Factors influencing access to palliative radiotherapy: a Norwegian population-based study

Area-based disparities in non-small-cell lung cancer survival

BACKGROUND

In the Nordic countries, universal healthcare access has been effective in reducing socioeconomic disparities in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) management. However, other factors, such as proximity to healthcare facilities, may still affect access to care. This study aimed at investigating the influence of residential area on NSCLC survival.

METHODS

This population-based study utilized hospital records to identify NSCLC patients who underwent their initial treatment at Vaasa Central Hospital between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020. Patients were categorized based on their postal codes into urban areas (≤50 km from the hospital) and rural areas (>50 km from the hospital). Survival rates between these two groups were compared using Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 321 patients were included in the study. Patients residing in rural areas (n = 104) exhibited poorer 12-month survival rates compared to their urban counterparts (n = 217) (unadjusted Hazard Ratio [HR]: 1.38; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.01-1.89; p = 0.042). After adjusting for factors such as performance status, frailty, and stage at diagnosis in a multivariate Cox regression model, the adjusted HR increased to 1.47 (95% CI: 1.07-2.01; p = 0.017) for patients living in rural areas compared to those in urban areas.

INTERPRETATION

The study findings indicate that the distance to the hospital is associated with increased lung cancer mortality. This suggests that geographical proximity may play a crucial role in the disparities observed in NSCLC survival rates. Addressing these disparities should involve strategies aimed at improving healthcare accessibility, particularly for patients residing in rural areas, to enhance NSCLC outcomes and reduce mortality.

Use of radiotherapy in patients with oesophageal, stomach, colon, rectal, liver, pancreatic, lung, and ovarian cancer: an International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) population-based study

BACKGROUND

There is little evidence on variation in radiotherapy use in different countries, although it is a key treatment modality for some patients with cancer. Here we aimed to examine such variation.

METHODS

This population-based study used data from Norway, the four UK nations (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales), nine Canadian provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, and Saskatchewan), and two Australian states (New South Wales and Victoria). Patients aged 15-99 years diagnosed with cancer in eight different sites (oesophageal, stomach, colon, rectal, liver, pancreatic, lung, or ovarian cancer), with no other primary cancer diagnosis occurring within the 5 years before to 1 year after the index cancer diagnosis or during the study period were included in the study. We examined variation in radiotherapy use from 31 days before to 365 days after diagnosis and time to its initiation, alongside related variation in patient group differences. Information was obtained from cancer registry records linked to clinical or patient management system data, or hospital administration data. Random-effects meta-analyses quantified interjurisdictional variation using 95% prediction intervals (95% PIs).

FINDINGS

Between Jan 1, 2012, and Dec 31, 2017, of 902 312 patients with a new diagnosis of one of the studied cancers, 115 357 (12·8%) did not meet inclusion criteria, and 786,955 were included in the analysis. There was large interjurisdictional variation in radiotherapy use, with wide 95% PIs: 17·8 to 82·4 (pooled estimate 50·2%) for oesophageal cancer, 35·5 to 55·2 (45·2%) for rectal cancer, 28·6 to 54·0 (40·6%) for lung cancer, and 4·6 to 53·6 (19·0%) for stomach cancer. For patients with stage 2-3 rectal cancer, interjurisdictional variation was greater than that for all patients with rectal cancer (95% PI 37·0 to 84·6; pooled estimate 64·2%). Radiotherapy use was infrequent but variable in patients with pancreatic (95% PI 1·7 to 16·5%), liver (1·8 to 11·2%), colon (1·6 to 5·0%), and ovarian (0·8 to 7·6%) cancer. Patients aged 85-99 years had three-times lower odds of radiotherapy use than those aged 65-74 years, with substantial interjurisdictional variation in this age difference (odds ratio [OR] 0·38; 95% PI 0·20-0·73). Women had slightly lower odds of radiotherapy use than men (OR 0·88, 95% PI 0·77-1·01). There was large variation in median time to first radiotherapy (from diagnosis date) by cancer site, with substantial interjurisdictional variation (eg, oesophageal 95% PI 11·3 days to 112·8 days; pooled estimate 62·0 days; rectal 95% PI 34·7 days to 77·3 days; pooled estimate 56·0 days). Older patients had shorter median time to radiotherapy with appreciable interjurisdictional variation (-9·5 days in patients aged 85-99 years vs 65-74 years, 95% PI -26·4 to 7·4).

INTERPRETATION

Large interjurisdictional variation in both use and time to radiotherapy initiation were observed, alongside large and variable age differences. To guide efforts to improve patient outcomes, underlying reasons for these differences need to be established.

FUNDING

International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (funded by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Institute New South Wales, Cancer Research UK, Danish Cancer Society, National Cancer Registry Ireland, The Cancer Society of New Zealand, National Health Service England, Norwegian Cancer Society, Public Health Agency Northern Ireland on behalf of the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry, DG Health and Social Care Scottish Government, Western Australia Department of Health, and Public Health Wales NHS Trust).

Hospital use and cancer treatment by age and socioeconomic status in the last year of life: A Norwegian population-based study of patients dying of cancer

INTRODUCTION

Cancer is the leading cause of death in Norway. In this nationwide study we describe the number and causes of hospital admissions and treatment in the final year of life for patients who died of cancer, as well as the associations to age and socioeconomic status (SES).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From nationwide registries covering 2010-2014, we identified all patients who were diagnosed with cancer 12-60 months before death and had cancer as their reported cause of death. We examined the number of overnight hospital stays, causes of admission, and treatment (chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgical procedures) offered during the last year of life by individual (age, sex, comorbidity), cancer (type, stage, months since diagnosis), and socioeconomic variables (co-residential status, income, education).

RESULTS

The analytical sample included 17,669 patients; 8,247 (47%) were female, mean age was 71.7 years (standard deviation 13.7). At diagnosis, 31% had metastatic disease, while 29% had an intermediate or high comorbidity burden. Altogether, 94% were hospitalized during their final year, 82% at least twice, and 33% six times or more. Patients spent a median of 23 days in hospital (interquartile range 11-41), and altogether 38% died there. Younger age, bladder and ovarian cancer, not living alone, and higher income were associated with having ≥6 hospitalizations. Cancer-related diagnoses were the main causes of hospitalizations (65%), followed by infections (11%). Around 51% had ≥1 chemotherapy episode, with large variations according to patient age and SES; patients who were younger, did not live alone, had high education, and high income received more chemotherapy. Radiotherapy was received by 15% and declined with age, and the variation according to SES characteristics was minor. Of the 12,940 patients with a cancer type where surgery is a main treatment modality, only 835 (6%) underwent surgical procedures for their primary tumor in the last year of life.

DISCUSSION

Most patients who die of cancer are hospitalized multiple times during the last year of life. Hospitalizations and treatment decline with advancing age. Living alone and having low income is associated with fewer hospitalizations and less chemotherapy treatment. Whether this indicates over- or undertreatment across various groups warrants further exploration.

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

INTRODUCTION

There is an increasing incidence of cancer in older people, but limited data on radiotherapy uptake, and in particular, radiotherapy utilisation (RTU) rates. The RTU rate for older adults with cancer may be lower than recommended due to lower tolerance for radiotherapy as well as additional comorbidities, reduced life expectancy and travel for treatment. Radiotherapy use must be aligned with best available, age-specific evidence to ensure older adults with cancer receive optimal benefit without harms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to synthesise the published data on the actual RTU rate for patients with cancer as a function of age. MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched to identify relevant population-based and hospital-based cohort studies on radiotherapy utilisation for all age groups, published in English, from 1 January 1990 to 1 July 2020. We focused on the following common cancers in older adults for which radiotherapy is recommended: breast, prostate, lung, rectal cancer, glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), and cervical cancer. Age-specific radiotherapy utilisation data were extracted and analysed as a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

From 2606 studies screened, 75 cohort and population-based studies were identified with age-specific radiotherapy utilisation data. The total number of patients in the 75 studies was 4,792,138. The RTU rate decreased with increasing age for all tumour sites analysed, except for patients receiving curative radiotherapy as definitive treatment for prostate or cervical cancer. This reduction with increasing age was demonstrated in both palliative and curative settings.

DISCUSSION

There is a global reduction in radiotherapy utilisation with increasing age for most tumour sites. The reduction in delivery of radiotherapy warrants further examination and evidence-based guidelines specific to this population.

Value of Geographical Information Systems in Analyzing Geographic Accessibility to Inform Radiotherapy Planning: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Vulnerable populations face geographical barriers in accessing radiotherapy (RT) facilities, resulting in heterogeneity of care received and cancer burden faced. We aimed to explore the current use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) in access to RT and use these findings to create sustainable solutions against barriers for access in low- and middle-income countries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review using the PRISMA search strategy was done for studies using GIS to explore outcomes among patients with cancer. Included studies were reviewed and classified into three umbrella categories of how GIS has been used in studying access to RT.

RESULTS

Forty articles were included in the final review. Thirty-eight articles were set in high-income countries and two in upper-middle-income countries. Included studies were published from 2000 to 2020, and were comprised of patients with all-cancers combined, breast, colon, skin, lung, prostate, ovarian, and rectal carcinoma patients. Studies were categorized under three groups on the basis of how they used GIS in their analyses: to describe geographic access to RT, to associate geographic access to RT with outcomes, and for RT planning. Most studies fell under multiple categories.

CONCLUSION

Although this field is relative nascent, there is a wide array of functions possible through GIS for RT planning, including identifying high-risk populations, improving access in high-need areas, and providing valuable information for future resource allocation. GIS should be incorporated in future studies, especially set in low- and middle-income countries, which evaluate access to RT.

The effect of age on specialized palliative care use in the last year of life for patients who die of cancer: A nationwide study from Norway

INTRODUCTION

Specialized palliative care (SPC) is beneficial towards end of life because of its holistic approach to improve quality of life and comfort of patients and their families. Few studies have described how patient age, sex, comorbidities, and socioeconomic status (SES) are associated with SPC use in nonselective populations who die of cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the use of SPC in the year preceding death by all Norwegian individuals with a recent cancer diagnosis who died of cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From nationwide registries, we identified patients with a recent (<5 years) cancer diagnosis who died during 2010-2014. Using binary logistic regression models, we estimated the probability of receiving hospital-based SPC during the last year of life according to individual (age, sex, comorbidity), cancer (stage, type, and months since diagnosis), and SES (e.g., living alone, household income, and education) characteristics.

RESULTS

The analytical sample contained 45,521 patients with a median age at death of 75 years; 46% were women. The probability of receiving hospital-based SPC in the total cohort was 0.43 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-0.43). Use of SPC was higher if patients were younger, female, had limited comorbidity, metastatic disease, had one the following cancer types: colorectal, pancreatic, bladder, kidney, or gastric, were diagnosed more than six months before death, and had higher SES. Adjusted model results suggested that the probability of using SPC in the last year of life for patients aged 80-89 years was 0.31 (95% CI 0.30-0.32), compared to a probability of 0.63 (95% CI 0.61-0.65) for patients aged 50-59 years. For patients ≥90 years, the probability was 0.16 (95% CI 0.15-0.18).

DISCUSSION

Less hospital-based SPC use among older patients, males, and those with lower SES indicates possible under-treatment in these groups. Future studies should be designed to determine the underlying reasons for these observed differences.

Geographical distance and reduced access to palliative radiotherapy: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) is an effective way of reducing symptoms caused by advanced incurable cancer. Several studies have investigated factors that contribute to inequalities in access to PRT; distance to a radiotherapy centre has been identified as one potential barrier.

AIM

To assess whether there is an association between distance to a radiotherapy centre and utilisation rates of PRT in adults with cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42020190772). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and APA-PsycINFO were searched for relevant papers up to 28 February 2021.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included. Twelve studies focused on whether patients with incurable cancer received PRT, as part of their treatment package. Pooled results reported that living ≥50 km vs <50 km from the radiotherapy centre was associated with a reduced likelihood of receiving PRT (OR 0.84 (95%CI 0.80, 0.88)). Nine focused on distance from the radiotherapy centre and compared single-fraction (SF) versus multiple-fraction PRT, indicating that patients living further away were more likely to receive SF. Pooled results comparing ≥50 km versus <50 km showed increased odds of receiving SF for those living ≥50 km (OR 1.48 (95%CI 1.26,1.75)).

CONCLUSION

Patients living further away from radiotherapy centres were less likely to receive PRT and those who received PRT were more likely to receive SF PRT, providing some evidence of inequalities in access to PRT treatment based on proximity to centres providing radiotherapy. Further research is needed to understand whether these inequalities are influenced by clinical referral patterns or by patients unwilling or unable to travel longer distances.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020190772.

Compliance with recommended cancer patient pathway timeframes and choice of treatment differed by cancer type and place of residence among cancer patients in Norway in 2015-2016

Background

Cancer patient pathways (CPPs) were implemented in Norway to reduce unnecessary waiting times, regional variations, and to increase the predictability of cancer care for the patients. This study aimed to determine if 70% of cancer patients started treatment within the recommended time frames, and to identify potential delays.

Methods

Patients registered with a colorectal, lung, breast, or prostate cancer diagnosis at the Cancer Registry of Norway in 2015–2016 were linked with the Norwegian Patient Registry and Statistics Norway. Adjusting for sociodemographic variables, multivariable quantile (median) regressions were used to examine the association between place of residence and median time to start of examination, treatment decision, and start of treatment.

Results

The study included 20 668 patients. The proportions of patients who went through the CPP within the recommended time frames were highest among colon (84%) and breast (76%) cancer patients who underwent surgery and lung cancer patients who started systemic anticancer treatment (76%), and lowest for prostate cancer patients who underwent surgery (43%). The time from treatment decision to start of treatment was the main source of delay for all cancers. Travelling outside the resident health trust prolonged waiting time and was associated with a reduced odds of receiving surgery and radiotherapy for lung and rectal cancer patients, respectively.

Conclusions

Achievement of national recommendations of the CCP times differed by cancer type and treatment. Identified bottlenecks in the pathway should be targeted to decrease waiting times. Further, CPP guidelines should be re-examined to determine their ongoing relevance.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09306-9.

The LabBM score is an excellent survival prediction tool in patients undergoing palliative radiotherapy

Background and aim

The prognostic assessment of patients referred for palliative radiotherapy can be conducted by site-specific scores. A quick assessment that would cover the whole spectrum could simplify the working day of clinicians who are not specialists for a particular disease site. This study evaluated a promising score, the LabBM (validated for brain metastases), in patients treated for other indications.

Materials and methods

The LabBM score was calculated in 375 patients by assigning 1 point each for C-reactive protein and lactate dehydrogenase above the upper limit of normal, and 0.5 points each for hemoglobin, platelets and albumin below the lower limit of normal. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed.

Results

Median overall survival gradually decreased with increasing point sum (range 25.1-1.1 months). When grouped according to the original three-tiered model, excellent discrimination was found. Patients with 0-1 points had a median survival of 15.7 months. Those with 1.5-2 points had a median survival of 5.8 months. Finally, those with 2.5-3.5 points had a median survival of 3.2 months (all p-values ≤ 0.001).

Conclusion

The LabBM score, which is derived from inexpensive blood tests and easy to use, stratified patients into three very distinct prognostic groups and deserves further validation.

Factors associated with emergency-onset diagnosis, time to treatment and type of treatment in colorectal cancer patients in Norway

Background

International differences in survival among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients may partly be explained by differences in emergency presentations (EP), waiting times and access to treatment.

Methods

CRC patients registered in 2015–2016 at the Cancer Registry of Norway were linked with the Norwegian Patient Registry and Statistics Norway. Multivariable logistic regressions analysed the odds of an EP and access to surgery, radiotherapy and systemic anticancer treatment (SACT). Multivariable quantile regression analysed time from diagnosis to treatment.

Results

Of 8216 CRC patients 29.2% had an EP before diagnosis, of which 81.4% were admitted to hospital with a malignancy-related condition. Higher age, more advanced stage, more comorbidities and colon cancer were associated with increased odds of an EP (p < 0.001). One-year mortality was 87% higher among EP patients (HR=1.87, 95%CI:1.75–2.02). Being married or high income was associated with 30% reduced odds of an EP (p < 0.001). Older age was significantly associated with increased waiting time to treatment (p < 0.001). Region of residence was significantly associated with waiting time and access to treatment (p < 0.001). Male (OR = 1.30, 95%CI:1.03,1.64) or married (OR = 1.39, 95%CI:1.09,1.77) colon cancer patients had an increased odds of SACT. High income rectal cancer patients had an increased odds (OR = 1.48, 95%CI:1.03,2.13) of surgery.

Conclusion

Patients who were older, with advanced disease or more comorbidities were more likely to have an emergency-onset diagnosis and less likely to receive treatment. Income was not associated with waiting time or access to treatment among CRC patients, but was associated with the likelihood of surgery among rectal cancer patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08415-1.

Palliative Radiotherapy Within the Veterans Health Administration: Barriers to Referral and Timeliness of Treatment

PURPOSE

Most Veterans Health Administration hospitals do not have radiation oncology (RO) departments on-site. The purpose of this study is to determine the impact of on-site RO on referral patterns and timeliness of palliative radiation therapy (PRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A survey was sent to medical directors at 149 Veterans Health Administration centers. Questions evaluated frequency of referral for PRT, timeliness of RO consults and treatment, and barriers to referral for PRT. Chi-square analysis was used to evaluate differences between centers that have on-site RO and centers that refer to outside facilities.

RESULTS

Of 108 respondents, 33 (31%) have on-site RO. Chi-square analysis revealed that RO consult within 1 week is more likely at centers with on-site RO (68% v 31%; P = .01). Centers with on-site RO more frequently deliver PRT for spinal cord compression within 24 hours (94% v 70%; P = .01). Those without on-site RO were more likely to want increased radiation oncologist involvement (64% v 26%; P < .001). Barriers to referral for PRT included patient ability to travel (81%), patient noncompliance (31%), delays in consult and/or treatment (31%), difficulty contacting a radiation oncologist (14%), and concern regarding excessive number of treatments (13%). Respondents with on-site RO less frequently reported delays in consult and/or treatment (6% v 41%; P < .0001) and difficulty contacting a radiation oncologist (0% v 20%; P = .0056) as barriers.

CONCLUSION

Respondents with on-site RO reported improved communication with radiation oncologists and more timely consultation and treatment initiation. Methods to improve timeliness of PRT for veterans at centers without on-site RO should be considered.

Palliative Care Physicians and Palliative Radiotherapy, Knowledge and Barriers for Referring: A Cross-sectional Study

CONTEXT

Palliative radiotherapy is effective in the management of symptoms resulting from advanced cancer. However, it remains underutilized. In developed countries, many factors have been linked to this phenomenon but data in developing and low-income countries, particularly in Latin America, are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a cross-sectional survey to explore palliative care physicians' knowledge of palliative radiotherapy and to investigate possible factors that limit patient referral.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional survey. An online questionnaire was sent to palliative care physicians (n = 170) registered in the Chilean Medical Society of Palliative Care directory.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 58.8%. Nearly all respondents (98%) considered radiotherapy to be a useful treatment. Less than half the respondents (43%) had good knowledge of palliative radiotherapy. Knowledge was correlated with self-reported knowledge (P = 0.015), discussing cases with radiation oncologist (P = 0.001), and having attended educational events on palliative radiotherapy (P = 0.001). Patient reluctance, poor performance status, and family reluctance were identified as major barriers to the use of palliative radiotherapy. Physicians from cities other than the capital were more likely to be concerned about barriers such as distance to radiotherapy facilities (P = 0.01), the duration of the referral process (P = 0.01), and the lack of a radiation oncologist available for discussing cases (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Several barriers affect referral to palliative radiotherapy. Some barriers seem to be more significant for physicians practicing in cities far from cancer centers. Physicians' knowledge is less than optimal and has been identified as a barrier to referral. Educational interventions and broadening the availability of cancer treatment resources are needed to improve the referral process.

Cancer incidence in non-immigrants and immigrants in Norway

BACKGROUND

Major cancers are associated with lifestyle, and previous studies have found that the non-immigrant populations in the Nordic countries have higher incidence rates of most cancers than the immigrant populations. However, rates are changing worldwide - so these differences may disappear with time. Here we present recent cancer incidence rates among immigrant and non-immigrant men and women in Norway and investigate whether previous differences still exist.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We took advantage of a recent change in the Norwegian Cancer Registry regulations that allow for the registry to have information on country of birth. The number of person years for 2014-2018 was aggregated for every combination of sex, five-year age-group and country of birth, by summing up each year's population in these groups. The number of cancer cases was then counted for the same groups, and age-standardised incidence rates calculated by weighing the age-specific incidence rates by the Nordic and World standard populations. Further, we calculated incidence rate ratios using the non-immigrant population as a reference.

RESULTS

Immigrants from Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Asia had lower incidence of total cancer compared to the non-immigrant population in Norway and immigrants born in the other Nordic or high-income countries. However, some cancers were more common in certain immigrant groups. Asian men and women had threefold the incidence of liver cancer than non-immigrant men and women. Men from the other Nordic countries and from Eastern Europe had higher lung cancer rates than non-immigrant men.

CONCLUSION

National registries should continuously monitor and present cancer incidence stratified on important population subgroups such as country of birth. This can help assess population subgroup specific needs for cancer prevention and treatment, and could eventually help reduce the morbidity and mortality of cancer.

Stage-specific survival has improved for young breast cancer patients since 2000: but not equally

Purpose

The stage-specific survival of young breast cancer patients has improved, likely due to diagnostic and treatment advances. We addressed whether survival improvements have reached all socioeconomic groups in a country with universal health care and national treatment guidelines.

Methods

Using Norwegian registry data, we assessed stage-specific breast cancer survival by education and income level of 7501 patients (2317 localized, 4457 regional, 233 distant and 494 unknown stage) aged 30–48 years at diagnosis during 2000–2015. Using flexible parametric models and national life tables, we compared excess mortality up to 12 years from diagnosis and 5-year relative survival trends, by education and income as measures of socioeconomic status (SES).

Results

Throughout 2000–2015, regional and distant stage 5-year relative survival improved steadily for patients with high education and high income (high SES), but not for patients with low education and low income (low SES). Regional stage 5-year relative survival improved from 85 to 94% for high SES patients (9% change; 95% confidence interval: 6, 13%), but remained at 84% for low SES patients (0% change; − 12, 12%). Distant stage 5-year relative survival improved from 22 to 58% for high SES patients (36% change; 24, 49%), but remained at 11% for low SES patients (0% change; − 19, 19%).

Conclusions

Regional and distant stage breast cancer survival has improved markedly for high SES patients, but there has been little survival gain for low SES patients. Socioeconomic status matters for the stage-specific survival of young breast cancer patients, even with universal health care.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10549-020-05698-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Provision and use of radiotherapy in Europe

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.

What is the optimal radiotherapy utilization rate for lung cancer?-a systematic review

Lung cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Although radiotherapy (RT) may be beneficial in the radical and/or palliative management of many lung cancer patients, it is underutilized worldwide. Population-level development of RT resources requires estimates of optimal radiotherapy utilization rates (ORUR) and actual radiotherapy utilization rate (ARUR). A systematic review of PubMed database for English-language articles from January 2009 to January 2019 was performed. Keywords included utilization, underutilization, demand, epidemiologic, benchmark, RT and cancer. Data abstracted included: study population, diagnosis, stage, year of diagnosis, timing of RT, intent of RT, ARUR, and ORUR. Eligible studies provided ARUR or ORUR for lung cancer, small cell lung cancer (SCLC), or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Included ARUR were based on at least 1,000 patients who were diagnosed or treated in 2009 or later. Included ORUR were based on evidence review or ARUR in 2009 or later. The initial search strategy yielded 1,627 unique abstracts. After review, 105 articles were determined appropriate for full-text review. From these, a final set of 21 articles met all inclusion criteria. In eight papers, ORUR was estimated. Estimated lifetime ORUR ranged from 61% to 82%. Methods for estimation included the evidence-based guideline model, Malthus model, and criterion-based benchmarking (CBB) model. The majority of estimates (6/8) used the evidence-based guideline model. Fifteen papers provided ARUR on lung cancer, inclusive of SCLC and NSCLC. ARUR within 9 months to 1 year of diagnosis ranged from 39% to 46%. Lifetime ARUR was an estimated 52% in Ontario, Canada. Palliative intent ARUR ranged from 12% in Central Poland to 46% in Ontario, Canada. RT is underutilized for lung cancer globally, and there is wide geographical variation in the level of underutilization.