Standardizing Breast Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Practices in a Diverse Health System through Development of a Delphi Consensus Supported Clinical Algorithm

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) for early breast cancer is a highly effective treatment option. However, the multitude of available techniques backed by strong clinical evidence can result in a lack of consistency in treatment approaches, even within a single healthcare organization. This presents challenges for both providers and patients in making informed decisions. To address this issue, our radiation department, which serves a large and diverse health system, developed a clinical algorithm for adjuvant RT for breast cancer. This algorithm was created to enhance the quality and standardization of care delivered across our network.

MATERIALS/METHODS

A modified Delphi technique was used. A panel of eight experienced breast radiation oncologists from our institution was assembled. The panel first identified the common clinical scenarios encountered in treating patients with adjuvant breast RT, and then made recommendations for the primary and alternative approaches for each scenario. NCCN guidelines, ASTRO executive summaries, and published national and international randomized trials were used for reference. In case of disagreements, the final recommendation was reached through a majority vote. The draft algorithm was also shared with medical oncologists, surgeons, and patient advocates to gather their input prior to final approval by the expert panel.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached for three broad clinical scenarios for patients who have undergone lumpectomy or mastectomy: Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS), Invasive Cancer Node Negative (ICN0), and Invasive Cancer Node Positive (ICN+). The panel agreed subdivision of the scenarios into three risk groups (low, intermediate, and high) and three age groups, based on guidelines and consensus statements. For DCIS patients, size, grade, margin status, hormone receptor status, and tumor focality were used for further stratification. For ICN0 patients, HER2 receptor status and lymphovascular space invasion were also included. For ICN+ patients, nodal status (negative versus 1-3 positive nodes versus more than 3 positive nodes) was used for stratification. Additionally, DCIS and ICN0 patients were further divided into age groups. The panel reached consensus recommendations for RT, including whole breast RT, partial breast RT, chest wall RT, regional nodal irradiation, or omission of RT for each sub-group. Clinical trial enrollment was also recommended where appropriate.

CONCLUSION

A breast cancer adjuvant RT algorithm was developed with the aim of standardizing care for patients with breast cancer. Implementation is expected to standardize treatment recommendations in our health system and to streamline the shared decision-making process with patients.

Pancreas Cancer Learning Health Network Established to Share Best Practice Across 14 Centers and Improve Patient Outcomes

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Pancreas cancer (PC) survival is among the lowest of all malignancies. Clinical trials have failed to significantly improve outcomes. Individual and institutional biases in care result in significant variation in practice, further hindering progress. Learning health networks (LHNs) prospectively collect real world data across centers and test improvements that can rapidly be expanded across centers if deemed successful. Herein, we report preliminary progress from the Pancreas Cancer Canopy Cancer Collective (PC-CCC), the first oncology LHN, established to improve duration and quality of survival in PC.

MATERIALS/METHODS

In 2019, we established the PC-CCC with six care centers who engaged in a collaborative design process to create a set of improvement aims, change ideas, and outcome measures. Center team members receive training and coaching in collaborative quality improvement methods, applied to local improvement efforts. Eight more centers joined in 2021, and a shared Canopy outcomes database was built and implemented to inform center-specific and network-wide improvement efforts and allow the LHN to undertake research using real-world data. Current improvement efforts are focused on proactively screening new PC patients for: (1) Clinical trials, (2) pancreas enzymes, (3) palliative care needs, and (4) goals of care conversations.

RESULTS

Currently, 14 care centers are active participants in the PC-CCC LHN. Data on a total of 2,002 PC patients are available to date. At presentation to the care center, most patients are female (51%) and have biopsy proven PC (83.9%). Average age is 68 years, and presenting disease status is metastatic (14.5%), resectable (11.4%), locally advanced (10.9%), borderline resectable (8.1%), or not yet staged (40%). For those who received radiation, 75.8% received stereotactic body radiation therapy. Among patients whose chemotherapy regimen was documented, most received 5-fluorouracilbased treatment (52%). Descriptive follow up data (including treatment and outcomes) are being actively updated, to be reported at time of presentation.

CONCLUSION

Creation of a cancer LHN for PC is feasible and has set the stage for improving patient and provider outcomes through iterative community-building, continuous improvement, and sharing of data and multidisciplinary best practices. Additionally, the data obtained from the CCC database can rapidly inform the network how variation in clinical practice across centers can influence outcomes.

The Prevalence and Management of Synchronous Prostate and Rectal Cancer

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Synchronous prostate and rectal cancer is rare and guidelines for co-management are not well established. This case series explores the prevalence of synchronous diagnosis and different treatment paradigms to propose a standardized approach to management.

MATERIALS/METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all radiation treatments between 1/2017 and 12/2022 for curative intent treatment to both prostate and rectal cancer. Synchronous was defined as rectal or prostate cancer diagnosed within a 6-month period of each other. We collected baseline characteristics and treatment paradigms including the sequencing of chemoradiation (CRT), chemotherapy (CT), prostate boost, and surgery.

RESULTS

There were 10 out of 2204 total treated patients with prostate or rectal primary noted to have a synchronous diagnosis (0.45%). Table 1 shows characteristics and treatment approach for all patients with 50% receiving CRT and 50% CT alone first. At a median FU of 21.4 months, 2 patients did not complete therapy due to patient choice and both had progression of disease (POD). After completion of CRT, 6 patients underwent rectal surgery with 2 pathological complete response, and 2 patients proceeded with a Watch and Wait approach with clinical complete response on MRI. Prostate boost was delivered equally as often pre-surgery as post-surgery with both SBRT, EBRT and Seed Implant used. There was no grade 3+ RT related toxicity in the patients who completed all therapy.

CONCLUSION

This series represents one of the largest synchronous prostate and rectal cancer cohorts treated with curative intent. Future collaborative work is needed to develop guidelines in the treatment of synchronous prostate and rectal cancers. Although a rare diagnosis, the heterogeneity of approaches has led us to propose a standardized approach to management of synchronous diagnosis with upfront chemotherapy followed by EBRT inclusive of prostate and rectum followed by boost via brachytherapy (SBRT in non-candidates).

Treatment Terminations during Radiation Therapy: A Ten-Year Experience

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Disruptionsin cancer care adversely affect clinical outcomes, particularly when a patient does not complete the prescribed course of treatment. The impact of treatment termination (TT) during radiation therapy has not been well studied. This study addresses TT in a large multi-center department of radiation oncology over a 10-year time period.

MATERIALS/METHODS

TTs of patients undergoing radiation treatment between January 2013 and December 2022 were prospectively tracked as part of departmentalquality and safety monitoring. A TT was defined as the discontinuation of therapy at any point following consent and simulation. Causes of TTs were categorized as: hospice/death, physician choice related to toxicity, physician choice unrelated to toxicity, patient choice related to toxicity, patient choice unrelated to toxicity, progression of disease, non-cancer illness, or other. The rate of TT was calculated as a percentage of all new patients who start radiation treatments. As part of our ongoing department quality and safety program, incremental changes were made to pre-treatment evaluation and scheduling processes, collectively referred to as the "No-Fly" policy. TT rates during three iterations of this policy were compared.

RESULTS

Outof 28,707 planned treatment courses, a total of 1,467 TTs were identified (5.1%). 688 (46.9%) involved patients treated with curative intent, 770 (52.5%) with palliative intent, and 9 (0.6%) for benign disease. The rate of TT decreased from 9.3% in 2013 to 3.3% in 2022. Relative to evolutions of our No-Fly policy, the overall TT rate decreased from 8.8% under No-Fly 1 (2013-2014), to 5.2% during No-Fly 2 (2015-2018), and 4.0% with No-Fly 3 (2019-2022) (ANOVA, p<0.001). The most common sites for TT were H&N (19.3%), CNS (17.9%), and Bone Metastases (17.9%). The most common cause of TT was hospice and/or death (36.5%), 69.1% of which were in patients receiving palliative treatments. Other common causes included patient choice unrelated to toxicity (35%), physician choice unrelated to toxicity (8.8%), and progression of disease (7.6%). There were 473 TTs without radiation dose given (1.6% of planned treatments, 32.3% of TTs).

CONCLUSION

Radiation TTs reflect major deviations from the original care plan. This large cohort study highlights the value of open departmental discourse about TTs, which prompted quality improvement changes that reduced TTs over time. Future studies addressing clinical outcomes can direct treatment decision-making and improve care for our patients.

The Association of Chemoradiation Induced Lymphopenia with Racial Disparity and Its Prognostic Impact on Survival for Anal Cancer

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

While the association between chemoradiation induced lymphopenia (CIL) and poor overall survival (OS) is established in multiple solid malignancies, it has not been studied in anal cancer. Racial and socioeconomic disparities as potential predictors of lymphopenia have not been reported. We hypothesize that race and socioeconomic status is associated with increased incidence of severe CIL, which can predict worse overall survival for patients with anal cancer.

MATERIALS/METHODS

A cohort of 75 patients treated with definitive chemoradiation (CRT) for squamous cell anal cancer from January 2014 to December 2020 was reviewed. Total lymphocyte counts (TLC) at baseline and TLC nadir at 1 month post-CRT were analyzed. Logistic regression was used to identify associations between race, gender, ethnicity, median household income by zip code, marital status, baseline hematopoietic cell counts, and post-CRT Grade 3+ lymphopenia (TLC <0.5k/μL). Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression model were used to perform survival analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 75 patients identified, mean age was 66.9 years and median follow-up time was 37.1 months. There were 63 females, 53 non-Hispanic whites, 22 minorities (12 Blacks, 9 Hispanics, 1 Asians) Radiation dose ranged from 41.4 Gray to 56 Gray. At 1 month post CRT, 85.3% developed lymphopenia (G1 9.3%, G2 26.7%, G3 37.3%, G4 12.0%). On multivariate logistic regression, non-white race demonstrated a trend to have more Grade 3+ lymphopenia (OR = 3.5, p = 0.07). On univariate Cox regression, poorer overall survival was associated with race (HR 3.7, p = 0.04), baseline white blood count (HR 1.3, p = 0.04), baseline hemoglobin (HR 0.6, p = 0.04), and post-CRT Grade 3+ lymphopenia (HR 5.8, p = 0.03). On multivariate Cox regression, only post-CRT Grade 3+ lymphopenia was associated with worse OS (HR 7.5, p = 0.049). 5-year OS significantly differed between patients with and without post-CRT Grade 3+ lymphopenia (62.3% vs 94.7%, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Lymphopenia is commonly observed after chemoradiation for anal cancer. Racial disparity is associated with severe lymphopenia induced by chemoradiation, which is a robust predictor of poor survival in anal cancer. More attention to lymphopenia induced by chemoradiation for anal cancer is needed, particularly in racial minorities.