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2025.115334] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2025] [Accepted: 02/27/2025] [Indexed: 03/26/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Radiotherapy (RT) is a central pillar of a multimodal cancer treatment approach. The ongoing advances in the fields of RT, imaging technologies, cancer biology, and others yield the potential to refine the use of RT. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) hosted a dedicated workshop to identify and prioritize key research questions and to define future RT-based treatment strategies to improve the survival and quality of life of cancer patients. METHODS An initial call for relevant RT research topics led to the formation of workgroups to develop these into new clinical research proposals and projects. The EORTC Radiation Oncology Scientific Council (ROSC) State of Science workshop was held in Brussels, Belgium, in February 2024, bringing together EORTC members and international stakeholders to connect and work on the proposals. RESULTS Four topics of interest were identified: I) De-escalation of RT, minimizing toxicity while maintaining patients' quality of life, II) Technology-driven RT utilizing advances in treatment techniques, such as spatially fractionated RT to improve outcomes in patients with bulky disease and localized high tumor burden, III) Biology-driven RT, integrating the rapid advances in cancer biology and functional imaging to guide and personalize RT, and IV) New indications adding value and expanding the use of RT. CONCLUSION The EORTC ROSC State of Science workshop prioritized clinical questions to be addressed in prospective clinical research projects to advance RT care and improve patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Portik
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW Research Institute for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
| | - Denis Lacombe
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Corinne Faivre-Finn
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Vérane Achard
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France and University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Nicolaus Andratschke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Dora Correia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
| | - Mateusz Spalek
- Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Piet Ost
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; Iridium Network, Radiation Oncology, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Felix Ehret
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Department of Radiation Oncology, Berlin, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Berlin, a partnership between DKFZ and Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Abdel-Wahab M, Giammarile F, Carrara M, Paez D, Hricak H, Ayati N, Li JJ, Mueller M, Aggarwal A, Al-Ibraheem A, Alkhatib S, Atun R, Bello A, Berger D, Delgado Bolton RC, Buatti JM, Burt G, Bjelac OC, Cordero-Mendez L, Dosanjh M, Eichler T, Fidarova E, Gondhowiardjo S, Gospodarowicz M, Grover S, Hande V, Harsdorf-Enderndorf E, Herrmann K, Hofman MS, Holmberg O, Jaffray D, Knoll P, Kunikowska J, Lewis JS, Lievens Y, Mikhail-Lette M, Ostwald D, Palta JR, Peristeris P, Rosa AA, Salem SA, Dos Santos MA, Sathekge MM, Shrivastava SK, Titovich E, Urbain JL, Vanderpuye V, Wahl RL, Yu JS, Zaghloul MS, Zhu H, Scott AM. Radiotherapy and theranostics: a Lancet Oncology Commission. Lancet Oncol 2024; 25:e545-e580. [PMID: 39362232 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00407-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2024] [Revised: 07/18/2024] [Accepted: 07/19/2024] [Indexed: 10/05/2024]
Abstract
Following on from the 2015 Lancet Oncology Commission on expanding global access to radiotherapy, Radiotherapy and theranostics: a Lancet Oncology Commission was created to assess the access and availability of radiotherapy to date and to address the important issue of access to the promising field of theranostics at a global level. A marked disparity in the availability of radiotherapy machines between high-income countries and low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) has been identified previously and remains a major problem. The availability of a suitably trained and credentialled workforce has also been highlighted as a major limiting factor to effective implementation of radiotherapy, particularly in LMICs. We investigated initiatives that could mitigate these issues in radiotherapy, such as extended treatment hours, hypofractionation protocols, and new technologies. The broad implementation of hypofractionation techniques compared with conventional radiotherapy in prostate cancer and breast cancer was projected to provide radiotherapy for an additional 2·2 million patients (0·8 million patients with prostate cancer and 1·4 million patients with breast cancer) with existing resources, highlighting the importance of implementing new technologies in LMICs. A global survey undertaken for this Commission revealed that use of radiopharmaceutical therapy-other than 131I-was highly variable in high-income countries and LMICs, with supply chains, workforces, and regulatory issues affecting access and availability. The capacity for radioisotope production was highlighted as a key issue, and training and credentialling of health professionals involved in theranostics is required to ensure equitable access and availability for patient treatment. New initiatives-such as the International Atomic Energy Agency's Rays of Hope programme-and interest by international development banks in investing in radiotherapy should be supported by health-care systems and governments, and extended to accelerate the momentum generated by recognising global disparities in access to radiotherapy. In this Commission, we propose actions and investments that could enhance access to radiotherapy and theranostics worldwide, particularly in LMICs, to realise health and economic benefits and reduce the burden of cancer by accessing these treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- May Abdel-Wahab
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Francesco Giammarile
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Mauro Carrara
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Diana Paez
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Hedvig Hricak
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Molecular Pharmacology Program, Sloan Kettering Institute, New York, NY, USA; Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; Gerstner Sloan Kettering Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nayyereh Ayati
- Centre for Health Economics, Monash Business School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Jing Jing Li
- Centre for Health Economics, Monash Business School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | | | - Ajay Aggarwal
- Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Akram Al-Ibraheem
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman, Jordan; Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - Sondos Alkhatib
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Rifat Atun
- Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Abubakar Bello
- National Hospital, Abuja and Federal University of Health Sciences, Azare, Nigeria
| | - Daniel Berger
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Roberto C Delgado Bolton
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging (Radiology) and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital San Pedro and Centre for Biomedical Research of La Rioja, Logroño, Spain; Servicio Cántabro de Salud, Santander, Spain
| | - John M Buatti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center, Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
| | | | - Olivera Ciraj Bjelac
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Lisbeth Cordero-Mendez
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Manjit Dosanjh
- University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Thomas Eichler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massey Cancer Center Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Elena Fidarova
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Mary Gospodarowicz
- Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Surbhi Grover
- Botswana-University of Pennsylvania Partnership, Gaborone, Botswana; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Varsha Hande
- Department of Global Health, Medicine and Welfare, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki, Japan
| | - Ekaterina Harsdorf-Enderndorf
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Ken Herrmann
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Duisburg, Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Michael S Hofman
- Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Ola Holmberg
- Division of Radiation, Transport and Waste Safety, Department of Nuclear Safety and Security, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - David Jaffray
- Department of Radiation Physics and Department of Imaging Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Peter Knoll
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Jolanta Kunikowska
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Jason S Lewis
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Molecular Pharmacology Program, Sloan Kettering Institute, New York, NY, USA; Department of Pharmacology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | - Yolande Lievens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Miriam Mikhail-Lette
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Dennis Ostwald
- WifOR Institute, Darmstadt, Germany; Steinbeis School of International Business and Entrepreneurship, Herrenberg, Germany
| | - Jatinder R Palta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | | | - Arthur A Rosa
- Radiation Oncology, Grupo Oncoclinicas, Salvador, Brazil
| | - Soha Ahmed Salem
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Mike M Sathekge
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa; Steve Biko Academic Hospital, Pretoria, South Africa; Nuclear Medicine Research Infrastructure, Pretoria, South Africa
| | | | - Egor Titovich
- Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Jean-Luc Urbain
- Department of Radiology, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Branford General Hospital, Ontario, Canada
| | - Verna Vanderpuye
- National Center for Radiotherapy Oncology and Nuclear Medicine Department of the Korlebu Teaching Hospital, Accra, Ghana
| | - Richard L Wahl
- Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Department of Radiology, and Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA
| | - Jennifer S Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Department of Cancer Biology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH USA
| | - Mohamed Saad Zaghloul
- Radiation Oncology Department, National Cancer Institute, Cairo University & Children's Cancer Hospital, Cairo, Egypt
| | - Hongcheng Zhu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China; Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Andrew M Scott
- Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; School of Cancer Medicine, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Corrao G, Marvaso G, Mastroleo F, Biffi A, Pellegrini G, Minari S, Vincini MG, Zaffaroni M, Zerini D, Volpe S, Gaito S, Mazzola GC, Bergamaschi L, Cattani F, Petralia G, Musi G, Ceci F, De Cobelli O, Orecchia R, Alterio D, Jereczek-Fossa BA. Photon vs proton hypofractionation in prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiother Oncol 2024; 195:110264. [PMID: 38561122 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110264] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2023] [Revised: 03/21/2024] [Accepted: 03/24/2024] [Indexed: 04/04/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND High-level evidence on hypofractionated proton therapy (PT) for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) patients is currently missing. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic literature review to compare the toxicity and effectiveness of curative radiotherapy with photon therapy (XRT) or PT in PCa. METHODS PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched up to April 2022. Men with a diagnosis of PCa who underwent curative hypofractionated RT treatment (PT or XRT) were included. Risk of grade (G) ≥ 2 acute and late genitourinary (GU) OR gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were the primary outcomes of interest. Secondary outcomes were five-year biochemical relapse-free survival (b-RFS), clinical relapse-free, distant metastasis-free, and prostate cancer-specific survival. Heterogeneity between study-specific estimates was assessed using Chi-square statistics and measured with the I2 index (heterogeneity measure across studies). RESULTS A total of 230 studies matched inclusion criteria and, due to overlapped populations, 160 were included in the present analysis. Significant lower rates of G ≥ 2 acute GI incidence (2 % vs 7 %) and improved 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival (95 % vs 91 %) were observed in the PT arm compared to XRT. PT benefits in 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival were maintained for the moderate hypofractionated arm (p-value 0.0122) and among patients in intermediate and low-risk classes (p-values < 0.0001 and 0.0368, respectively). No statistically relevant differences were found for the other considered outcomes. CONCLUSION The present study supports that PT is safe and effective for localized PCa treatment, however, more data from RCTs are needed to draw solid evidence in this setting and further effort must be made to identify the patient subgroups that could benefit the most from PT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giulia Corrao
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Giulia Marvaso
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Federico Mastroleo
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Annalisa Biffi
- National Centre of Healthcare Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; Unit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Giacomo Pellegrini
- National Centre of Healthcare Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; Unit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Samuele Minari
- National Centre of Healthcare Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Maria Giulia Vincini
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - Mattia Zaffaroni
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - Dario Zerini
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefania Volpe
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Simona Gaito
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester, UK; Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Luca Bergamaschi
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Cattani
- Unit of Medical Physics, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Petralia
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Division of Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Gennaro Musi
- Division of Urology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Ceci
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Division of Nuclear Medicine and Theranostics, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Ottavio De Cobelli
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Division of Urology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Orecchia
- Scientific Directorate, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Daniela Alterio
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Mikhail-Lette M, Cordero L, Lievens Y, Al-Ibraheem A, Urbain JL, Chera B, Muylle K, Vaandering A, Rosa AA, Cerci JJ, Sathekge M, Minjgee M, Nansalmaa E, Erdenechimeg S, Ruiz RL, Scott A, Paez D, Giammarile F, Veduta A, Minoshima E, Vichare S, Abdel-Wahab M. Six country vignettes: Strengthening radiotherapy and theranostics. J Cancer Policy 2024; 40:100471. [PMID: 38556128 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcpo.2024.100471] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2023] [Revised: 03/11/2024] [Accepted: 03/16/2024] [Indexed: 04/02/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND For cancer patient populations worldwide, the synchronous scale-up of diagnostics and treatments yields meaningful gains in survival and quality of life. Among advanced cancer therapies, radiotherapy (RT) and theranostics are key to achieving practical, high-quality, and personalized precision medicine - targeting disease manifestations of individual patients and broad populations, alike. Aiming to learn from one another across different world regions, the six country vignettes presented here depict both challenges and victories in de novo establishment or improvement of RT and theranostics infrastructure. METHODS The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) convened global RT and theranostics experts from diverse world regions and contexts to identify relevant challenges and report progress in their own six countries: Belgium, Brazil, Costa Rica, Jordan, Mongolia, and South Africa. These accounts are collated, compared, and contrasted herein. RESULTS Common challenges persist which could be more strategically assessed and addressed. A quantifiable discrepancy entails personnel. The estimated radiation oncologists (ROs), nuclear medicine physicians (NMPs), and medical physicists (MPs for RT and nuclear medicine) per million inhabitants in the six collective countries respectively range between 2.69-38.00 ROs, 1.00-26.00 NMPs, and 0.30-3.45 MPs (Table 1), reflecting country-to-country inequities which largely match World Bank country-income stratifications. CONCLUSION Established goals for RT and nuclear medicine advancement worldwide have proven elusive. The pace of progress could be hastened by enhanced approaches such as more sustainably phased implementation; better multinational networking to share lessons learned; routine quality and safety audits; as well as capacity building employing innovative, resource-sparing, cutting-edge technologic approaches. Bodies such as ministries of health, professional societies, and the IAEA shall serve critical roles in convening and coordinating more innovative RT and theranostics translational research, including expanding nuanced global database metrics to inform, reach, and potentiate milestones most meaningfully. POLICY SUMMARY Aligned with WHO 25×25 NCDs target; WHA70.12 and WHA76.5 resolutions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miriam Mikhail-Lette
- International Atomic Energy Agency Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, Division of Human Health, Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Imaging Section, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Lisbeth Cordero
- International Atomic Energy Agency Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, Division of Human Health, Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Imaging Section, Vienna, Austria
| | - Yolande Lievens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Akram Al-Ibraheem
- Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET/CT, King Hussein Cancer Center (KHCC), Amman, Jordan
| | - Jean-Luc Urbain
- Department of Radiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - Bhishamjit Chera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA
| | | | - Aude Vaandering
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Université Catholique de Louvain, Saint-Luc University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Arthur Accioly Rosa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oncoclínicas Salvador and Hospital Santa Izabel, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil
| | - Juliano Julio Cerci
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Quanta Diagnóstico e Terapia, Curitiba, Brazil
| | - Mike Sathekge
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Pretoria and Steve Biko Academic Hospital, Pretoria, South Africa
| | | | | | | | - Rolando Loría Ruiz
- Radiation Therapy Center Siglo 21, Hospital México and Clínica Bíblica, Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, San Jose, Costa Rica
| | - Andrew Scott
- Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; School of Cancer Medicine, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Diana Paez
- International Atomic Energy Agency Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, Division of Human Health, Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Imaging Section, Vienna, Austria
| | - Francesco Giammarile
- International Atomic Energy Agency Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, Division of Human Health, Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Imaging Section, Vienna, Austria
| | - Anna Veduta
- International Atomic Energy Agency Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, Division of Human Health, Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Imaging Section, Vienna, Austria
| | - Erika Minoshima
- International Atomic Energy Agency Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, Division of Human Health, Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Imaging Section, Vienna, Austria
| | - Shrikant Vichare
- International Atomic Energy Agency Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, Division of Human Health, Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Imaging Section, Vienna, Austria
| | - May Abdel-Wahab
- International Atomic Energy Agency Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, Division of Human Health, Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Imaging Section, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Busschaert SL, Kimpe E, Barbé K, De Ridder M, Putman K. Introduction of ultra-hypofractionation in breast cancer: Implications for costs and resource use. Radiother Oncol 2024; 190:110010. [PMID: 37956888 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.110010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2023] [Revised: 10/14/2023] [Accepted: 11/04/2023] [Indexed: 11/15/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE A shift towards (ultra-)hypofractionated breast irradiation can have important implications for the practice of contemporary radiation oncology. This paper presents a systematic analysis of the impact of different fractionation schedules on multiple key performance indicators, namely resource use, costs, work times, throughput and waiting times. MATERIALS AND METHODS Time-driven activity-based costing (TD-ABC) is applied to calculate the costs and resources consumed where the perspective of the radiotherapy department in adopted. Three fractionation regimens are considered: ultra-hypofractionation (5 x 5.2 Gy, UHF), moderate hypofractionation (15 x 2.67 Gy, HF) and conventional fractionation (25 x 2 Gy, CF). Subsequently, a discrete event simulation (DES) model of the radiotherapy care pathway is developed and scenarios are compared in which the following factors are varied: distribution of fractionation regimens, patient volume and operating hours. RESULTS The application of (U)HF can permit radiotherapy departments to reduce the use of scarce resources, realise work time and cost savings, increase throughput and reduce waiting times. The financial advantages of (U)HF are, however, reduced in cases of excess capacity and cost savings may therefore be limited in the short-term. Moreover, although an extension of operating hours has favourable effects on throughput and waiting times, it may also reduce cost differences between fractionation schedules by increasing the capacity of resources. CONCLUSION By providing an in-depth analysis of the consequences associated with a shift towards (U)HF in breast cancer, the present study demonstrates how a DES model based on TD-ABC costing can assist radiotherapy professionals in making data-driven decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara-Lise Busschaert
- Department of Public Health, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan, 101 - 1090 Brussels, Belgium.
| | - Eva Kimpe
- Department of Public Health, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan, 101 - 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Kurt Barbé
- Department of Public Health, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan, 101 - 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Mark De Ridder
- Department of Radiotherapy, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Laarbeeklaan, 101 - 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Koen Putman
- Department of Public Health, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan, 101 - 1090 Brussels, Belgium; Department of Radiotherapy, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Laarbeeklaan, 101 - 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Hogan JS, Karraker P, Fischer-Valuck BW, Vapiwala N, Mehta MP, Perez CA, Baumann JC, Bradley JD, Baumann BC. Benchmarking the Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model: Changes in Medicare Reimbursement for 16 Common Radiation Therapy Treatment Courses. Pract Radiat Oncol 2023; 13:e389-e394. [PMID: 37172757 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2023.04.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2023] [Revised: 04/24/2023] [Accepted: 04/27/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023]
Abstract
Radiation oncology (RO) has seen declines in Medicare reimbursement (MCR) in the past decade under the current fee-for-service model. Although studies have explored decline in reimbursement at a per-code level, to our knowledge there are no recent studies analyzing changes in MCR over time for common RO treatment courses. By analyzing changes in MCR for common treatment courses, our study had 3 objectives: (1) to provide practitioners and policymakers with estimates of recent reimbursement changes for common treatment courses; (2) to provide an estimate of how reimbursement will change in the future under the current fee-for-service model if current trends continue; and (3) to provide a baseline for treatment episodes in the event that the episode-based Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model is eventually implemented. Specifically, we quantified inflation- and utilization-adjusted changes in reimbursement for 16 common radiation therapy (RT) treatment courses from 2010 to 2020. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary databases were used to obtain reimbursement for all RO procedures in 2010, 2015, and 2020 for free-standing facilities. Inflation-adjusted average reimbursement (AR) per billing instance was calculated for each Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System code using 2020 dollars. For each year, the billing frequency of each code was multiplied by the AR per code. Results were summed per RT course per year, and AR for RT courses were compared. Sixteen common RO courses for head and neck, breast, prostate, lung, and palliative RT were analyzed. AR decreased for all 16 courses from 2010 to 2020. From 2015 to 2020, the only course that increased in AR was palliative 2-dimensional 10-fraction 30 Gy, which increased by 0.4%. Courses using intensity modulated RT saw the largest AR decline from 2010 to 2020, ranging from 38% to 39%. We report significant declines in reimbursement from 2010 to 2020 for common RO courses, with the largest declines for intensity modulated RT. Policymakers should consider the significant cuts to reimbursement that have already occurred when considering future reimbursement adjustment under the current fee-for-service model or when considering mandatory adoption of a new payment system with further cuts and the negative effect of such cuts on quality and access to care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jacob S Hogan
- Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Patricia Karraker
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | | | - Neha Vapiwala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Minesh P Mehta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Carlos A Perez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | | | - Jeffrey D Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Brian C Baumann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri; Department of Radiation Oncology, Springfield Clinic, Springfield, Illinois.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Defourny N, Mackenzie P, Spencer K. Health Services Research in Brachytherapy: Current Understanding and Future Challenges. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2023; 35:548-555. [PMID: 36941146 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2023.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2022] [Revised: 01/20/2023] [Accepted: 03/01/2023] [Indexed: 03/09/2023]
Abstract
Brachytherapy is an integral component of cancer care. Widespread concerns have been expressed though about the need for greater brachytherapy availability across many jurisdictions. Yet, health services research in brachytherapy has lagged behind that in external beam radiotherapy. Optimal brachytherapy utilisation, to help inform expected demand, have not been defined beyond the New South Wales region in Australia, with few studies having reported observed brachytherapy utilisation. There is also a relative lack of robust cost and cost-effectiveness studies, making investment decisions in brachytherapy even more uncertain and challenging to justify, despite its key role in cancer control. As the range of indications for brachytherapy expands, providing organ/function preservation for a wider range of diagnoses, there is an urgent need to redress this balance. By outlining the work undertaken in this area to date, we highlight its importance and explore where further study is required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N Defourny
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
| | - P Mackenzie
- Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR), The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia; Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute, Sydney, Australia; St Andrew's Hospital, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia
| | - K Spencer
- University of Leeds Faculty of Medicine and Health, Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Hehakaya C, Moors EHM. Institutionalisation of convergent medical innovation: an empirical study of the MRI-guided linear accelerator in the Netherlands and the United States. INNOVATION-ORGANIZATION & MANAGEMENT 2023; 27:74-95. [PMID: 39935856 PMCID: PMC11809769 DOI: 10.1080/14479338.2023.2213212] [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: 02/14/2022] [Accepted: 05/03/2023] [Indexed: 02/13/2025]
Abstract
Although convergence is a major trend in the development of medical innovations, the implications of the institutionalisation of convergent innovation are understudied. This paper explores how the institutionalisation of convergent innovation affects the organisation of health care, by using operational domains and categories of the Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread and Sustainability (NASSS) and the Institutional Readiness (IR) approach respectively. We use an illustrative comparative case study on the institutionalisation of MRI-guided linear accelerator (MR-Linac) technology in the Netherlands and the United States. Empirically, we conducted 66 interviews with different professionals in the health care system around MR-Linac. The findings show that institutionalisation of convergent innovation affects the organisation of health care by: changing the traditional organisation of solving a medical problem, thereby transforming and reorganising work in the health care environment, providing opportunities for individual user development, collective action and cross-sectoral developments, and requiring the additional work of evaluating convergent innovation, including administrative tasks, innovation and research activities within and across institutions. The insights offered are also relevant for understanding convergence in the medical field, and for rethinking medical innovation in general.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charisma Hehakaya
- Global Public Health & Bioethics, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ellen H. M. Moors
- Innovation Studies, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Vandemaele M, Aznar M, Blanchard P, Borras JM, Leech M, Aggarwal A, Lievens Y. A systematic literature review of definitions and classification systems for radiotherapy innovation: A first step towards building a value-based assessment tool for radiation oncology. Radiother Oncol 2023; 183:109602. [PMID: 36889594 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109602] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2023] [Revised: 02/24/2023] [Accepted: 02/26/2023] [Indexed: 03/08/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Timely access to radiotherapy innovations remains suboptimal, partly because there is no commonly agreed appraisal system suitable for the broad range of radiotherapy interventions. The Health Economics in Radiation Oncology (HERO) programme of ESTRO therefore engaged in building a radiotherapy-specific value-based framework. We report on a first step towards that aim, documenting the available definitions and classification systems for radiotherapy interventions. METHODS A systematic literature search was carried out in Pubmed and Embase, following PRISMA methodology and using search terms on 'innovation', 'radiotherapy', 'definition' and 'classification'. Data were extracted from articles that met prespecified inclusion criteria. RESULTS Out of 13,353 articles, 25 met the inclusion criteria, resulting in the identification of 7 definitions of innovation and 15 classification systems applicable to radiation oncology. Iterative appraisal divided the classification systems into two groups. A first group of 11 systems categorized innovations according to the perceived magnitude of innovation, typically 'minor' versus 'major'. The remaining 4 systems categorised innovations according to radiotherapy-specific characteristics, such as the type of radiation equipment or radiobiological properties. Here, commonly used terms as 'technique' or 'treatment' were found to be used in different meanings. DISCUSSION There is no widely accepted definition or classification system for radiotherapy innovations. The data however suggest that unique properties of radiotherapy interventions can be used to categorise innovations in radiation oncology. Still, there remains a need for clear terminology denoting radiotherapy-specific characteristics. CONCLUSION Building on this review, the ESTRO-HERO project will define what is required for a radiotherapy-specific value-based assessment tool.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miet Vandemaele
- Radiation Oncology Department, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
| | - Marianne Aznar
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, UK
| | - Pierre Blanchard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Oncostat U1018 INSERM, Université Paris-Saclay, Gustave-Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Josep M Borras
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Barcelona and Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Michelle Leech
- Applied Radiation Therapy Trinity, Discipline of Radiation Therapy, School of Medicine, Trinity St. James's Cancer Institute, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
| | - Ajay Aggarwal
- Institute of Cancer Policy, King's College London, London, UK; Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Yolande Lievens
- Radiation Oncology Department, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Franco P, De Felice F, Kaidar-Person O, Gabrys D, Marta GN, Banini M, Livi L, Jagsi R, Coles CE, Poortmans P, Meattini I. Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Radiation Oncology: A Bibliometric Analysis and Critical Review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 116:232-245. [PMID: 36841344 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.02.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2022] [Revised: 02/12/2023] [Accepted: 02/15/2023] [Indexed: 02/25/2023]
Abstract
The promotion of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) is being increasingly pursued in health care, both in general and within radiation oncology. Because bibliometrics is a powerful tool to reveal the scientific literature on a specific topic during a certain timespan, a systematic bibliometric analysis of the documents published on EDI in radiation oncology was performed, aiming at exploring common patterns in research and emerging trends, tracking collaborations and networks, and anticipating future directions in clinical research. Standard descriptive statistics and bibliometric techniques were used in the analysis. A collaboration network and thematic map were generated from the data. Four domains were represented: (1) motor themes, including themes well developed and important for the structuring of the research field; (2) niche themes, representing the isolated topics that do not share important external links with other themes; (3) emerging themes, referring to still weakly developed topics; and (4) basic themes, including the essential topics. EDI in the profession of radiation oncology is essential to ensure that the workforce delivering radiation oncology care both draws from the full talent pool of human capital and delivers the highest quality science and clinical care to all patients. The burgeoning literature on EDI in radiation oncology suggests that a large and growing cohort of scholars within radiation oncology are dedicated to addressing these important challenges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pierfrancesco Franco
- Department of Translational Medicine (DIMET), University of Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy; Department of Radiation Oncology, Maggiore della Carità University Hospital, Novara, Italy
| | - Francesca De Felice
- Department of Radiotherapy, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Orit Kaidar-Person
- Breast Cancer Radiation Therapy Unit, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel; Sackler School of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel; GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Dorota Gabrys
- Radiotherapy Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Gliwice Branch, Gliwice, Poland
| | - Gustavo Nader Marta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Sírio-Libanês, São Paulo/Brasília, Brazil; Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group (LACOG), Porto Alegre, Brazil
| | - Marco Banini
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences "Mario Serio," University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Livi
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences "Mario Serio," University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Reshma Jagsi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | | | - Philip Poortmans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Netwerk, Antwerp, Belgium; Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Icro Meattini
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences "Mario Serio," University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Lara PC, Benstead K, Erikssen JG. Training in Radiation and Clinical Oncology in Europe. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND CURRICULAR DEVELOPMENT 2023; 10:23821205231197982. [PMID: 37692557 PMCID: PMC10483962 DOI: 10.1177/23821205231197982] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2023] [Accepted: 08/11/2023] [Indexed: 09/12/2023]
Abstract
The European population is strongly affected by cancer. Radiotherapy is roughly used in 50% of cancer patients in European countries. The increased cancer burden demands a new generation of radiation/clinical oncologist (RO/CO) that, besides a strong evidence-based oncological knowledge, will be ready for leadership in cancer care. The mutual recognition of professional qualifications of Radiation/Clinical Oncology in the EU needs training harmonization. The European Society of Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Union for Medical Specialties (UEMS) made important efforts toward a European Common Curriculum for RO/CO leadership in cancer care. If qualifications are mutually recognized, the training supporting these qualifications should be also harmonized. Since 1991, ESTRO produced several editions of the Core Curriculum in Radiation Oncology (1991, 2004, 2012, 2019). These Core Curricula were endorsed as European Training Requirements by the UEMS in 2004, 2013, and 2019. A core curriculum for clinical oncology was also produced to provide this harmonization tool to countries where radiation oncology is practiced inside the broader specialty of clinical oncology. New initiatives are in place to continuously adapt the training programs to the rapidly evolving cancer care organization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pedro C Lara
- Canarian Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Roque University Hospital, Fernando Pessoa Canarias University, Las Palmas, Spain
| | - Kim Benstead
- Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Brockworth, UK
| | - Jesper Grau Erikssen
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Mushonga M, Abdihamid O, Ntizimira C, Murenzi G, Ka S, Hammad N, Rubagumya F. The first Choosing Wisely Africa conference: a roadmap to value-based cancer care in Africa (16th December 2022, Senegal). Ecancermedicalscience 2023; 17:1517. [PMID: 37113728 PMCID: PMC10129401 DOI: 10.3332/ecancer.2022.1517] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2023] [Indexed: 04/29/2023] Open
Abstract
The Choosing Wisely campaign was formally launched in 2012 and a decade later, the inaugural Choosing Wisely Africa conference was held in Dakar, Senegal on 16 December 2022 supported by ecancer. Academic partners included Ministere de la Sante et de I'Action Sociale, Senegalese Association of Palliative Care, Federation Internationale des Soins Palliatifs, Universite Cheikh Anta diop de Dakar, Societe Senegalaise de Cancerologie and King's College London. There were around 70 delegates attending in person mostly from Senegal and a further 30 joining virtually. Ten speakers gave insight into Choosing Wisely from an African perspective and Dr's Fabio Moraes and Frederic Ivan Ting shared the Choosing Wisely experience from Brazil and the Philippines, respectively. This report therefore shares the highlights of the first Choosing Wisely Africa conference guided by topics discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melinda Mushonga
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences, Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada
- Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe
| | - Omar Abdihamid
- The Garissa Cancer Center, Garissa County Referral Hospital, Garissa, Kenya
| | | | - Gad Murenzi
- Einstein-Rwanda Research and Capacity Building Program, Research for Development (RD Rwanda) and Rwanda Military Hospital, Kigali, Rwanda
| | - Sidy Ka
- Cheikh Anta Diop University, Dakar 10700, Senegal
| | - Nazik Hammad
- Departments of Oncology, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada
| | - Fidel Rubagumya
- Einstein-Rwanda Research and Capacity Building Program, Research for Development (RD Rwanda) and Rwanda Military Hospital, Kigali, Rwanda
- Department of Oncology and Department of Research, Rwanda Military Hospital, Kigali, Rwanda
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Mushonga M, Weiss J, Liu ZA, Nyakabau AM, Mohamad O, Tawk B, Moraes FY, Grover S, Yap ML, Zubizarreta E, Lievens Y, Rodin D. Hypofractionation in Breast Cancer Radiotherapy Across World Bank Income Groups: Results of an International Survey. JCO Glob Oncol 2023; 9:e2200127. [PMID: 36706350 PMCID: PMC10166450 DOI: 10.1200/go.22.00127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melinda Mushonga
- Sally Mugabe Central Hospital, Harare, Zimbabwe.,Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jessica Weiss
- Department of Biostatistics, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Zhihui Amy Liu
- Department of Biostatistics, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Anna-Mary Nyakabau
- Department of Oncology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe
| | - Osama Mohamad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - Bouchra Tawk
- German Cancer Research Consortium, Core Site Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany.,Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Fabio Y Moraes
- Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Surbhi Grover
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States; Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Mei Ling Yap
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes, Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute, UNSW Sydney, Liverpool, Australia.,Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centres, Western Sydney University, Campbelltown, Australia.,School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Campbelltown, Australia
| | | | - Yolande Lievens
- Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Danielle Rodin
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Muirhead R, Aggarwal A. Real World Data - Does it Cut the Mustard or Should We Take it With a Pinch of Salt? Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2023; 35:15-19. [PMID: 36272863 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2022.09.058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2022] [Revised: 08/16/2022] [Accepted: 09/26/2022] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- R Muirhead
- Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
| | - A Aggarwal
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Trust, London, UK; Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Santos M, Chavez-Nogueda J, Galvis JC, Merino T, Oliveira e Silva L, Rico M, Sarria G, Sisamon I, Garay O. Hypofractionation as a solution to radiotherapy access in latin america: expert perspective. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2022; 27:1094-1105. [PMID: 36632306 PMCID: PMC9826647 DOI: 10.5603/rpor.a2022.0108] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2022] [Accepted: 10/24/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Limited radiation therapy resources have resulted in an interest in developing time and cost-saving innovations to expand access to cancer treatment, in Latin America. Therefore, hypofractionated radiotherapy (HRT) is a possible solution, as this modality delivers radiation over a shorter period of time. Materials and methods A selected panel of Latin American (LA) experts in fields related to HRT were provided with a series of relevant questions to address, prior to the multi-day conference. Within this meeting, each narrative was discussed and edited, through numerous rounds of discussion, until agreement was achieved. Results The challenges identified in increasing the adoption of HRT in LA include a lack of national and regional clinical practice guidelines and cancer registries; a lack of qualified human resources and personnel education; high up-front costs of equipment; disparate resource distribution and scarce HRT research. An analysis for these overarching challenges was developed and answered with recommendations. Conclusion Extending the adoption of HRT in LA can provide a path forward to increase access to radiotherapy and overcome the shortage of equipment. HRT has the potential to improve population health outcomes and patient centered care, while offering comparable local control, toxicity, palliation, and late effects for multiple indications, when compared to conventional RT. Concerted efforts from all involved stakeholders are needed to overcome the barriers in adopting this strategy in LA countries. The recommendations presented in this article can serve as a plan of action for HRT adoption in other countries in a similar situation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcos Santos
- ALATRO — Latin America Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology, Goiânia, Brasil
| | - Jessica Chavez-Nogueda
- Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital de Oncología, Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI, IMSS, México City, México
| | - Juan Carlos Galvis
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Clinica Los Nogales, Division of Clinical Research Clinica Los Nogales, Bogota, Colombia
| | - Tomas Merino
- Hemato-Oncology Department, Pontifícia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Luis Oliveira e Silva
- Brasilia University Hospital (Hospital Universitário de Brasília — HUB), Brasília, Brasil
| | - Mariana Rico
- Americas Health Foundation (AHF), Washington, United States
| | - Gustavo Sarria
- Radiation Therapy Department, Oncosalud — AUNA, Lima, Peru
| | - Ignacio Sisamon
- Centro de Oncologia y Radioterapia and Hospital Privado de Comunidad, Mar del Plata, Argentina,School of Medicine, FASTA University, Mar del Plata, Argentina
| | - Onix Garay
- National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)/Mexican Social Security Institute (IMSS), México City, Mexico
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Bruand M, Salleron J, Guihard S, Crety CM, Liem X, Pasquier D, Lamrani-Ghaouti A, Charra-Brunaud C, Peiffert D, Clavier JB, Desandes E, Faivre JC. Acute skin toxicity of conventional fractionated versus hypofractionated radiotherapy in breast cancer patients receiving regional node irradiation: the real-life prospective multicenter HYPOBREAST cohort. BMC Cancer 2022; 22:1318. [PMID: 36526987 PMCID: PMC9755801 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-10402-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2022] [Accepted: 12/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Large-scale trials have shown that hypofractionated adjuvant breast radiotherapy was as effective in terms of survival and local control as conventional fractionated radiotherapy, and acute toxicity was reduced with hypofractionated radiotherapy. However, there is a lack of data about the toxicity of breast with regional nodal irradiation (RNI). The aim of this study was to assess the effect of fractionation on radiation-related acute skin toxicity in patients receiving RNI in addition to whole-breast or chest wall irradiation, using real-life data. METHODS We conducted a prospective, multicenter cohort study with systematic computerized data collection integrated into Mosaiq®. Three comprehensive cancer centers used a standardized form to prospectively collect patient characteristics, treatment characteristics and toxicity. RESULTS Between November 2016 and January 2022, 1727 patients were assessed; 1419 (82.2%) and 308 (17.8%) patients respectively received conventional fractionated and hypofractionated radiation therapy. Overall, the incidence of acute grade 2 or higher dermatitis was 28.4% (490 patients). Incidence was lower with hypofractionated than with conventional fractioned radiation therapy (odds ratio (OR) 0.34 [0.29;0.41]). Two prognostic factors were found to increase the risk of acute dermatitis, namely 3D (vs IMRT) and breast irradiation (vs chest wall). CONCLUSION Using real-life data from unselected patients with regional nodal irradiation, our findings confirm the decreased risk of dermatitis previously reported with hypofractionated radiation therapy in clinical trials. Expansion of systematic data collection systems to include additional centers as well as dosimetric data is warranted to further evaluate the short- and long-term effects of fractionation in real life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marie Bruand
- grid.452436.20000 0000 8775 4825Academic Department of Radiation Therapy & Brachytherapy, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine – Unicancer, 6 avenue de Bourgogne - CS, 30 519 54519 Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy cedex, France ,grid.29172.3f0000 0001 2194 6418EA 4360 APEMAC, Université de Lorraine, Nancy, France
| | - Julia Salleron
- grid.452436.20000 0000 8775 4825Unité de biostatistiques, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine, 54519 Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France
| | - Sébastien Guihard
- grid.512000.6Service de Radiothérapie, ICANS - Institut de Cancérologie Strasbourg Europe, 67200 Strasbourg, France
| | - Charles Marchand Crety
- grid.418448.50000 0001 0131 9695Service de Radiothérapie, Institut Jean Godinot, 51100 Reims, France
| | - Xavier Liem
- grid.452351.40000 0001 0131 6312Service de Radiothérapie, Centre Oscar Lambret, 59000 Lille, France
| | - David Pasquier
- grid.452351.40000 0001 0131 6312Service de Radiothérapie, Centre Oscar Lambret, 59000 Lille, France ,grid.503422.20000 0001 2242 6780RIStAL, UMR 9189, Université de Lille, 59000 Lille, France
| | | | - Claire Charra-Brunaud
- grid.452436.20000 0000 8775 4825Academic Department of Radiation Therapy & Brachytherapy, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine – Unicancer, 6 avenue de Bourgogne - CS, 30 519 54519 Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy cedex, France
| | - Didier Peiffert
- grid.452436.20000 0000 8775 4825Academic Department of Radiation Therapy & Brachytherapy, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine – Unicancer, 6 avenue de Bourgogne - CS, 30 519 54519 Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy cedex, France ,grid.29172.3f0000 0001 2194 6418EA 4360 APEMAC, Université de Lorraine, Nancy, France
| | - Jean-Baptiste Clavier
- grid.512000.6Service de Radiothérapie, ICANS - Institut de Cancérologie Strasbourg Europe, 67200 Strasbourg, France
| | - Emmanuel Desandes
- grid.29172.3f0000 0001 2194 6418EA 4360 APEMAC, Université de Lorraine, Nancy, France ,grid.452436.20000 0000 8775 4825Service en Charge des Données de Santé, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine, 54519 Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France
| | - Jean-Christophe Faivre
- grid.452436.20000 0000 8775 4825Academic Department of Radiation Therapy & Brachytherapy, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine – Unicancer, 6 avenue de Bourgogne - CS, 30 519 54519 Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy cedex, France
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Real-World Patterns and Decision Drivers of Radiotherapy for Lung Cancer Patients in Romania: RADIO-NET Study Results. Diagnostics (Basel) 2022; 12:diagnostics12123089. [PMID: 36553096 PMCID: PMC9777374 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12123089] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2022] [Revised: 11/24/2022] [Accepted: 12/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiotherapy (RT) plays a crucial role in all stages of lung cancer. Data on recent real-world RT patterns and main drivers of RT decisions in lung cancer in Romania is scarce; we aimed to address these knowledge gaps through this physician-led medical chart review in 16 RT centers across the country. Consecutive patients with lung cancer receiving RT as part of their disease management between May-October 2019 (pre-COVID-19 pandemic) were included. Descriptive statistics were generated for all variables. This cohort included 422 patients: median age 63 years, males 76%, stages I-II 6%, III 43%, IV 50%, mostly adeno- and squamous cell carcinoma (76%), ECOG 0-1 50% at the time of RT. Curative intent RT was used in 36% of cases, palliative RT in 64%. Delays were reported in 13% of patients, mostly due to machine breakdown (67%). Most acute reported RT toxicity was esophagitis (19%). Multiple disease-, patient-, physician- and context-related drivers counted in the decision-making process. This is the first detailed analysis of RT use in lung cancer in Romania. Palliative RT still dominates the landscape. Earlier diagnosis, coordinated multidisciplinary strategies, and the true impact of the multimodal treatments on survival are strongly needed to improve lung cancer outcomes.
Collapse
|
19
|
Chuong MD, Ann Clark M, Henke LE, Kishan AU, Portelance L, Parikh PJ, Bassetti MF, Nagar H, Rosenberg SA, Mehta MP, Refaat T, Rineer JM, Smith A, Seung S, Zaki BI, Fuss M, Mak RH. Patterns of Utilization and Clinical Adoption of 0.35 Tesla MR-guided Radiation Therapy in the United States - Understanding the Transition to Adaptive, Ultra-Hypofractionated Treatments. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2022; 38:161-168. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2022.11.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2022] [Revised: 11/18/2022] [Accepted: 11/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
|
20
|
Blackler N, Bradley KE, Kelly C, Murphy S, Cross C, Kirby M. A national survey of the radiotherapy dosimetrist workforce in the UK. Br J Radiol 2022; 95:20220459. [PMID: 36063424 PMCID: PMC9793486 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20220459] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2022] [Revised: 07/14/2022] [Accepted: 07/25/2022] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To undertake a national survey of the Radiotherapy Dosimetrist workforce within the UK; examining different attributes and experiences, comparing results with published evidence within the literature. METHODS A national, anonymised survey was undertaken between Dec 2020 and end of Feb 2021; employing a mixed-methods approach and blend of closed, open-ended answer choices and free-text comments. Questions included range of training routes and job titles; registration status; job tasks and engagement with Continuing Professional Development (CPD). RESULTS A total of 223 individuals responded. Nearly half were trained via therapeutic radiography; approximately, a fifth through a clinical technologist/physics routes. Most (70%) had Dosimetrist in their job title. Nearly 70% were statutorily registered, and almost a fifth were in the voluntary register of Clinical Technologists. Most job tasks were in treatment planning - with 57% spending over 70% of their time there. Most notably, 29% were not involved in any CPD scheme. No published evidence showed the same aspects identified here. CONCLUSIONS Our survey showed a unique profile of the Radiotherapy Dosimetrist workforce in the UK, with a variety of training routes and statutory registration status. Nearly, a third were not engaged in a CPD scheme - adding to the current discussion that perhaps all Dosimetrists should be statutorily registered, for ensuring safe and effective clinical practice. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE A novel and unique national survey of Dosimetrists working in Radiotherapy in the UK is presented, leading to new insights into current training routes, registration status, job tasks and CPD engagement and needs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Mike Kirby
- The University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Rodrigues ED, Gonsalves D, Teixeira L, López E. Frailty-the missing constraint in radiotherapy treatment planning for older adults. Aging Clin Exp Res 2022; 34:2295-2304. [PMID: 36056189 DOI: 10.1007/s40520-022-02200-1] [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: 05/30/2022] [Accepted: 07/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/01/2022]
Abstract
Current demographic changes translate into an increased frequency of cancer in older adults. Available data show that about 45-55% of the new cancer patients will need RT treatments, with an expected increase of 20-30% in the future. To provide the best cancer care it is mandatory to assess frailty, offer appropriate curative treatments to patients and personalise them for the frail. Based on published data, the median prevalence of frailty in older population is about 42%. Recently, the free radical theory of frailty has been proposed stating that oxidative damage is more prevalent in frail patients. In parallel, RT is one of the most frequent cancer treatments offered to older adults and is a source of external free radicals. RT dose constraints correlate with toxicity rates, so we open the question whether frailty should be considered when defining these constraints. Thus, for this paper, we will highlight the importance of frailty evaluation for RT treatment decisions and outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edna Darlene Rodrigues
- Departamento de Estudo de Populações, ICBAS, Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas Abel Salazar, University of Porto, Rua de Jorge Viterbo Ferreira, n° 228, 4050-313, Porto, Portugal. .,Center for Health Technology and Services Research, CINTESIS, Rua Dr. Plácido da Costa, s/n, 4200-450, Porto, Portugal. .,EIT Health Ageing PhD School, Munich, Germany.
| | - Daniela Gonsalves
- GenesisCare en Madrid, Hospital San Francisco de Asís, Calle de Joaquín Costa, 28, 28002, Madrid, Spain
| | - Laetitia Teixeira
- Departamento de Estudo de Populações, ICBAS, Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas Abel Salazar, University of Porto, Rua de Jorge Viterbo Ferreira, n° 228, 4050-313, Porto, Portugal.,Center for Health Technology and Services Research, CINTESIS, Rua Dr. Plácido da Costa, s/n, 4200-450, Porto, Portugal
| | - Escarlata López
- GenesisCare en Madrid, Hospital Vithas La Milagrosa, Calle de Modesto Lafuente, 14, 28010, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Hehakaya C, Sharma AM, van der Voort Van Zijp JR, Grobbee DE, Verkooijen HM, Izaguirre EW, Moors EH. Implementation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Radiation Therapy in Routine Care: Opportunities and Challenges in the United States. Adv Radiat Oncol 2022; 7:100953. [PMID: 35651662 PMCID: PMC9149022 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2022.100953] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2021] [Accepted: 03/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Magnetic resonance image (MRI)-guided radiation therapy with the 1.5 Tesla magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MR-Linac) is a rapidly evolving and emerging treatment. The MR-Linac literature mainly focused on clinical and technological factors in technology implementation, but it is relatively silent on health care system-related factors. Consequently, there is a lack of understanding of opportunities and barriers in implementing the MR-Linac from a health care system perspective. This study addresses this gap with a case study of the US health care system. Methods and Materials An exploratory, qualitative research design was used. Data collection consisted of 23 semistructured interviews ranging from clinical experts at the radiation therapy and radiology department to insurance commissioners in 7 US hospitals. Analysis of opportunities and barriers was guided by the Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread and Sustainability framework for new medical technologies in health care organizations. Results Opportunities included high-precision MR-guidance during radiation therapy with potential continued technical advances and better patient outcomes. MR-Linac also offers opportunities for research, professional, and economic development. Barriers included the lack of empirical evidence of clinical effectiveness, technological complexity, and large staffing and structural investments. Furthermore, the presence of patients with disadvantaged socioeconomic background, and the lack of appropriate reimbursement as well as regulatory conditions can hinder technology implementation. Conclusions Our study confirms the current literature on implementing the MR-Linac, but also reveals additional challenges for the US health care system. Alongside the well-known clinical and technical factors, also professional, socioeconomic, market, and governing influences affect technology implementation. These findings highlight new connections to facilitate technology uptake and provide a richer start to understanding its long-term effect.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charisma Hehakaya
- Division of Imaging & Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ankur M. Sharma
- University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee
- Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine and Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England
| | | | - Diederick E. Grobbee
- Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Helena M. Verkooijen
- Division of Imaging & Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Ellen H.M. Moors
- Innovation Studies, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Slotman BJ, Clark MA, Özyar E, Kim M, Itami J, Tallet A, Debus J, Pfeffer R, Gentile P, Hama Y, Andratschke N, Riou O, Camilleri P, Belka C, Quivrin M, Kim B, Pedersen A, van Overeem Felter M, Kim YI, Kim JH, Fuss M, Valentini V. Clinical adoption patterns of 0.35 Tesla MR-guided radiation therapy in Europe and Asia. Radiat Oncol 2022; 17:146. [PMID: 35996192 PMCID: PMC9396857 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-022-02114-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2022] [Accepted: 07/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) utilization is rapidly expanding, driven by advanced capabilities including better soft tissue imaging, continuous intrafraction target visualization, automatic triggered beam delivery, and the availability of on-table adaptive replanning. Our objective was to describe patterns of 0.35 Tesla (T)-MRgRT utilization in Europe and Asia among early adopters of this novel technology.
Methods Anonymized administrative data from all 0.35T-MRgRT treatment systems in Europe and Asia were extracted for patients who completed treatment from 2015 to 2020. Detailed treatment information was analyzed for all MR-linear accelerators (linac) and -cobalt systems.
Results From 2015 through the end of 2020, there were 5796 completed treatment courses delivered in 46,389 individual fractions. 23.5% of fractions were adapted. Ultra-hypofractionated (UHfx) dose schedules (1–5 fractions) were delivered for 63.5% of courses, with 57.8% of UHfx fractions adapted on-table. The most commonly treated tumor types were prostate (23.5%), liver (14.5%), lung (12.3%), pancreas (11.2%), and breast (8.0%), with increasing compound annual growth rates (CAGRs) in numbers of courses from 2015 through 2020 (pancreas: 157.1%; prostate: 120.9%; lung: 136.0%; liver: 134.2%). Conclusions This is the first comprehensive study reporting patterns of utilization among early adopters of a 0.35T-MRgRT system in Europe and Asia. Intrafraction MR image-guidance, advanced motion management, and increasing adoption of on-table adaptive RT have accelerated a transition to UHfx regimens. MRgRT has been predominantly used to treat tumors in the upper abdomen, pelvis and lungs, and increasingly with adaptive replanning, which is a radical departure from legacy radiotherapy practices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Mary Ann Clark
- ViewRay, Inc., Suite 3000, 1099 18th Street, Denver, CO, 80202, USA.
| | - Enis Özyar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, Acibadem MAA University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Myungsoo Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Incheon St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jun Itami
- Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center Japan, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Agnès Tallet
- Radiation Therapy Department, Institut Paoli-Calmettes, Marseille, France.,CRCM Inserm UMR1068, Marseille, France
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Raphael Pfeffer
- Radiation Oncology, Assuta Medical Centers, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - PierCarlo Gentile
- Radiation Oncology, Ospedale San Pietro Fatebenefratelli di Roma, Rome, Italy
| | | | | | - Olivier Riou
- Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), University Federation of Radiation Oncology of Mediterranean Occitanie, Montpellier University, INSERM U1194 IRCM, 34298, Montpellier, France
| | | | - Claus Belka
- Radiation Oncology, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Magali Quivrin
- Radiation Oncology, Centre Georges-Francois Leclerc, Dijon, France
| | - BoKyong Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sheikh Khalifa Specialty Hospital, Ras Al Khaimah, United Arab Emirates
| | | | | | - Young Il Kim
- Radiation Oncology, Chungnam National University Sejong Hospital, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
| | - Jin Ho Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Martin Fuss
- ViewRay, Inc., Suite 3000, 1099 18th Street, Denver, CO, 80202, USA
| | - Vincenzo Valentini
- Radiology, Radiation Oncology and Hematology Dept., Università Cattolica S.Cuore, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Cost-effectiveness of hypofractionated versus conventional radiotherapy in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer: An ancillary study of the PROstate fractionated irradiation trial - PROFIT. Radiother Oncol 2022; 173:306-312. [PMID: 35772576 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.06.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2022] [Revised: 06/15/2022] [Accepted: 06/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of moderate Hypofractionated Radiotherapy (H-RT) compared to Conventional Radiotherapy (C-RT) for intermediate-risk prostate caner (PCa). METHODS A prospective randomized clinical trial including 222 patients from six French cancer centers was conducted as an ancillary study of the international PROstate Fractionated Irradiation Trial (PROFIT). We carried-out a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) from the payer's perspective, with a time horizon of 48 months. Patients assigned to the H-RT arm received 6000 cGy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks, or 7800 cGy in 39 fractions over 7 to 8 weeks in the C-RT arm. Patients completed quality of life (QoL) questionnaire: Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) at baseline, 24 and 48 months, which were mapped to obtain a EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D) equivalent to generate Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY). We assessed differences in QALYs and costs between the two arms with Generalized Linear Models (GLMs). Costs, estimated in euro (€) 2020, were combined with QALYs to estimate the Incremental Cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with non-parametric bootstrap. RESULTS Total costs per patien were lower in the H-RT arm compared to the C-RT arm €3,062 (95 % CI: 2,368 to 3,754) versus €4,285 (95 % CI: 3,355 to 5,215), (p < 0.05). QALY were marginally higher in the H-RT arm, however this difference was not significant: 0.044 (95 % CI: - 0.016 to 0.099). CONCLUSIONS Treating localized prostate cancer with moderate H-RT could reduce national health insurance spending. Adopting such a treatment with an updated reimbursement tariff would result in improving resource allocation in RT management.
Collapse
|
25
|
Ghandourh W, Holloway L, Batumalai V, Chlap P, Field M, Jacob S. Optimal and actual rates of Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy (SABR) utilisation for primary lung cancer in Australia. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2022; 34:7-14. [PMID: 35282142 PMCID: PMC8907547 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2022.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2022] [Accepted: 03/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy (SABR) plays a major role in the management of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). An evidence-based model is developed to estimate optimal rates of lung SABR utilisation within the Australian population. Optimal utilisation rates are compared against actual utilisation rates to evaluate service provision.
Background and purpose Radiotherapy utilisation rates considerably vary across different countries and service providers, highlighting the need to establish reliable benchmarks against which utilisation rates can be assessed. Here, optimal utilisation rates of Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy (SABR) for lung cancer are estimated and compared against actual utilisation rates to identify potential shortfalls in service provision. Materials and Methods An evidence-based optimal utilisation model was constructed after reviewing practice guidelines and identifying indications for lung SABR based on the best available evidence. The proportions of patients likely to develop each indication were obtained, whenever possible, from Australian population-based studies. Sensitivity analysis was performed to account for variations in epidemiological data. Practice pattern studies were reviewed to obtain actual utilisation rates. Results A total of 6% of all lung cancer patients were estimated to optimally require SABR at least once during the course of their illness (95% CI: 4–6%). Optimal utilisation rates were estimated to be 32% for stage I and 10% for stage II NSCLC. Actual utilisation rates for stage I NSCLC varied between 6 and 20%. For patients with inoperable stage I, 27–74% received SABR compared to the estimated optimal rate of 82%. Conclusion The estimated optimal SABR utilisation rates for lung cancer can serve as useful benchmarks to highlight gaps in service delivery and help plan for more adequate and efficient provision of care. The model can be easily modified to determine optimal utilisation rates in other populations or updated to reflect any changes in practice guidelines or epidemiological data.
Collapse
|
26
|
Marhold M, Kramer G, Krainer M, Le Magnen C. The prostate cancer landscape in Europe: Current challenges, future opportunities. Cancer Lett 2022; 526:304-310. [PMID: 34863887 DOI: 10.1016/j.canlet.2021.11.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2021] [Revised: 11/24/2021] [Accepted: 11/30/2021] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common non-cutaneous cancer in men in Europe and is predicted to exhibit declining mortality in the European Union (EU) due to various recent improvements in treatment. The goal of this short review is to give insight into the European treatment landscape of PCa, while focusing on improvements in care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maximilian Marhold
- Division of Oncology, Department for Medicine I, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Gero Kramer
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Michael Krainer
- Division of Oncology, Department for Medicine I, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Clémentine Le Magnen
- Pathology, Institute of Medical Genetics and Pathology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Switzerland; Department of Urology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Masson I, Bellanger M, Perrocheau G, Mahé MA, Azria D, Pommier P, Mesgouez-Nebout N, Giraud P, Peiffert D, Chauvet B, Dudouet P, Salem N, Noël G, Khalifa J, Latorzeff I, Guérin-Charbonnel C, Supiot S. Cost and Toxicity Comparisons of Two IMRT Techniques for Prostate Cancer: A Micro-Costing Study and Weighted Propensity Score Analysis Based on a Prospective Study. Front Oncol 2022; 11:781121. [PMID: 35087753 PMCID: PMC8787862 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.781121] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2021] [Accepted: 12/10/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has become the standard treatment for patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Two techniques of rotational IMRT are commonly used in this indication: Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and helical tomotherapy (HT). To the best of our knowledge, no study has compared their related costs and clinical effectiveness and/or toxicity in prostate cancer. We aimed to assess differences in costs and toxicity between VMAT and HT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer with pelvic irradiation. MATERIAL AND METHODS We used data from the "RCMI pelvis" prospective multicenter study (NCT01325961) including 155 patients. We used a micro-costing methodology to identify cost differences between VMAT and HT. To assess the effects of the two techniques on total actual costs per patient and on toxicity we used stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS The mean total cost for HT, €2019 3,069 (95% CI, 2,885-3,285) was significantly higher than the mean cost for VMAT €2019 2,544 (95% CI, 2,443-2,651) (p <.0001). The mean ± SD labor and accelerator cost for HT was €2880 (± 583) and €1978 (± 475) for VMAT, with 81 and 76% for accelerator, respectively. Acute GI and GU toxicity were more frequent in VMAT than in HT (p = .021 and p = .042, respectively). Late toxicity no longer differed between the two groups up to 24 months after completion of treatment. CONCLUSION Use of VMAT was associated with lower costs for IMRT planning and treatment than HT. Similar stabilized long-term toxicity was reported in both groups after higher acute GI and GU toxicity in VMAT. The estimates provided can benefit future modeling work like cost-effectiveness analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ingrid Masson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
| | - Martine Bellanger
- Department of Human and Social Sciences, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
- UMR CNRS6051, EHESP (Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Santé Publique - School of Public Health), University of Rennes, Rennes, France
| | - Geneviève Perrocheau
- Department of Human and Social Sciences, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
| | - Marc-André Mahé
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
- Department of Radiation Oncology, François Baclesse Cancer Center, Caen, France
| | - David Azria
- Fédération Universitaire d’Oncologie Radiothérapie (FOROM), Institut Régional du Cancer Montpellier (ICM), Université de Montpellier, Institut de Recherche en Cancérologie de Montpellier (IRCM), Montpellier, France
| | - Pascal Pommier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Léon Bérard Center, Lyon, France
| | - Nathalie Mesgouez-Nebout
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest Paul Papin, Angers, France
| | - Philippe Giraud
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Didier Peiffert
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Lorraine Cancer Institute, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France
| | - Bruno Chauvet
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sainte Catherine Institute, Avignon, France
| | - Philippe Dudouet
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pont de Chaume Clinic, Montauban, France
| | - Naji Salem
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France
| | - Georges Noël
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancerology Institute of Strasbourg-Europe, Strasbourg, France
| | - Jonathan Khalifa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse-Oncopole (IUCT-Oncopole), Toulouse, France
| | - Igor Latorzeff
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Pasteur Clinic, Toulouse, France
| | - Catherine Guérin-Charbonnel
- Clinical Trial Sponsor Unit/Biometry, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
- Centre de Recherche en Cancérologie et Immunologie Nantes Angers - Center for Research in Cancerology and Immunology Nantes-Angers (CRCINA), Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale - National Institute for Health and Medical Research (INSERM) UMR1232, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) ERL6001, University of Nantes, Nantes, France
| | - Stéphane Supiot
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest René Gauducheau, Saint-Herblain, France
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Spencer K, Defourny N, Tunstall D, Cosgrove V, Kirkby K, Henry A, Lievens Y, Hall P. Variable and fixed costs in NHS radiotherapy; consequences for increasing hypo fractionation. Radiother Oncol 2022; 166:180-188. [PMID: 34890735 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.11.035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2021] [Revised: 11/19/2021] [Accepted: 11/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE The increased use of hypofractionated radiotherapy changes department activity. While expected to be cost-effective, departments' fixed costs may impede savings. Understanding radiotherapy's cost-drivers, to what extent these are fixed and consequences of reducing activity can help to inform reimbursement strategies. MATERIAL/METHODS We estimate the cost of radiotherapy provision, using time-driven activity-based costing, for five bone metastases treatment strategies, in a large NHS provider. We compare these estimations to reimbursement tariff and assess their breakdown by cost types: fixed (buildings), semi-fixed (staff, linear accelerators) and variable (materials) costs. Sensitivity analyses assess the cost-drivers and impact of reducing departmental activity on the costs of remaining treatments, with varying disinvestment assumptions. RESULTS The estimated radiotherapy cost for bone metastases ranges from 430.95€ (single fraction) to 4240.76€ (45 Gy in 25#). Provider costs align closely with NHS reimbursement, except for the stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) strategy (tariff exceeding by 15.3%). Semi-fixed staff costs account for 28.1-39.7% and fixed/semi-fixed equipment/space costs 38.5-54.8% of provider costs. Departmental activity is the biggest cost-driver; reduction in activity increasing cost, predominantly in fractionated treatments. Decommissioning linear accelerators ameliorates this, although can only be realised at equipment capacity thresholds. CONCLUSION Hypofractionation is less burdensome to patients and long-term offers a cost-efficient mechanism to treat an increasing number of patients within existing capacity. As a large majority of treatment costs are fixed/semi-fixed, disinvestment is complex, within the life expectancy of a linac, imbalances between demand and capacity will result in higher treatment costs. With a per-fraction reimbursement, this may disincentivise delivery of hypofractionated treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katie Spencer
- Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, United Kingdom; Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, United Kingdom.
| | - Noemie Defourny
- The PRECISE Group, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.
| | - David Tunstall
- Finance Department, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, United Kingdom.
| | - Viv Cosgrove
- Department of Radiotherapy Physics, Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, United Kingdom.
| | - Karen Kirkby
- The PRECISE Group, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.
| | - Ann Henry
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, United Kingdom; Leeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, United Kingdom.
| | - Yolande Lievens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Belgium.
| | - Peter Hall
- Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
The Role of the Global Coalition for Radiotherapy in Political Advocacy for Radiation Therapy as a Cost-Effective and Underfunded Modality Around the World. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 111:23-26. [PMID: 34348109 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.04.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2020] [Revised: 04/05/2021] [Accepted: 04/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
|
30
|
Borras JM, Corral J, Aggarwal A, Audisio R, Espinas JA, Figueras J, Naredi P, Panteli D, Pourel N, Prades J, Lievens Y. Innovation, value and reimbursement in radiation and complex surgical oncology: Time to rethink. Eur J Surg Oncol 2021; 48:967-977. [PMID: 34479744 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2021.08.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2021] [Accepted: 08/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Complex surgery and radiotherapy are the central pillars of loco-regional oncology treatment. This paper describes the reimbursement schemes used in radiation and complex surgical oncology, reports on literature and policy reviews. MATERIAL AND METHODS A systematic review of the literature of the reimbursement models has been carried out separately for radiotherapy and complex cancer surgery based on PRISMA guidelines. Using searches of PubMed and grey literature, we identified articles from scientific journals and reports published since 2000 on provider payment or reimbursement systems currently used in radiation oncology and complex cancer surgery, also including policy models. RESULTS Most European health systems reimburse radiotherapy using a budget-based, fee-for-service or fraction-based system; while few reimburse services according to an episode-based model. Also, the reimbursement models for cancer surgery are mostly restricted to differences embedded in the DRG system and adjustments applied to the fees, based on the complexity of each surgical procedure. There is an enormous variability in reimbursement across countries, resulting in different incentives and different amounts paid for the same therapeutic strategy. CONCLUSION A reimbursement policy, based on the episode of care as the basic payment unit, is advocated for. Innovation should be tackled in a two-tier approach: one defining the common criteria for reimbursement of proven evidence-based interventions; another for financing emerging innovation with uncertain definitive value. Relevant clinical and economic data, also collected real-life, should support reimbursement systems that mirror the actual cost of evidence-based practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Josep M Borras
- University of Barcelona, Spain; Catalonian Cancer Plan, Department of Health, Spain; Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Spain.
| | - Julieta Corral
- Catalonian Cancer Plan, Department of Health, Spain; Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ajay Aggarwal
- Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospital NHS Trust, United Kingdom
| | - Riccardo Audisio
- Department of Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Josep Alfons Espinas
- Catalonian Cancer Plan, Department of Health, Spain; Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Josep Figueras
- European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, Belgium
| | - Peter Naredi
- Department of Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Dimitra Panteli
- Department of Health Care Management, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Joan Prades
- Catalonian Cancer Plan, Department of Health, Spain; Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Yolande Lievens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital & Ghent University, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
The Role of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Patient-Centered Cancer Care in the Era of Precision Medicine. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13174272. [PMID: 34503082 PMCID: PMC8428334 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13174272] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2021] [Accepted: 08/11/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Over the last few decades, changes in diagnostic and treatment paradigms have greatly advanced cancer care and improved outcomes [...].
Collapse
|
32
|
Innovation, value and reimbursement in radiation and complex surgical oncology: time to rethink. Radiother Oncol 2021; 169:114-123. [PMID: 34461186 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2021] [Revised: 08/04/2021] [Accepted: 08/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Complex surgery and radiotherapy are the central pillars of loco-regional oncology treatment. This paper describes the reimbursement schemes used in radiation and complex surgical oncology, reports on literature and policy reviews. MATERIAL AND METHODS A systematic review of the literature of the reimbursement models has been carried out separately for radiotherapy and complex cancer surgery based on PRISMA guidelines. Using searches of PubMed and grey literature, we identified articles from scientific journals and reports published since 2000 on provider payment or reimbursement systems currently used in radiation oncology and complex cancer surgery, also including policy models. RESULTS Most European health systems reimburse radiotherapy using a budget-based, fee-for-service or fraction-based system; while few reimburse services according to an episode-based model. Also, the reimbursement models for cancer surgery are mostly restricted to differences embedded in the DRG system and adjustments applied to the fees, based on the complexity of each surgical procedure. There is an enormous variability in reimbursement across countries, resulting in different incentives and different amounts paid for the same therapeutic strategy. CONCLUSION A reimbursement policy, based on the episode of care as the basic payment unit, is advocated for. Innovation should be tackled in a two-tier approach: one defining the common criteria for reimbursement of proven evidence-based interventions; another for financing emerging innovation with uncertain definitive value. Relevant clinical and economic data, also collected real-life, should support reimbursement systems that mirror the actual cost of evidence-based practice.
Collapse
|
33
|
Christ SM, Siddig S, Elbashir F, Abuelgasim M, Alamin Azrag AA, Abdelrahman OM, Gafer N, Thormann M, Petric P, Willmann J. Radiation Oncology in the Land of the Pyramids: How Sudan Continues to Push the Frontiers of Cancer Care in Eastern Africa. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 110:931-939. [PMID: 34171244 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.02.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2021] [Accepted: 02/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
When faced with illness, Sudanese patients have traditionally relied primarily on folklore healers. In the recent past, Sudan increased its health care spending and placed ever-greater importance on medical education. Although traditional remedies still play an important role, Sudanese patients increasingly consult conventional medicine. Not only infectious diseases but also a rising burden of noncommunicable conditions, including cancer, represent major health care challenges. Therefore, Sudan will need to make the best out of the limited resources available and further increase investment in health care to confront these trends successfully. Sudan was one of the first African countries to recognize the importance of radiation oncology in multidisciplinary cancer care and began investing in it in the 1960s. Today, there are 4 comprehensive cancer centers in the country, which offer radiation therapy and employ 10 radiation therapy machines for a population of about 45 million people. This proportion is an indication that Sudan still has an underfunded health care system with a lack of infrastructure and human resources. The present manuscript intends to provide a well-rounded overview of radiation oncology in Sudan today.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian M Christ
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
| | - Shaimaa Siddig
- Department of Clinical Oncology and Palliative Care, Radiation and Isotope Centre, Khartoum, Sudan
| | - Fawzia Elbashir
- Department of Clinical Oncology, National Cancer Institute, University of Gezira, Wad Medani City, Sudan
| | | | - Alsadeg Awad Alamin Azrag
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Shendi Centre of Nuclear Medicine and Oncology, University Hospital, Shendi, Sudan
| | | | - Nahla Gafer
- Department of Clinical Oncology and Palliative Care, Radiation and Isotope Centre, Khartoum, Sudan
| | - Maximilian Thormann
- Department of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine, and Neuroradiology, University Hospital, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Primoz Petric
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Jonas Willmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Value-based radiotherapy: A new chapter of the ESTRO-HERO project. Radiother Oncol 2021; 160:236-239. [PMID: 33992629 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.05.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2021] [Accepted: 05/09/2021] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
Radiotherapy interventions are rapidly evolving and improving, holding promise for better patient outcomes, yet at the possible detriment of higher societal costs. The ESTRO-HERO value-based radiotherapy project aims to develop a framework defining and assessing the value of radiotherapy innovations, to support clinical implementation and equitable access, within a sustainable healthcare system.
Collapse
|
35
|
Marta GN, Ramiah D, Kaidar-Person O, Kirby A, Coles C, Jagsi R, Hijal T, Sancho G, Zissiadis Y, Pignol JP, Ho AY, Cheng SHC, Offersen BV, Meattini I, Poortmans P. The Financial Impact on Reimbursement of Moderately Hypofractionated Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer: An International Consortium Report. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2021; 33:322-330. [PMID: 33358283 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2020.12.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2020] [Revised: 11/06/2020] [Accepted: 12/08/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
AIMS Moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation has been evaluated in several prospective studies, resulting in wide acceptance of shorter treatment protocols for postoperative breast irradiation. Reimbursement for radiation therapy varies between private and public systems and between countries, impacting variably financial considerations in the use of hypofractionation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the financial impact of moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation by reimbursement system in different countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS The study was designed by an international group of radiation oncologists. A web-questionnaire was distributed to representatives from each country. The participants were asked to involve the financial consultant at their institution. RESULTS Data from 13 countries from all populated continents were collected (Europe: Denmark, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, UK; North America: Canada, USA; South America: Brazil; Africa: South Africa; Oceania: Australia; Asia: Israel, Taiwan). Clinicians and/or departments in most of the countries surveyed (77%) receive remuneration based on the number of fractions delivered to the patient. The financial loss per patient estimated resulting from applying moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation instead of conventional fractionation ranged from 5-10% to 30-40%, depending on the healthcare provider. CONCLUSION Although a generalised adoption of moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation would allow for a considerable reduction in social and economic burden, the financial loss for the healthcare providers induced by fee-for-service remuneration may be a factor in the slow uptake of these regimens. Therefore, fee-for-service reimbursement may not be preferable for radiation oncology. We propose that an alternative system of remuneration, such as bundled payments based on stage and diagnosis, may provide more value for all stakeholders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G N Marta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Sírio-Libanês, São Paulo, Brazil.
| | - D Ramiah
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Donald Gordon Medical Centre, Johannesburg, South Africa
| | - O Kaidar-Person
- Breast Cancer Radiation Unit, Radiation Oncology Institute, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel
| | - A Kirby
- Department of Radiotherapy, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - C Coles
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - R Jagsi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - T Hijal
- Division of Radiation Oncology, McGill University Health Centre, Montréal, Quebec, Canada
| | - G Sancho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Y Zissiadis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Genesis Cancer Care, Wembley, WA, Australia
| | - J-P Pignol
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - A Y Ho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - S H-C Cheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Koo Foundation Sun Yat-Sen Cancer Center, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - B V Offersen
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - I Meattini
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy; Department of Biomedical, Experimental, and Clinical Sciences "M. Serio", University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - P Poortmans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Kankernetwerk, Wilrijk-Antwerp, Belgium; University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Wilrijk-Antwerp, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Willmann J, Poortmans P, Monti AF, Grant W, Clementel E, Corning C, Reynaert N, Hurkmans CW, Andratschke N. Development of staffing, workload and infrastructure in member departments of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) radiation oncology group. Radiother Oncol 2021; 155:226-231. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.11.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2020] [Revised: 11/04/2020] [Accepted: 11/08/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
|
37
|
Cardoso F, MacNeill F, Penault-Llorca F, Eniu A, Sardanelli F, Nordström EB, Poortmans P. Why is appropriate healthcare inaccessible for many European breast cancer patients? - The EBCC 12 manifesto. Breast 2021; 55:128-135. [PMID: 33461060 PMCID: PMC7817501 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2020.12.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2020] [Revised: 12/23/2020] [Accepted: 12/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
In Europe, inappropriate reimbursement and funding rules and regulations act as disincentives to best breast cancer care or, at worst, hinder best care. This problem was the focus of the 12th European Breast Cancer Conference (EBCC) manifesto, discussed during the virtual conference. As patient involvement is indispensable in driving changes to clinical practice, Europa Donna the European patient advocacy group was closely involved in the 12th manifesto. Reimbursement policies have rarely evolved with advances in breast cancer care such as outpatient (ambulatory) care rather than inpatient admission, use of oral or subcutaneous anti-cancer drugs rather than day-hospital intravenous administration, oncoplastic surgery techniques to minimize mastectomy rates, breast reconstructive surgery, risk-reducing surgery for BRCA mutation carriers, or use of hypo-fractionated breast radiation therapy. Although each European country, region and centre will have to understand how their reimbursement policies may hinder best care and find their own solutions, the problems are similar throughout Europe and some solutions can be broadly applied. This manifesto is not calling for more funding or demanding changes that will result in more expensive care. Reimbursement, if better aligned with guidelines and optimal clinical practice, will deliver more cost-effective healthcare. This will release resources, support more equitable use of finite funding and resources, so allowing more European breast cancer patients to benefit from evidence-based treatment recommended by national and international guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fatima Cardoso
- Breast Unit, Champalimaud Clinical Centre/ Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal.
| | - Fiona MacNeill
- Royal Marsden Hospital London, Division of Breast Surgery (UEMS), UK.
| | | | - Alexandru Eniu
- Cancer Institute Ion Chiricuta, Department of Breast Tumors, Day Hospital Unit, Cluj-Napoca, Romania; Hopital Riviera-Chablais, Switzerland.
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Università Degli Studi di Milano, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Milan, Italy; IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Department of Radiology, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
| | | | - Philip Poortmans
- Iridium Kankernetwerk and University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Antwerp, Belgium.
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Rodin D, Tawk B, Mohamad O, Grover S, Moraes FY, Yap ML, Zubizarreta E, Lievens Y. Hypofractionated radiotherapy in the real-world setting: An international ESTRO-GIRO survey. Radiother Oncol 2021; 157:32-39. [PMID: 33453312 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.01.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2020] [Revised: 12/21/2020] [Accepted: 01/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Multiple large trials have established the non-inferiority of hypofractionated radiotherapy compared to conventional fractionation. This study will determine real-world hypofractionation adoption across different geographic regions for breast, prostate, cervical cancer, and bone metastases, and identify barriers and facilitators to its use. MATERIALS AND METHODS An anonymous, electronic survey was distributed from January 2018 through January 2019 to radiation oncologists through the ESTRO-GIRO initiative. Predictors of hypofractionation were identified in univariable and multivariable regression analyses. RESULTS 2316 radiation oncologists responded. Hypofractionation was preferred in node-negative breast cancer following lumpectomy (82·2% vs. 46·7% for node-positive; p < 0.001), and in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer (57·5% and 54·5%, respectively, versus 41·2% for high-risk (p < 0.001)). Hypofractionation was used in 32·3% of cervix cases in Africa, but <10% in other regions (p < 0.001). For palliative indications, hypofractionation was preferred by the majority of respondents. Lack of long-term data and concerns about local control and toxicity were the most commonly cited barriers. In adjusted analyses, hypofractionation was least common for curative indications amongst low- and lower-middle-income countries, Asia-Pacific, female respondents, small catchment areas, and in centres without access to intensity modulated radiotherapy. CONCLUSION Significant variation was observed in hypofractionation across curative indications and between regions, with greater concordance in palliation. Using inadequate fractionation schedules may impede the delivery of affordable and accessible radiotherapy. Greater regionally-targeted and disease-specific education on evidence-based fractionation schedules is needed to improve utilization, along with best-case examples addressing practice barriers and supporting policy reform.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danielle Rodin
- Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Canada.
| | - Bouchra Tawk
- German Cancer Research Consortium, Core Site Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Osama Mohamad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
| | - Surbhi Grover
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States; Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
| | - Fabio Y Moraes
- Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
| | - Mei Ling Yap
- Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes, Research and Evaluation (CCORE), Ingham Institute, UNSW Sydney, Liverpool, Australia; Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centres, Western Sydney University, Campbelltown, Australia
| | | | - Yolande Lievens
- Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Ultrahypofractionation of localized prostate cancer : Statement from the DEGRO working group prostate cancer. Strahlenther Onkol 2020; 197:89-96. [PMID: 33301049 PMCID: PMC7726607 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-020-01723-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2020] [Accepted: 11/17/2020] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
Abstract
Due to its low fractionation sensitivity, also known as “alpha/beta ratio,” in relation to its surrounding organs at risk, prostate cancer is predestined for hypofractionated radiation schedules assuming an increased therapeutic ratio compared to normofractionated regimens. While moderate hypofractionation (2.2–4 Gy) has been proven to be non-inferior to normal fractionation in several large randomized trials for localized prostate cancer, level I evidence for ultrahypofractionation (>4 Gy) was lacking until recently. An accumulating body of non-randomized evidence has recently been strengthened by the publication of two randomized studies comparing ultrahypofractionation with a normofractionated schedule, i.e., the Scandinavian HYPO-RT trial by Widmark et al. and the first toxicity results of the PACE‑B trial. In this review, we aim to give a brief overview of the current evidence of ultrahypofractionation, make an overall assessment of the level of evidence, and provide recommendations and requirements that should be followed before introducing ultrahypofractionation into routine clinical use.
Collapse
|
40
|
Barton M, Batumalai V, Spencer K. Health Economic and Health Service Issues of Palliative Radiotherapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2020; 32:775-780. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2020.06.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2020] [Revised: 05/19/2020] [Accepted: 06/18/2020] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
|
41
|
Total marrow and total lymphoid irradiation in bone marrow transplantation for acute leukaemia. Lancet Oncol 2020; 21:e477-e487. [PMID: 33002443 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(20)30342-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 61] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2020] [Revised: 04/20/2020] [Accepted: 05/28/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
The use of total body irradiation as part of conditioning regimens for acute leukaemia is progressively declining because of concerns of late toxic effects and the introduction of radiation-free regimens. Total marrow irradiation and total marrow and lymphoid irradiation represent more targeted forms of radiotherapy compared with total body irradiation that have the potential to decrease toxicity and escalate the dose to the bone marrow for high-risk patients. We review the technological basis and the clinical development of total marrow irradiation and total marrow and lymphoid irradiation, highlighting both the possible advantages as well as the current roadblocks for widespread implementation among transplantation units. The exact role of total marrow irradiation or total marrow and lymphoid irradiation in new conditioning regimens seems dependent on its technological implementation, aiming to make the whole procedure less time consuming, more streamlined, and easier to integrate into the clinical workflow. We also foresee a role for computer-assisted planning, as a way to improve planning and delivery and to incorporate total marrow irradiation and total marrow and lymphoid irradiation in multi-centric phase 2-3 trials.
Collapse
|
42
|
Ratosa I, Chirilă ME, Steinacher M, Kozma E, Vojtíšek R, Franco P, Poortmans P. Hypofractionated radiation therapy for breast cancer: Preferences amongst radiation oncologists in Europe - Results from an international survey. Radiother Oncol 2020; 155:17-26. [PMID: 33065187 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.10.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2020] [Revised: 09/24/2020] [Accepted: 10/05/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE We aimed to assess the prescription preference about hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT) for breast cancer (BC) patients amongst radiation oncologists (ROs) practicing in Europe and to identify restraints on HFRT utilisation. MATERIALS AND METHODS An online survey was circulated amongst ROs in Europe through personal, RO and BC societies' networks, from October 2019 to March 2020. The statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, chi-squared testing, and logistic regression analysis. RESULTS We received 412 responses from 44 countries. HFRT was chosen as the preferred schedule for whole breast irradiation (WBI) by 54.7% and for WBI with regional nodes irradiation (RNI) by 28.7% of the responding ROs. In the case of postmastectomy RT with or without reconstruction, HFRT was preferred by 21.1% and 29.6%, respectively. Overall, 69.2% of the responding ROs selected at least one factor influencing the decision to utilise HFRT, the most frequent of which included age (51.4%), RNI (46.9%), internal mammary lymph nodes irradiation (39.7%), BC stage (33.5%) and implant-based breast reconstruction (31.6%). ROs working in academic centres (odds ratio, (OR), 1.7; 95% confidence interval, (CI); 1.1-2.6, p = 0.019), practicing in Western Europe (OR, 4.2; 95%CI; 2.7-6.6, p < 0.0005) and/or dedicating >50% of clinical time to BC patients (OR, 2.5; 95%CI; 1.5-4.2, p = 0.001) more likely preferred HFRT. CONCLUSION Although HFRT is recognised as a new standard, its implementation in routine RT clinical practice across Europe varies for numerous reasons. Better dissemination of evidence-based recommendations is advised to improve the level of awareness about this clinical indication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ivica Ratosa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Slovenia; Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia.
| | | | | | - Elvisa Kozma
- Oncology Service, University Hospital, Tirana, Albania
| | - Radovan Vojtíšek
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, University Hospital in Pilsen, Czech Republic
| | | | - Philip Poortmans
- Iridium Kankernetwerk, Wilrijk-Antwerp, Belgium; University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Wilrijk-Antwerp, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Witt Nyström P, Bratland Å, Minn H, Grau C. Ongoing and future clinical trials in particle therapy in the Nordic countries. Acta Oncol 2020; 59:1145-1150. [PMID: 32673134 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2020.1792548] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
In the Nordic countries, as in the rest of the world, particle therapy as a radiotherapy modality, is evolving, albeit the hard evidence for the clinical benefit still is scarce. However, a common goal for the Nordic countries is to include a minimum of 80% of the patients treated with particle therapy into clinical trials. In this paper, we summarize the current status of clinical trials involving particle therapy in the Nordic countries, with an overview of both active and coming trials. So far, one is closed for inclusion and data are being analyzed, seven trials are actively recruiting patients and several more trials are underway. No common Nordic trial has yet been designed, nor is in the planning phase, and the authors will discuss the obstacles as well as the opportunities a common Nordic platform may represent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Petra Witt Nyström
- The Skandion Clinic, Uppsala, Sweden
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Åse Bratland
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Heikki Minn
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, University Hospital Turku, Turku, Finland
| | - Cai Grau
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Corbin S, Brusadin G, Rivera S, Bossi A, Deutsch É. [Retrospective study on the intensification of hypofractionated radiotherapy: The organizational change]. Cancer Radiother 2020; 24:714-721. [PMID: 32839103 PMCID: PMC7442004 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2020.06.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2020] [Revised: 06/15/2020] [Accepted: 06/16/2020] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
Abstract
Objectif de l’étude Le processus de réalisation de la radiothérapie externe est une chaine d’étapes dans laquelle chacune d’entre elles est réalisée seulement si la précédente a été complétée. Le développement des pratiques d’hypofractionnement ces dernières années a tendance à augmenter la charge de travail des étapes de préparation à une irradiation et à diminuer le nombre de séances par patient. Cette étude rétrospective vise à analyser l’évolution de ces pratiques dans un centre de lutte contre le cancer et d’en apprécier les enjeux organisationnels. Matériel et méthodes L’ensemble des données de gestion des dossiers de radiothérapie ont été extraites du système d’information de radiothérapie. Les séances de radiothérapie ont été identifiées par patient et par code CIM (Classification internationale des maladies). Le taux de remplissage des appareils de traitement a été calculé avec les données réelles du département de radiothérapie. Résultats De 2015 à 2019, une augmentation du nombre de scanographies (+16 %), du nombre de patients pris en charge (+11,6 %) et du volume d’heures disponibles pour les traitements (+12 %) ont été observées. Aussi, une diminution du nombre total de séances de radiothérapie (−5 %), de la moyenne de séances réalisées par séquence de traitement (−19 %), du taux de remplissage des appareils (−7 %) et de la moyenne de séances réalisées par patients traités des tumeurs malignes des bronches et du poumon (−38 %), des organes digestifs (−37 %), secondaires (−19 %) du sein (−15 %) et de la prostate (−15 %) ont été observées. Le nombre de séances administrées par séquence de traitement entre 2015 et 2019 a diminué significativement pour les patients des classes d’âge [20–69 ans] (p < 0,001) et [> 70 ans] (p < 0,001). Conclusion Un paradoxe apparait entre l’augmentation du nombre total de patients pris en charge et la diminution du taux de remplissage des appareils de traitement. Ce transfert de charge de travail a un impact sur la qualité et la sécurité des soins et sur les stratégies d’organisation et d’investissement. Il a également un impact économique lié au modèle de remboursement basé sur la tarification à la séance. Une réorganisation des services de radiothérapie s’avère inéluctable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Corbin
- Département d'oncologie radiothérapie Gustave-Roussy, 94805, Villejuif, France; Université Paris-Saclay, 94805 Villejuif, France.
| | - G Brusadin
- Département d'oncologie radiothérapie Gustave-Roussy, 94805, Villejuif, France; Université Paris-Saclay, 94805 Villejuif, France
| | - S Rivera
- Département d'oncologie radiothérapie Gustave-Roussy, 94805, Villejuif, France; Université Paris-Saclay, 94805 Villejuif, France
| | - A Bossi
- Département d'oncologie radiothérapie Gustave-Roussy, 94805, Villejuif, France; Université Paris-Saclay, 94805 Villejuif, France
| | - É Deutsch
- Département d'oncologie radiothérapie Gustave-Roussy, 94805, Villejuif, France; Université Paris-Saclay, 94805 Villejuif, France
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Lievens Y, Borras JM, Grau C. Provision and use of radiotherapy in Europe. Mol Oncol 2020; 14:1461-1469. [PMID: 32293084 PMCID: PMC7332207 DOI: 10.1002/1878-0261.12690] [Citation(s) in RCA: 59] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2019] [Revised: 01/07/2020] [Accepted: 04/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiation therapy is one of the core components of multidisciplinary cancer care. Although ~ 50% of all European cancer patients have an indication for radiotherapy at least once in the course of their disease, more than one out of four cancer patients in Europe do not receive the radiotherapy they need. There are multiple reasons for this underutilisation, with limited availability of the necessary resources – in terms of both trained personnel and equipment – being a major underlying cause of suboptimal access to radiotherapy. Moreover, large variations across European countries are observed, not only in available radiotherapy equipment and personnel per inhabitant or per cancer patient requiring radiotherapy, but also in workload. This variation is in part determined by the country's gross national income. Radiation therapy and technology are advancing quickly; hence, recommendations supporting resource planning and investment should reflect this dynamic environment and account for evolving treatment complexity and fractionation schedules. The forecasted increase in cancer incidence, the rapid introduction of innovative cancer treatments and the more active involvement of patients in the healthcare discussion are all factors that should be taken under consideration. In this continuously changing oncology landscape, reliable data on the actual provision and use of radiotherapy, the optimal evidence‐based demand and the future needs are crucial to inform cancer care planning and address and overcome the current inequalities in access to radiotherapy in Europe.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yolande Lievens
- Department of Radiation OncologyGhent University Hospital and Ghent UniversityBelgium
| | - Josep M. Borras
- Department of Clinical SciencesIDIBELLUniversity of BarcelonaSpain
| | - Cai Grau
- Department of Oncology and Danish Center for Particle TherapyAarhus University HospitalDenmark
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Nevens D, Kindts I, Defourny N, Boesmans L, Van Damme N, Engels H, Van de Voorde C, Lievens Y. The financial impact of SBRT for oligometastatic disease: A population-level analysis in Belgium. Radiother Oncol 2020; 145:215-222. [PMID: 32065901 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.01.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2019] [Revised: 01/09/2020] [Accepted: 01/27/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION There is a steady rise in Stereotactic Body RadioTherapy (SBRT) utilization in oligometastatic disease (OMD). This may generate important financial consequences for radiotherapy budgets. The National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance of Belgium (NIHDI) initiated a coverage with evidence development (CED) project for innovative radiotherapy, including SBRT, in 2011. A cost calculation and budget estimation for SBRT in the OMD setting was carried out. MATERIALS AND METHODS Predictive growth scenarios for future uptake of SBRT for OMD in Belgium were developed using demographics and CED data. The provider cost of SBRT for OMD in Belgium was calculated using the Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TD-ABC) model developed by ESTRO-HERO, alimented with national data on resources, treatments and operational parameters, and compared to the new reimbursement. Combining these, the future financial impact of this novel treatment indication for healthcare providers and payers in Belgium was evaluated. RESULTS The number of 428 OMDs treated with SBRT in Belgium in 2017 is expected to increase between 484 and 2073 courses annually by 2025. A provider cost of €4360 per SBRT was calculated (range: €3488-€5654), whereas the reimbursement covers between €4139 and €4654. Large variations in potential extra provider costs by 2025 ensue from the different scenarios, ranging between €1,765,993 and €9,038,754. Provider costs and reimbursement show good agreement. CONCLUSION Although the financial impact of SBRT for OMD in Belgium is forecasted to remain acceptable, even in extreme scenarios, further clinical trials and real-life clinical and financial monitoring with prospective data gathering are necessary to refine the data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daan Nevens
- Iridium Kankernetwerk, Radiation Oncology Department, Universiteit Antwerpen, Belgium.
| | - Isabelle Kindts
- Department of Radiotherapy, Cancer Centre, General Hospital Groeninge, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - Noémie Defourny
- ESTRO, European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology, Brussels, Belgium; Radiation Oncology and Experimental Cancer Research, Ghent University, Belgium
| | | | | | - Hilde Engels
- NIHDI, National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance, Brussels, Belgium
| | | | - Yolande Lievens
- Radiation Oncology and Experimental Cancer Research, Ghent University, Belgium; Radiation Oncology Department, Ghent University Hospital, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|