Search

Purpose/Objective(s) A United States (US) radiation oncology (RO) curriculum, developed by key stakeholders using best practices for curriculum inquiry, is needed to guide residency education and qualifying examinations. Competency-based training, including entrustable professional activities (EPAs), provides an outcomes-based approach to modern graduate medical education. This study developed the first list of US RO EPAs and curricular content domains (CDs) to guide resident training and assessment in the modern era. Materials/Methods The Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group (ROECSG) Core Curriculum Project Leadership Committee (LC) developed initial EPAs and CDs. Following recruitment of stakeholders, a Delphi process was used for consensus. In the first Delphi, EPAs and CDs were reviewed for inclusion/exclusion, clarity, level of training (EPAs only), and time allocation (CDs only). Participants submitted additional EPAs/CDs for consideration. Any EPA or CD one standard deviation below the median underwent LC review. All participants completing the first Delphi were invited to the second. New EPAs or EPAs undergoing major revisions were re-reviewed. Percent allocated curriculum time was finalized for CDs and for a single subdomain (SD). Results 186 participants representing diverse RO stakeholder groups volunteered to participate. 114 completed the first Delphi (61.3%): 6/9 CDs met consensus, 1 CD was removed, 2 CDs were combined (Table 1). Of 114 invited, 77 participants completed the second Delphi (67.5%). Of 55 initial EPAs, 52 final EPAs met consensus. 4 SDs of a single CD (Applied Sciences) were reviewed and met consensus. Consensus on percent time allocated per CD and SD was reached (Table 1). Conclusion Deliberative curriculum inquiry was successfully used to develop a consensus on US RO CDs/SDs and EPAs. These data can guide educational time in training programs and help inform weighting for qualifying examinations. CDs are not exclusive; educators must ensure all CDs are considered when delivering curriculum content, regardless of the primary CD. RO-specific EPAs can guide clinical training and resident assessment. The Delphi should be used to reach consensus recommendations for SD content breakdown. Given the evolving nature of RO and the need for curriculum renewal, the Delphi process will be repeated on an interval basis.

Palliative care is an integral component of comprehensive cancer care that offers reasonable symptom control and a decent quality of life beyond the chance for cure.[1][1] A 50-year-old postmenopausal woman was seen in the oncology clinic with a progressive lump in the right breast and ulceration

The technological advancement heralded the arrival of precision radiotherapy (RT), thereby increasing the therapeutic ratio and decreasing the side effects from treatment. Contour of target volumes (TV) and organs at risk (OARs) in RT is a complicated process. In recent years, automatic contouring of TV and OARs has rapidly developed due to the advances in deep learning (DL). This technology has the potential to save time and to reduce intra- or inter-observer variability. In this paper, the authors provide an overview of RT, introduce the concept of DL, summarize the data characteristics of the included literature, summarize the possible challenges for DL in the future, and discuss the possible research directions.

The Anatomy and Radiology Contouring (ARC) Bootcamp was a face-to-face (F2F) intervention providing integrated education for radiation oncology (RO) residents and medical physicists. To increase access, we launched an online offering in 2019. We evaluated the effect of the online course on participants' knowledge acquisition, contouring skills, and self-confidence by comparing it with the F2F course.Using modules, the online course offers content similar to that of the F2F comparator. Participants from the 2019 F2F and the 2019-2020 online course completed pre- and postevaluations assessing anatomy and radiology knowledge, contouring skills, self-confidence, and course satisfaction.There were 180 individuals enrolled (F2F: n = 40; online: n = 140); 57 participants (F2F: n = 30; online: n = 27) completed both evaluations. The online course had a wider geographic participation (19 countries) than F2F (4 countries). F2F had primarily RO resident participation (80%), compared with online (41%). Both cohorts demonstrated similar improvements in self-confidence pertaining to anatomy and radiology knowledge, contouring skills, and interpreting radiology images (all P.001). Both the online (mean ± SD improvement: 6.6 ± 6.7 on a 40-point scale; P.001) and F2F (3.7 ± 5.7; P = .002) groups showed anatomy and radiology knowledge improvement. Only the F2F group demonstrated improvement with the contouring assessment (F2F: 0.10 ± 0.17 on a 1-point Dice scale; P = .004; online: 0.07 ± 0.16; P = .076). Both cohorts perceived the course as a positive experience (F2F: 4.8 ± 0.4 on a 5-point scale; online: 4.5 ± 0.6), stated it would improve their professional practice (F2F: 4.6 ± 0.5; online: 4.2 ± 0.8), and said they would recommend it to others (F2F: 4.8 ± 0.4; online: 4.4 ± 0.6).The online ARC Bootcamp demonstrated improved self-confidence, knowledge scores, and high satisfaction levels among participants. The offering had lower completion rates but was more accessible to geographic regions, provided a flexible learning experience, and allowed for ongoing education during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Previous studies have demonstrated that patients can be identified from 3-dimensional (3D) reconstructions of computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging data of the brain or head and neck. This presents a privacy and security concern for scan data released to public data sets. It is unknown whether thermoplastic immobilization masks used for treatment planning in radiation therapy are sufficient to prevent facial recognition. Our study sought to evaluate whether patients with an immobilization mask could be identified on 3D reconstructions of scan data. Our study reconstructed 3D images from simulation CT (SIM-CT) scans of 35 patients and compared these to original patient photographs to test if the thermoplastic mask obfuscated facial features. Blind review from 4 facial recognition algorithms and a human (radiation oncologist) was evaluated for the ability to match 3D reconstructions of patients scans to patient images. The matching procedure was repeated against an expanded testing data set of the 35 patient photographs plus 13,233 facial photographs from the "Labeled Faces in the Wild" data set (13,268 photographs in total). Facial recognition algorithms were able to match a maximum of 83% (range, 60%-83%) of patients to the corresponding images. Radiation Oncologist blinded review correctly matched 80% of patients to the corresponding images. Ethnicity and facial hair were the most common reasons for patient mismatch. In the expanded testing data set, algorithms were also able to match a maximum of 83% (range, 57%-83%) of patients. The majority of patients were able to be identified through computer algorithm or human review even under a SIM-CT mask. These results suggest there is a potential privacy and security concern when SIM-CT data are released to publicly available data sets.

BACKGROUND Durable palliation of advanced lung cancer is a common objective for radiation oncologists. However, there is no consensus on how to deliver the radiation course. Herein we report our experience of using split course radiotherapy and our assessment of outcomes based on planning from three-dimensional (3D) simulation before each treatment course. METHODS All lung cancer patients from 2006-2020 were identified. Of these, 52 patients received a split course treatment of 50-60 Gy in 18-25 fractions intended to provide durable palliation for disease not amenable to curative therapy. Treatment involved 3D planning with repeat computed tomography (CT) simulation prior to the second course. Survival and symptomatic response were analyzed via chart review. We categorized rapid responders versus non-rapid responders from the initial radiation course based on ≥30% gross tumor volume (GTV) reduction at the second CT simulation. We evaluated the impact of response on overall survival and palliative response. RESULTS Among our cohort treated with split course palliative radiotherapy, 33 (63%) had a rapid response to initial treatment. There was no difference in survival between groups [hazard ratio (HR) =1.30, P=0.47]. There was no significant difference in palliative response rates between rapid and non-rapid responders. On multivariable analysis, only female sex (HR =0.26, P

Purpose This study aimed to develop a model for predicting pathologic extracapsular extension (ECE) and seminal vesicle invasion (SVI) while integrating magnetic resonance imaging-based T-staging (cTMRI, cT1c-cT3b).Materials and Methods A total of 1,915 who underwent radical prostatectomy between 2006-2016 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. We performed a multivariate logistic regression analysis as well as Bayesian network (BN) modeling based on possible confounding factors. The BN model was internally validated using 5-fold validation.Results According to the multivariate logistic regression analysis, initial prostate-specific antigen (iPSA) (β=0.050, p < 0.001), percentage of positive biopsy cores (PPC) (β=0.033, p < 0.001), both lobe involvement on biopsy (β=0.359, p=0.009), Gleason score (β=0.358, p < 0.001), and cTMRI (β=0.259, p < 0.001) were significant factors for ECE. For SVI, iPSA (β=0.037, p < 0.001), PPC (β=0.024, p < 0.001), Gleason score (β=0.753, p < 0.001), and cTMRI (β=0.507, p < 0.001) showed statistical significance. BN models to predict ECE and SVI were also successfully established. The overall area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC)/accuracy of the BN models were 0.76/73.0% and 0.88/89.6% for ECE and SVI, respectively. According to internal comparison between the BN model and Roach formula, BN model had improved AUC values for predicting ECE (0.76 vs. 0.74, p=0.060) and SVI (0.88 vs. 0.84, p < 0.001).Conclusion Two models to predict pathologic ECE and SVI integrating cTMRI were established and installed on a separate website for public access to guide radiation oncologists.

Proton therapy is increasingly being used as a radiation therapy modality. There is uncertainty about the biological effectiveness of protons relative to photon therapies as it depends on several physical and biological parameters. Radiation oncology currently applies a constant and generic value for the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 1.1, which was chosen conservatively to ensure tumor coverage. The use of a constant value has been challenged particularly when considering normal tissue constraints. Potential variations in RBE have been assessed in several published reviews but have mostly focused on data from clonogenic cell survival experiments with unclear relevance for clinical proton therapy. The goal of this review is to put in vitro findings in relation to clinical observations. Relevant in vivo pathways determining RBE for tumors and normal tissues are outlined, including not only damage to tumor cells and parenchyma but also vascular damage and immune response. Furthermore, the current clinical evidence of varying RBE is reviewed. The assessment can serve as guidance for treatment planning, personalized dose prescriptions, and outcome analysis.

The reach of personalized medicine in radiation oncology has expanded greatly over the past few decades as technical precision has improved the delivery of radiation to each patient’s unique anatomy. Yet, the consideration of biological heterogeneity between patients has largely not been translated to clinical care. There are innumerable promising advancements in the discovery and validation of biomarkers, which could be used to alter radiation therapy directly or indirectly. Directly, biomarker-informed care may alter treatment dose or identify patients who would benefit most from radiation therapy and who could safely avoid more aggressive care. Indirectly, a variety of biomarkers could assist with choosing the best radiosensitizing chemotherapies. The translation of these advancements into clinical practice will bring radiation oncology even further into the era of precision medicine, treating patients according to their unique anatomical and biological differences.

Highlights • Radiotherapy can trigger cytokine release syndrome and tumor lysis syndrome in association with chemotherapy drugs. • Extreme caution must be given when irradiating large tumor volumes at high risk of tumor lysis. • Evidence of cytokine release following radiotherapy unveils the systemic interactions of radiotherapy with the immune system., We present the case of a 53-year-old woman treated with analgesic radiotherapy for a multiple myeloma bone lesion of the forearm. After a first fraction of 5 Gray (Gy), she presented with an acute respiratory syndrome with fever a few hours after the treatment. The same symptoms occurred after the second fraction 3 days later. The patient recovered quickly thanks to intravenous hydration and suspension of the radiotherapy. Biological tests revealed a tumor lysis syndrome. We concluded that the clinical symptoms could be defined as cytokine release syndrome. This is the second time in the literature that cytokine release syndrome has been described following radiotherapy. First, we synthesize TLS and radiotherapy to determine how radiotherapy could be a trigger associated with other well-known factors. Furthermore, we discuss radiotherapy and cytokine release syndrome. Summary We present the case of a woman treated with analgesic radiotherapy for a multiple myeloma bone lesion. Following the first and the second treatment fraction, the patient presented with an acute respiratory syndrome with fever and biological tests revealed a tumor lysis syndrome. We concluded that the clinical symptoms could be defined as cytokine release syndrome. Furthermore, we discuss how radiotherapy could be a trigger of cytokine release syndrome and tumor lysis syndrome in association with chemotherapy drugs.

Purpose Quality assurance (QA) practices improve the quality level of oncology trials by ensuring that the protocol is followed and the results are valid and reproducible. This study investigated the utilization of QA among randomized controlled trials that involve radiotherapy (RT). Methods and Materials We searched ClinicalTrials.gov in February 2020 for all phase III oncology randomized clinical trials (RCTs). These trials were screened for RT-specific RCTs that had published primary trial results. Information regarding QA in each trial was collected from the study publications and trial protocol if available. Two individuals independently performed trial screening and data collection. Pearson’s Chi-square tests analyses were used to assess factors that were associated with QA inclusion in RT trials. Results Forty-two RCTs with RT as the primary intervention or as a mandatory component of the protocol were analyzed; the earliest was started in 1994 and one trial was still active though not recruiting. Twenty-nine (69%) trials mandated RT quality assurance (RTQA) practices as part of the trial protocol, with 19 (45%) trials requiring institutional credentialing. Twenty-one (50%) trials published protocol deviation outcomes. Clinical trials involving advanced radiation techniques (IMRT, VMAT, SRS, SBRT) did not include more RTQA than trials without these advanced techniques (73% vs. 65%, p=0.55). Trials that reported protocol deviation outcomes were associated with mandating RTQA in their protocols as compared to trials that did not report these outcomes (100% vs. 38%, p Conclusions There is a lack of RTQA utilization and transparency in RT clinical trials. It is imperative for RT trials to include increased QA for safe, consistent, and high-quality RT planning and delivery.

PURPOSE Disparities in geographic access to medical care exist in nearly all fields of medicine including radiation oncology. We aim to update knowledge of the geographic distribution of radiation oncologists in the United States. METHODS AND MATERIALS We used the Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File (PUF) from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Directory of Radiotherapy Centers (DIRAC) database to identify practices that either coded for or are marked as having access to brachytherapy services. Geographic analysis was performed on several levels including United States (US) Census region, Dartmouth Atlas Healthcare Referral Region, and the county level. RESULTS We identified 327 providers that billed for a brachytherapy code during the calendar year 2018 and 564 facilities providing brachytherapy. Within the 306 HRRs in the US, 149 have access to brachytherapy. This represents 247.5 million people based on 2018 estimates of population from the US Census Bureau. This implies that 76.7% of people within the US live in an HRR with access to brachytherapy, and, conversely, that 75.3 million people (23.3%) do not. Numerically, counties in metropolitan areas were more likely to have access to brachytherapy than those outside of a metropolitan area. CONCLUSIONS Geographic disparities exist in access to brachytherapy; metropolitan counties are more likely to have access than non-metropolitan counties. We support continued development of databases of brachytherapy providers and programs that may support travel and lodging costs to minimize these disparities.

Purpose Brachytherapy is an essential technique to deliver radiation therapy and is involved in the treatment of multiple disease sites as monotherapy or as an adjunct to external beam radiation therapy. With a growing focus on the cost and value of cancer treatments as well new payment models, it is essential that standardized quality measures and metrics exist to allow for straightforward assessment of brachytherapy quality and for the development of clinically significant and relevant clinical data elements. We present the American Brachytherapy Society consensus statement on quality measures and metrics for brachytherapy as well as suggested clinical data elements. Methods and Materials Members of the American Brachytherapy Society with expertise in disease site specific brachytherapy created a consensus statement based on a literature review and clinical experience. Results Key quality measures (ex. workup, clinical indications), dosimetric metrics, and clinical data elements for brachytherapy were evaluated for each modality including breast cancer, cervical cancer, endometrial cancer, prostate cancer, keratinocyte carcinoma, soft tissue sarcoma, and uveal melanoma. Conclusions This consensus statement provides standardized quality measures and dosimetric quality metrics as well as clinical data elements for each disease site to allow for standardized assessments of brachytherapy quality. Moving forward, a similar paradigm can be considered for external beam radiation therapy as well, providing comprehensive radiation therapy quality measures, metrics, and clinical data elements that can be incorporated into new payment models.

PURPOSE To examine recent modality utilization trends in accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) based on the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) guidelines. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 58,194 patients treated with APBI were identified. Patients were segregated by APBI modality (brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy [EBRT], and intraoperative radiotherapy ([IORT]). These patients were then further classified by suitability to receive APBI based on ASTRO guidelines. Temporal trends in utilization were evaluated using linear regression. Logistic regression was applied to study factors contributing to APBI modality choice and treatment within the ASTRO suitability groups. RESULTS Patients treated with brachytherapy, EBRT, and IORT comprised 70.5%, 17.5%, and 12.0% of patients treated with APBI. From 2008 to 2017, total APBI cases remained relatively stable (-54.1 cases/year, p=0.161) while brachytherapy cases decreased by 258.7 cases/year (p

Background: We evaluated radiation oncology residency program directors' attitudes toward discrete palliative care skills in effort to determine which skills should be prioritized in radiation onco...

Purpose/Objective(s) Medical documentation has become increasingly challenging for providers, particularly with time constraints and changes to office visit formats during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Medical scribes may help mitigate this burden. Our objective was to determine how scribes affect provider workflow efficiency during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to pre-pandemic controls. Materials/Methods Providers completed a survey in February 2020 (S1, pre-pandemic) and one year into the COVID-19 pandemic in February 2021 (S2, during-pandemic). Standardized surveys administered during S1 evaluated perceived impact of scribes on clerical work, medical documentation, and efficiency during office visits using the Likert Scale. Surveys administered during S2 also addressed scribe use during telemedicine visits, in addition to office visits. Provider perception of time spent on documentation with or without a scribe was evaluated using a 5-level ordinal scale. Provider response was assessed using descriptive frequency statistics. Fisher's exact test was used to compare categorical variables. Analysis was performed using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC). All tests were two-sided with an alpha level of 0.05. Results Fifty-eight providers responded to the surveys: 36 (62%) for S1, 22 (38%) for S2. Scribe use decreased perceived clerical work, facilitated chart review, recording of physical exam findings, note documentation and improved efficiency, both before and during the pandemic (P = 0.5, P = 0.7, P = 0.8, P = 0.8, P = 0.9 respectively). Scribe use significantly decreased perceived time to complete documentation pre-pandemic (P = 0.002) and during the pandemic for both in person (P = < 0.0001) and telemedicine visits (P = 0.0004). More providers took over 60 minutes to complete medical documentation without the use of a scribe pre-pandemic (72% versus 30% with a scribe, P = 0.006) and during the pandemic, for both in person (40% versus 0% with a scribe, P = 0.002) and telemedicine visits (35% versus 0% with a scribe, P = 0.002). Even with increased telemedicine visits during the pandemic, 17 (77%) providers strongly agreed that scribe use decreased their daily clerical work and improved efficiency and 18 (82%) strongly agreed scribes were just as helpful during telemedicine visits as during in person visits. Conclusion Scribe use decreases provider time spent on medical documentation and improves overall efficiency. This improvement in clinical efficiency was similar before and during the COVID-19 pandemic for both in person and telemedicine clinic visits. Integration of scribes into radiation oncology clinics may improve provider satisfaction by reducing burden of documentation and may improve provider well-being.

PURPOSE The Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model (RO Model) will test prospective radiotherapy episode-based payments for 16 common disease sites. We created an automated analytics platform to calculate the impact of the RO Model vs historical fee-for-service episode reimbursements for brachytherapy treatments within five community oncology practices for prostate, uterine, and cervical cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS Claims data between January 1, 2017 and October 2, 2019 for prostate, uterine, and cervical cancer were analyzed as per the RO Model Final Rule methodology. Expected professional and technical component (PC and TC) reimbursements were compared for episodes that utilized brachytherapy alone vs combination modality (external beam and brachytherapy) in the RO Model vs historical reimbursements. RESULTS 6,022 RO Model-defined episodes (60% prostate, 28% uterine, 13% cervical) were generated. Brachytherapy monotherapy episodes (14%) would have an average positive reimbursement in the RO Model (+$2,163 for prostate, +$711 for uterine, +$533 for cervical for the PC; +$12,168 for prostate, +$8,181 for uterine, +$11,322 for cervical for the TC), while combination modality episodes (15%) would have an average negative reimbursement in the RO Model (-$183 for prostate, -$1,701 for uterine, -$2,195 for cervical for the PC; -$374 for prostate, -$5,026 for uterine, -$2,801 for cervical for the TC). CONCLUSIONS Brachytherapy monotherapy episodes for prostate, uterine, and cervical cancer will benefit from an increase in payment, whereas combination modality episodes will receive lower reimbursement. Large shifts in episodic payment may be related to practice-wide adjustments and pricing based on partial episodes of care that may ultimately limit access to care for vulnerable patient populations with cancer.

Introduction: The aim is to find out how many radiation oncology centres treat biliary duct carcinoma (BDC), what treatments they offer and whether they would be interested in developing prospective trials. Materials and methods: A questionnaire was posted to all 220 Italian Radiation Oncology Centres. The survey consisted of 31 eligibility questions in a combination of multiple and forced choice formats addressing the following parameters: characteristics of the centre, numbers of BDC patients treated, treatment options, radiotherapy parameters (target definition, schedule, technique, dose constraints) and interest in developing future randomized trials. Results: No major differences emerged in BDC management, whatever the site, and whether it was resectable or not. Discrepancies in routine clinical practice were, however, observed with lack of agreement on expansion margins, dose constraints and treatment schedules for the stereotactic technique and palliative treatments. Conclusions: The present survey attempted to fill the gaps in the role of radiotherapy in patients with BDC. Since lack of prospective randomized studies and disease rarity have mitigated against an evidence-based approach, patients with BDC should be enrolled in prospective studies. The above-mentioned results should also emphasize the need to combine analysis of treatment results from all Italian centres in order to create predictive models.

Canadian radiation oncology (RO) residency programs transitioned to a competency-based medical education (CBME) training model named Competence by Design (CBD) in July 2019. Prior to this, CBD was piloted in a single RO training program to characterize assessment completion and challenges of implementation. Six residents and seven staff participated in a mixed-methods study and were oriented to CBD. Four Entrustable Professional Activities were assessed over a 4-week-long block and documented using online assessment forms. Anonymized assessments were analyzed to characterize completion. Post-pilot surveys were completed by 4/6 residents and 5/7 staff. Semi-structured post-pilot focus groups were conducted with all residents. Assessments were requested and documented on a weekly basis. Narrative comments were found in 68.1% of assessments, of which 26.7% described specific examples of observed competence or recommendations for improvement. Three of five staff believed that assessments have a negative impact on clinical workflow. Three themes were identified: (1) direct observation is the most challenging aspect of CBD to implement; (2) feedback content can be improved; and (3) staff attitude, clinical workflow, and inaccessibility of assessment forms are the primary barriers to completing assessments. This study demonstrates that CBD assessments can be completed regularly in an outpatient radiation oncology setting and that implementation challenges include improving feedback quality, promoting direct observation, and continuing faculty development to improve perceptions of this assessment model. Further study is required to identify best practices and expectations for the discipline in the era of CBME.

Neuro-oncology is a growing, interdisciplinary field at the intersection of neurology and oncology, devoted to the care of patients with central nervous system tumors and neurologic complications of cancer, and collaboratively interfacing with neurosurgery, neuropathology, medical oncology and radiation oncology. There is increasing trainee interest in the field of neuro-oncology and an increasing number of fellowship training programs, attracting applicants with backgrounds in neurology, neurosurgery and medical oncology. The present guide aims to provide some general recommendations for residents and fellows to help them make the most out of their neuro-oncology fellowship and enable them to start their careers as a neuro-oncologists on firm footing.

PURPOSE A COVID-19 lockdown in India posed significant challenges to the continuation of radiotherapy (RT) and systemic therapy services. Although several COVID-19 service guidelines have been promulgated, implementation data are yet unavailable. We performed a comprehensive audit of the implementation of services in a clinical oncology department. METHODS A departmental protocol of priority-based treatment guidance was developed, and a departmental staff rotation policy was implemented. Data were collected for the period of lockdown on outpatient visits, starting, and delivery of RT and systemic therapy. Adherence to protocol was audited, and factors affecting change from pre-COVID standards analyzed by multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS Outpatient consults dropped by 58%. Planned RT starts were implemented in 90%, 100%, 92%, 90%, and 75% of priority level 1-5 patients. Although 17% had a deferred start, the median time to start of adjuvant RT and overall treatment times were maintained. Concurrent chemotherapy was administered in 89% of those eligible. Systemic therapy was administered to 84.5% of planned patients. However, 33% and 57% of curative and palliative patients had modifications in cycle duration or deferrals. The patient’s inability to come was the most common reason for RT or ST deviation. Factors independently associated with a change from pre-COVID practice was priority-level allocation for RT and age and palliative intent for systemic therapy. CONCLUSION Despite significant access limitations, a planned priority-based system of delivery of treatment could be implemented.

In its current form, the Radiation Oncology Model (RO Model) prioritizes payment cuts over true value-based payment transformation. With significant modifications to the payment methodology, the reporting requirements, and recognition of the unique challenges faced by disadvantaged populations, the RO Model can protect patient access to care, preserve the physician-patient decision-making process, and ensure the delivery of high-quality, efficient radiation therapy treatment. The American Society for Radiation Oncology has spent several years advocating for a meaningful alternative payment model for radiation oncology and continues to push The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation for changes to the RO Model that will recognize these key outcomes.

Rapid and relentless technological advances in an ever-more globalized world have shaped the field of radiation oncology in which we practise today. These developments have drastically modified the habitus 1 of health professionals and researchers at an individual and organisational level. In this article we present an analysis of trends in radiation oncology research over the last half a century. To do so, the data from >350,000 scientific publications pertaining to a yearly search of the PubMed database with the keywords cancer radiotherapy was analysed. This analysis revealed that, over the years, radiotherapy research output has declined relative to alternative cancer therapies, representing 64% in 1970 it decreased to 31% in 2019. Also, the pace of research has significantly accelerated with, in the last 15 years, a doubling in the number of articles published by the 10% most productive researchers. Researchers are also facing stronger competition today with a proportion of first authors that will never get to publish as a last author increasing steadily from 58% in 1970 to 84% in 2000. Additionally, radiotherapy research output is extremely unequally distributed in the world, with Africa and South America contributing to ∼3% of radiotherapy articles in 2019 while representing 23% of the world’s population. This disparity, reflecting economic situations and radiotherapy capabilities, has a knock-on effect for the provision of routine clinical treatment. Since research activity is inherent to delivery of high quality clinical care, this contributes to the global inequity of radiotherapy services. Learning from these trends is crucial for the future not only of radiation oncology research but also for effective and equitable cancer care.

Purpose The aim of this study was to examine current practice patterns in pediatric total body irradiation (TBI) techniques among COG member institutions. Methods and Materials Between November 2019 and February 2020, a questionnaire containing 52 questions related to the technical aspects of TBI was sent to medical physicists at 152 COG institutions. The questions were designed to obtain technical information on commonly used TBI treatment techniques. Another set of 9 questions related to the clinical management of patients undergoing TBI was sent to 152 COG member radiation oncologists at the same institutions. Results Twelve institutions were excluded because TBI was not performed in their institutions. A total of 88 physicists from 88 institutions (63% response rate) and 96 radiation oncologists from 96 institutions (69% response rate) responded. The anterior-posterior/posterior-anterior (AP/PA) technique was the most common technique reported (49 institutions [56%]); 44 institutions (50%) used the lateral technique, and 14 (16%) used volumetric modulated arc therapy or tomotherapy. Midplane dose rates of 6 to 15 cGy/min were most commonly used. The most common specification for lung dose was the midlung dose for both AP/PA techniques (71%) and lateral techniques (63%). Almost all physician responders agreed with the need to refine current TBI techniques, and 79% supported the investigation of new TBI techniques to further lower the lung dose. Conclusions There was no consistency in the practice patterns, methods for dose measurement, and reporting of TBI doses among COG institutions. The lack of standardization precludes meaningful correlation between TBI doses and clinical outcomes including disease control and normal tissue toxicity. The COG radiation oncology discipline is currently undertaking several steps to standardize the practice and dose reporting of pediatric TBI using detailed questionnaires and phantom-based credentialing for all COG centers.

PURPOSE: Variation in the use of radiation oncology procedures and technologies is poorly characterized. We sought to identify associations between the treatment planning codes used to bill for radiotherapy procedures and the demographic characteristics of the radiation oncologists submitting them. METHODS: The Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File was linked to the Physician Compare database by using the physician National Provider Identifier for the year 2016. Analysis was stratified by practice setting, considering both the freestanding non–facility-based (NFB) setting and the facility-based (FB) setting. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine provider characteristics (gender, practice rurality, and years since graduation) that predicted for the use of 3D-conformal RT (3DCRT) planning, intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) planning, and brachytherapy planning in the Medicare population. RESULTS: Three thousand twenty-nine physicians were linked for analysis. In both the FB and NFB settings together, male gender predicted for decreased likelihood of 3DCRT planning (OR, 0.70, 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.80, P < .001) and increased likelihood of IMRT planning (OR, 1.35, 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.54, P < .001). Brachytherapy planning was also more likely with increasing years since medical school graduation (OR, 1.03, 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.04, P < .001) in the combined FB and NFB settings. These significant associations persisted when examining the NFB and FB settings individually. In both settings overall, brachytherapy planning was more likely in male providers (OR, 1.75, 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.76, P = .02) and also more likely for providers practicing in metropolitan regions compared with those practicing in rural areas (OR, 3.01, 95% CI, 1.23 to 7.39, P = .02). CONCLUSION: Male gender predicts for utilization of IMRT planning, whereas female gender predicts for utilization of 3DCRT planning. Future research is warranted to better understand the role that provider gender and rurality play in the selection of radiation planning techniques for Medicare patients.

PURPOSE To evaluate the clinical outcomes in patients with cervical cancer with limited residual disease at brachytherapy (BT) treated with point-based dose prescription. METHODS Patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix treated with computed tomography (CT)-based intracavitary BT were considered for analysis. Patients with good response to external beam radiotherapy and limited residual disease suitable for intracavitary BT alone were included. Postapplication CT scans were performed before each fraction and individual plans were made for each session. The dose per fraction was 9Gy high dose rate, prescribed to point-A. Two sessions were planned, 1 week apart. The organs at risk were contoured, and cumulative dose-volume histograms were computed. Local control, pelvic control, disease-free survival, and overall survival were evaluated and late toxicities were documented. RESULTS Four hundred ninety patients were included. Overall, 79.8% had International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IB2 to IIB disease and 20.2% had stage III to IVA disease. Median dose at point A (EQD210Gy) was 74.4 Gy (interquartile range [IQR] 72.3-74.5 Gy) and median D2cc (EQD23Gy) for bladder, rectum, and sigmoid were 82.5 Gy (IQR, 65.5-90.8 Gy), 66.5 Gy (IQR, 60.7-75.7 Gy), and 54.1 Gy (IQR, 50.5-77.3 Gy), respectively. At a median follow-up of 62 (IQR, 33-87) months, the 5-year local and pelvic control rates were 90.1% and 88.3%, respectively. The 5-year disease-free survival was 80% and overall survival was 88%. Rates of grade 3-4 bladder and rectosigmoid toxicities were 6.93% and 4.08%, respectively. CONCLUSION In patients with limited residual disease at BT, point-based dose prescription with CT planning results in good local control and acceptable toxicity. In a resource-constrained setting, patients may be triaged to receive point-based BT or magnetic resonance imaging–guided adaptive BT depending on the extent of residual disease., Point-based brachytherapy can be utilized in cervical cancer with limited residual disease after external RT

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.

PURPOSE In sub-Saharan Africa, radiotherapy (RT) utilization and delivery patterns have not been extensively studied in patients with metastatic breast cancer. METHODS A retrospective cohort study of female patients with metastatic breast cancer seen at Parirenyatwa Radiotherapy Centre in Zimbabwe from 2014 to 2018 was conducted. Demographics, pathology, staging, and treatment data were abstracted through chart review. Fisher's exact test and chi-squared test of independence were used to compare proportions, and independent two-sample t-tests were used to compare means. RESULTS Of 351 patients with breast cancer, 152 (43%) had metastatic disease, median age 51 years (interquartile range: 43-61 years). Of those with metastatic disease, 30 patients (20%) received radiation to various metastatic sites: 16 spine; three nonspine bone metastases; six whole brain; and five chest wall or supraclavicular. Patients who received radiation were younger (46 v 52 years; P = .019), but did not differ significantly by performance status than those who did not. The most common dose prescription was 30 Gy in 10 fractions (33%). Five (17%) patients had treatment interruption and two (7%) had treatment noncompletion. Province of origin and clinical tumor stage were significant predictors of RT receipt ( P = .002; and P = .018, respectively). CONCLUSION A minority of patients with metastatic breast cancer received RT (20%), and these were likely to be younger, with advanced tumor stage, and resided in provinces where RT is available. Conventional courses were generally prescribed. There is a need to strongly consider palliative RT as an option for patients with metastatic breast cancer and use of hypofractionated courses (e.g. 8 Gy in one fraction) may support this goal.

Background: The present paper reports on analysis of 184 patients who were diagnosed with endometrial cancer. The main objective of this study was to address parameter V rec(30Gy) which determines a volume of the rectum irradiated with a dose of 30 Gy during radiotherapy. Material and methods: All patients were irradiated with an IMRT technique on linear accelerators. The planning target volume (PTV) contour was determined by a radiation oncologist. The clinical target volume (CTV) was drawn on CT images obtained in a prone position. For statistical analysis, appropriate tests (e.g. the Shapiro-Wilk, Wilcoxon) were used. Results and discussion: The performed analysis showed that the recommended condition for V rec(30Gy) is met only in 3% of patients and the observed median value exceeds 90%. The obtained results were compared with the studies in which the V rec(30Gy) values were related to various radiotherapy techniques. Conclusions: The analysis showed that the condition for V rec(30Gy) is satisfied in the case of only 3% of patients. Due to the difficulty with meeting the condition, it should be reconsidered based on real results.

The novel coronavirus of 2019 has had a broad impact of the delivery of healthcare, including cancer care. We chose to quantify the impact in the radiation oncology department of the largest academic center in the hardest hit city in Canada. With the approval of our ethics review board, data on each patient treated from March 13, 2020 to August 10, 2020 were compared to patients treated during the same period in 2019. We compared the case mix, delay from treatment decision to treatment start, and number of fractions per patient. We reviewed prospectively collected information regarding deviations from our usual practice. During the pandemic the caseload was reduced by 12%, this was more pronounced in prostate and CNS tumors. The average number of fractions per patient was reduced from 12.3 to 10.9. This reduction was most marked in prostate, breast, gastro-intestinal, and palliative cases. When physicians were questioned, they reported that 17% of treatment plans deviated from their usual practice because of the pandemic. The most common deviations were related to changes in department policies (77%) vs. patient-specific deviations (20%) or changes requested by the patient (3%). Rare deviations were due to patients contracting COVID-19 (2 patients). At its worse, the wait list contained 27% of patients who had a delay to radiotherapy of more than 28 days. However, the average wait time increased little (19.6 days vs. 18.2 days) as more pressing cases were prioritized. In an unprecedented health crisis, our radiation oncology department was able to reduce resource utilization, notably by decreasing the number of fractions per patient. It will be important to follow these patients&rsquo, health outcomes for insight into these practices. More quantitative tools to simulate and plan future practice changes in response to resource constraints will be implemented.

The basic principles of the treatment of prostate cancer patients have underwent significant revisions in recent years. Modern radiotherapy techniques, which have demonstrated high efficacy and safety in long-term randomized trials, are beginning to take a leading position in the treatment of prostate cancer in an overwhelming number of clinical scenarios (National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 2021). Despite the obvious successes of radiation oncology, a number of important problems remain unresolved, first of all - the need to reduce the rates of radiation complications. The topographical anatomy of the prostate gland determines the main profiles of post-radiation damage: rectal and genitourinary radiation toxicity. The previous five years have been marked by a significant intensification of research work abroad aimed at clinical testing of a number of biopolymer compositions and products for use as spacers between irradiated structures and normal tissues. The experience has made it possible for the first time to consider the possibility of using spacers in radiotherapy treatment of prostate cancer in the modern recommendations of the European Association of Urology (2021). The analysis of the national literature shows a complete lack of publications on the possibilities of optimizing the radiation treatment of prostate cancer through the use of specers. The purpose of this work was the need to highlight this important and perspective clinical problem.

Ultra-high dose rate "FLASH" radiotherapy has been shown to drastically reduce normal tissue toxicities while being as efficacious as conventional dose rate radiotherapy to treat tumors. A large number of preclinical studies describing this so-called FLASH effect have led to the clinical translation of FLASH-RT using ultra-high dose rate electron and proton beams. Although the vast majority of radiation therapy treatments are delivered using x-rays, few preclinical data using ultra-high dose rate x-ray irradiation have been published. This review focuses on different methods that can be used to generate ultra-high dose rate x-rays and their beam characteristics along with their effect on the biological tissues and the perspectives for the development of FLASH-RT with x-rays. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

(1) Background: Research productivity is a mandatory component of Canadian radiation oncology (RO) resident training. To our knowledge, Canadian RO resident research publication productivity has not previously been analysed. (2) Methods: We compiled a 12-year database of RO residents in Canadian training programs who completed residency between June 2005 and June 2016. Resident names and dates of training were abstracted from provincial databases and department websites and were used to abstract data from PubMed, including training program, publication year, journal, type of research, topic and authorship position. Residents were divided into four time periods and the linear trend test evaluated publication rates over time. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify authorship predictors. (3) Results: 227 RO residents representing 363 publications were identified. The majority were first-author publications (56%) and original research (77%). Overall, 82% of first-author, and 80% of any-author articles were published in resident year 4 or higher. Mean number of publications for first-author and any-author positions increased significantly over time (p = 0.016 and p = 0.039, respectively). After adjusting for gender and time period, large institutions (&gt, 3 residents per year) trended toward associations with more first-author publications (odds ratio (OR): 2.44, p = 0.066) and more any-author publications (OR: 2.49, p = 0.052). No significant differences were observed by gender. (4) Conclusions: Canadian RO resident publication productivity nearly doubled over a 12-year period. The majority of publications are released in the last 2 years of residency, and larger residency programs may be associated with more publications. These findings serve as a baseline as programs transition to Competency Based Medical Education (CBME).

Radiotherapy plays an essential role in the treatment of more than half of all patients with cancer. In recent decades, advances in devices that deliver radiation and the development of treatment planning software have helped radiotherapy attain precise tumour targeting with minimal toxicity to surrounding tissues. Simultaneously, as more targeted drug therapies are being brought into the market, there has been significant interest in improving cure rates for cancer by adding drugs to radiotherapy to widen the therapeutic window, the difference between normal tissue toxicity and treatment efficacy. The development of new combination therapies will require judicious adaptation of preclinical models that are routinely used for traditional drug discovery. Here we highlight the strengths and weaknesses of each of these preclinical models and discuss how they can be used optimally to identify new and clinically beneficial drug–radiotherapy combinations.

Ventricular arrhythmias are the leading cause of sudden cardiac death. Current treatment strategies for ventricular tachycardia, including antiarrhythmic drugs and catheter ablation, have limited efficacy in patients with structural heart disease. Noninvasive ablation with the use of externally applied radiation (cardiac radioablation) has emerged as a promising and novel approach to treating recurrent ventricular tachycardias. However, the heart is generally an “organ at risk” for radiation treatments, such that very little is known on the effects of radiotherapy on cardiac ultrastructure and electrophysiologic properties. Furthermore, there has been limited interaction between the fields of cardiology and radiation oncology and physics. The advent of cardiac radioablation will undoubtedly increase interactions between cardiologists, cardiac electrophysiologists, radiation oncologists and physicists. There is an important knowledge gap separating these specialties, but scientific developments, technical optimisation, and improvements depend on intense multidisciplinary collaboration. This manuscript seeks to review the basic of radiation physics and biology for cardiovascular specialists in an effort to facilitate constructive scientific and clinical collaborations to improve patient outcomes.

Purpose We aimed to evaluate recent Instagram and Twitter posts to identify the primary disseminators of information related to radiation therapy on social media (health care professionals vs patients), to characterize their influencer status, and to characterize the content of this information. Methods and Materials Using 2 commercial hashtag analytics platforms, 1000 of the most recent eligible posts from each platform were evaluated for content, tone, and engagement, as well as user (poster) characteristics. Inclusion criteria were as follows: unique posts, written in English, relevant to human cancer treatment, and containing 1 of 11 predetermined hashtags (#radiation, #radiotherapy, #radiationtherapy, #radiationoncology, #radonc, #radiationtherapist #radiationtreatment, #medphys, #cyberknife, #radiosurgery, #protontherapy). Results Users of radiation oncology content on Instagram were primarily patients/caregivers (47%), specifically adult patients (94%) with breast cancer (53%). Patient/caregiver content was focused on patient experience (79%), with approximately half specific to radiation therapy (51%), and most patient/caregiver posts demonstrated a positive tone (86%). In contrast, Twitter content was dominated by health care professionals (53%), specifically within radiation oncology (90% of unique users). Health care professional content was focused on colleague education/research dissemination (53%), with a high proportion of posts specific to radiation therapy (95%). Conclusions Given the disproportionate number of patients versus radiation oncology professionals active on Instagram versus Twitter, and the lack of radiation therapy-specific content on Instagram, there may be an opportunity to improve patient outreach and education by promoting the presence of radiation oncologists on Instagram.

Despite improvements in radiotherapy, radioresistance remains an important clinical challenge. Radioresistance can be mediated through enhanced DNA damage response mechanisms within the tumour or through selective pressures exerted by the tumour microenvironment (TME). The effects of the TME have in recent times gained increased attention, in part due to the success of immune modulating strategies, but also through improved understanding of the downstream effects of hypoxia and dysregulated wound healing processes on mediating radioresistance. Although we have a better appreciation of these molecular mechanisms, efforts to address them through novel combination approaches have been scarce, owing to limitations of photon therapy and concerns over toxicity. At the same time, proton beam therapy (PBT) represents an advancement in radiotherapy technologies. However, early clinical results have been mixed and the clinical strategies around optimal use and patient selection for PBT remain unclear. Here we highlight the role that PBT can play in addressing radioresistance, through better patient selection, and by providing an improved toxicity profile for integration with novel agents. We will also describe the developments around FLASH PBT. Through close examination of its normal tissue-sparing effects, we will highlight how FLASH PBT can facilitate combination strategies to tackle radioresistance by further improving toxicity profiles and by directly mediating the mechanisms of radioresistance.

Purpose Achieving competency as educators is increasingly recognized as a critical part of residents’ training in graduate medical education across specialties. In addition to teaching medical students, radiation oncology residents often play a vital role in peer and interprofessional education. We conducted a survey to identify the needs of radiation oncology residents for developing skills in teaching. Methods and Materials An anonymous, web-based survey was developed and distributed to resident physicians at US radiation oncology programs. Analyses describe respondent demographics, experiences with teaching, and interest in various aspects of a formal “residents-as-teachers” curriculum. Results There were 171 completed survey responses (27.5% response rate). A total of 146 residents (85.4%) reported receiving no formal training in teaching before residency, and 121 (70.8%) reported no formal training during residency. Residents who had formal training in teaching were significantly more likely to be “quite” or “extremely” confident about teaching compared with residents who had no prior formal training (76.0% vs 51.4%; P = .022). Residents most commonly taught other residents and medical students (163 [95.3%] and 160 [93.6%] respondents, respectively). The most common settings for teaching were one-on-one teaching (164 respondents [95.9%]), small-group lectures (135 respondents [78.9%]), and intradepartmental lectures (136 respondents [79.5%]). In response to open-ended questions regarding desired teaching opportunities and domains for teaching development, many residents expressed a lack of confidence in teaching and were interested in improvement across many aspects of teaching. Conclusions Radiation oncology residents are expected and desire to teach in a multitude of settings across a wide variety of audiences. However, a significant proportion of radiation oncology residents lack formal training and rarely receive feedback for their teaching skills. The results of this national survey support the development of a residents-as-teachers curriculum for radiation oncology residents that would address the needs for and significant interest in this area.

Background Analysis of Data to Advance Personalised Therapy with MR-Linac (ADAPT-MRL) is a multi-site, multinational, observational cohort registry designed to collect data on the use of the magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MR-Linac) for radiation therapy and patient outcomes. The registry will provide a linked repository of technical and clinical data that will form a platform for prospective studies and technology assessment. Methods Design: This registry aims to include an estimated 10,000 eligible participants across Australia and other countries over a 7- to 10-year period. Participants will undergo treatment and assessments in accordance with standard practice. Toxicity and survival outcomes will be assessed at baseline, during treatment, and with 3 monthly follow-up until 24 months, patient reported outcome measures will also be collected. Participants with a variety of cancers will be included. Discussion Data obtained from the ADAPT-MRL registry is expected to provide evidence on the safety and efficacy of the MR-Linac, a new technical innovation in radiation oncology. We expect this registry will generate data that will be used to optimise treatment techniques, MR-Linac software algorithms, evaluate participants’ outcomes and toxicities and to create a repository of adapted plans, anatomical and functional MR sequences linked to participants’ outcomes.

Microbeam radiotherapy (MRT) is the delivery of spatially fractionated beams that have the potential to offer significant improvements in the therapeutic ratio due to the delivery of micron-sized high dose and dose rate beams. They build on longstanding clinical experience of GRID radiotherapy and more recently lattice-based approaches. Here we briefly overview the preclinical evidence for MRT efficacy and highlight the challenges for bringing this to clinical utility. The biological mechanisms underpinning MRT efficacy are still unclear, but involve vascular, bystander, stem cell and potentially immune responses. There is probably significant overlap in the mechanisms underpinning MRT responses and FLASH radiotherapy that needs to be further defined. (c) 2021 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Radiation therapy is one of standard treatment for malignant glioma after surgery. The microenvironment after irradiation is considered not to be suitable for the survival of tumor cells (tumor bed effect). This study investigated whether the effect of changes in the microenvironment of parenchymal brain tissue caused by radiotherapy affect the recurrence and progression of glioma. 65-Gy irradiation had been applied to the right hemisphere of Fisher rats. After 3 months from irradiation, we extracted RNA and protein from the irradiated rat brain. To study effects of proteins extracted from the brains, we performed WST-8 assay and tube formation assay in vitro. Cytokine production were investigated for qPCR. Additionally, we transplanted glioma cell into the irradiated and sham animals and the median survival time of F98 transplanted rats was also examined in vivo. Immunohistochemical analyses and invasiveness of implanted tumor were evaluated. X-ray irradiation promoted the secretion of cytokines such as CXCL12, VEGF-A, TGF-β1 and TNFα from the irradiated brain. Proteins extracted from the irradiated brain promoted the proliferation and angiogenic activity of F98 glioma cells. Glioma cells implanted in the irradiated brains showed significantly high proliferation, angiogenesis and invasive ability, and the post-irradiation F98 tumor-implanted rats showed a shorter median survival time compared to the Sham-irradiation group. The current study suggests that the microenvironment around the brain tissue in the chronic phase after exposure to X-ray radiation becomes suitable for glioma cell growth and invasion.

purpose This practice parameter aims to detail the processes, qualifications of personnel, patient selection, equipment, patient and personnel safety, documentation, and quality control and improvement necessary for an HDR brachytherapy program. Methods and Materials This practice parameter was revised collaboratively by the American College of Radiology (ACR), the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS), and the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO). Results Brachytherapy is a radiotherapeutic modality in which radionuclide or electronic sources are used to deliver a radiation dose at a distance of up to a few centimeters by surface, intracavitary, intraluminal, or interstitial application. Brachytherapy alone or combined with external beam radiotherapy plays an important role in the management and treatment of patients with cancer. High-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy uses radionuclides, such as iridium-192, at dose rates of ≥12 Gy/hr to a designated target point or volume, and it is an important treatment for a variety of malignant and benign conditions. Its use allows for application of high doses of radiation to defined target volumes with relative sparing of adjacent critical structures. Conclusions HDR brachytherapy requires detailed attention to personnel, equipment, patient and personnel safety, and continuing staff education. Coordination between the radiation oncologist and treatment planning staff and effective quality assurance procedures are important components of successful HDR brachytherapy programs.

OBJECTIVE: To improve safety and efficiency of radiotherapy process by customizing a Varian ARIA oncology information system following the guidelines provided in AAPM TG-100 report. METHODS: First, failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) and quality management program were implemented for radiotherapy process. We have customized the visual care path in the ARIA system and set up a series of templates for simulation, prescription, contouring, treatment planning, and multiple checklists. Average time of activities’ completion and amount of planning errors were compared before and after the use of the customized ARIA to evaluate its impact on the efficiency and safety of radiotherapy. RESULTS: Completion time and on-time completion rate of the key activities in the care path are improved. The time of OAR/targets contouring decreases from (1.94±1.51) days to (1.64±1.07) days (p = 0.003), with the on-time completion rate increases from 77.4%to 83.3%(p = 0.048). Treatment planning time decreases from (0.81±0.65) days to (0.55±0.51) days (p

Infertility is one of the main sequelae of cancer and its treatment in both children and adults of reproductive age. It is, therefore, essential that oncologists and haematologists provide adequate information about the risk of infertility and the possibilities for its preservation before starting treatment. Although many international clinical guidelines address this issue, this document is the first Spanish multidisciplinary guideline in paediatric and adult oncological patients. Experts from the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology, the Spanish Fertility Society, the Spanish Society of Haematology and Haemotherapy, the Spanish Society of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology and the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology have collaborated to develop a multidisciplinary consensus.

The use of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to treat non-spine bone metastases (NSBM) is becoming increasingly common in clinical practice. The clinical advantages of SBRT include good pain control and high local control rates, although only limited data are available. The Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR) SBRT group recently convened a task force of experts in the field to address key questions related to SBRT for NSBM, including treatment indications, planning, techniques, and dose fractionation. The task force reviewed the available literature to develop evidence-based recommendations for the safe application of NSBM SBRT and to standardize and optimize SBRT processes. The present document provides a comprehensive analysis of the available data, including ongoing clinical trials and controversies, providing clinically applicable recommendations.

The role of radiation therapy (RT) varies across hematologic malignancies (HM). Radiation oncology (RO) resident comfort with specific aspects of HM patient management is unknown. The International Lymphoma RO Group (ILROG) assessed resident HM training opportunities and interest in an HM away elective. RO residents (PGY2-5) in the Association of Residents in RO (ARRO) database (n = 572) were emailed an anonymous, web-based survey in January 2019 including binary, Likert-type scale (1 = not at all, 5 = extremely, reported as median [interquartile range]), and multiple-choice questions. Of 134 resident respondents (23%), 86 (64%) were PGY4/5 residents and 36 (27%) were in larger programs (≥ 13 residents). Residents reported having specialized HM faculty (112, 84%) and a dedicated HM rotation (95, 71%). Residents reported “moderate” preparedness to advocate for RT in multidisciplinary conferences (3 [2–3]); make HM-related clinical decisions (3 [2–4]); and critique treatment planning (3 [2–4]). They reported feeling “moderately” to “quite” prepared to contour HM cases (3.5 [3–4]) and “quite” prepared to utilize the PET-CT five-point scale (4 [3–5]). Overall, residents reported feeling “moderately” prepared to treat HM patients (3 [2–3]); 24 residents (23%) felt “quite” or “extremely” prepared. Sixty-six residents (49%) were potentially interested in an HM away elective, commonly to increase comfort with treating HM patients (65%). Therefore, HM training is an important component of RO residency, yet a minority of surveyed trainees felt quite or extremely well prepared to treat HM patients. Programs should explore alternative and additional educational opportunities to increase resident comfort with treating HM patients. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13187-021-02098-9.

Introduction Poor adherence to the 2011 American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) evidence-based guideline on whole-breast irradiation (WBI) has been reported. We utilized theMednet to assess the views of the updated 2018 guideline among radiation oncologists (ROs). Methods We identified 11 questions asked by community ROs on theMednet, a web-based platform, between October 27, 2014 and May 2, 2017 that were updated in the 2018 guideline. New answers provided by senior authors of the 2018 guideline, cited guidelines, and polls to survey ROs were disseminated in 3 theMednet's newsletters between March 16, 2018 and May 1, 2018. Any question with less than 60% consensus was resubmitted on October 9, 2019 and assessed on February 13, 2020. Results A total of 792 ROs responded to the initial surveys. In each survey, the answer choice(s) that received the majority of the votes aligned with the 2018 guideline. The strongest consensus was for the use of hypofractionated (HF)-WBI regardless of histology (97%), followed by HF-WBI boost dose (92%), molecular subtype (90%), grade (88%), and concurrent use of trastuzumab (87%). The least consensus was for age at which HF-WBI should be offered with 53% of respondents, specifically 73% of academic ROs versus 47% of community ROs (P = .001), agreeing with the guideline. The re-submitted survey 19 months later showed 77% of 287 new respondents now agreed with the guideline regarding age. Conclusion The majority of ROs concur with the 2018 WBI guideline in theMednet surveys, with better agreement among academic ROs than community ROs for certain components of the guideline. Further research into the different practice patterns may optimize patient care.

While there has been an overall decline of tobacco and alcohol-related head and neck cancer in recent decades, there has been an increased incidence of HPV-associated oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). Recent research studies and clinical trials have revealed that the cancer biology and clinical progression of HPV-positive OPC is unique relative to its HPV-negative counterparts. HPV-positive OPC is associated with higher rates of disease control following definitive treatment when compared to HPV-negative OPC. Thus, these conditions should be considered unique diseases with regards to treatment strategies and survival. In order to sufficiently characterize HPV-positive OPC and guide treatment strategies, there has been a considerable effort to diagnose, prognose, and track the treatment response of HPV-associated OPC through advanced imaging research. Furthermore, HPV-positive OPC patients are prime candidates for radiation de-escalation protocols, which will ideally reduce toxicities associated with radiation therapy and has prompted additional imaging research to detect radiation-induced changes in organs at risk. This manuscript reviews the various imaging modalities and current strategies for tackling these challenges as well as provides commentary on the potential successes and suggested improvements for the optimal treatment of these tumors.