Search

Background The objective of this HERO study was to assess the number of new cancer patients that will require at least one course of radiotherapy by 2025. Methods European cancer incidence data by tumor site and country for 2012 and 2025 was extracted from the GLOBOCAN database. The projection of the number of new cases took into account demographic factors (age and size of the population). Population based stages at diagnosis were taken from four European countries. Incidence and stage data were introduced in the Australian Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE) model. Results Among the different tumor sites, the highest expected relative increase by 2025 in treatment courses was prostate cancer (24%) while lymphoma (13%), head and neck (12%) and breast cancer (10%) were below the average. Based on the projected cancer distributions in 2025, a 16% expected increase in the number of radiotherapy treatment courses was estimated. This increase varied across European countries from less than 5% to more than 30%. Conclusion With the already existing disparity in radiotherapy resources in mind, the data provided here should act as a leverage point to raise awareness among European health policy makers of the need for investment in radiotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose The absolute number of new cancer patients that will require at least one course of radiotherapy in each country of Europe was estimated. Material and methods The incidence and relative frequency of cancer types from the year 2012 European Cancer Observatory estimates were used in combination with the population-based stage at diagnosis from five cancer registries. These data were applied to the decision trees of the evidence-based indications to calculate the Optimal Utilization Proportion (OUP) by tumour site. Results In the minimum scenario, the OUP ranged from 47.0% in the Russian Federation to 53.2% in Belgium with no clear geographical pattern of the variability among countries. The impact of stage at diagnosis on the OUP by country was rather limited. Within the 24 countries where data on actual use of radiotherapy were available, a gap between optimal and actual use has been observed in most of the countries. Conclusions The actual utilization of radiotherapy is significantly lower than the optimal use predicted from the evidence based estimates in the literature. This discrepancy poses a major challenge for policy makers when planning the resources at the national level to improve the provision in European countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The ESTRO Health Economics in Radiation Oncology (HERO) project has the overall aim to develop a knowledge base of the provision of radiotherapy in Europe and build a model for health economic evaluation of radiation treatments at the European level. The first milestone was to assess the availability of radiotherapy resources within Europe. This paper presents the personnel data collected in the ESTRO HERO database. Materials and methods An 84-item questionnaire was sent out to European countries, through their national scientific and professional radiotherapy societies. The current report includes a detailed analysis of radiotherapy staffing (questionnaire items 47–60), analysed in relation to the annual number of treatment courses and the socio-economic status of the countries. The analysis was conducted between February and July 2014, and is based on validated responses from 24 of the 40 European countries defined by the European Cancer Observatory (ECO). Results A large variation between countries was found for most parameters studied. Averages and ranges for personnel numbers per million inhabitants are 12.8 (2.5–30.9) for radiation oncologists, 7.6 (0–19.7) for medical physicists, 3.5 (0–12.6) for dosimetrists, 26.6 (1.9–78) for RTTs and 14.8 (0.4–61.0) for radiotherapy nurses. The combined average for physicists and dosimetrists is 9.8 per million inhabitants and 36.9 for RTT and nurses. Radiation oncologists on average treat 208.9 courses per year (range: 99.9–348.8), physicists and dosimetrists conjointly treat 303.3 courses (range: 85–757.7) and RTT and nurses 76.8 (range: 25.7–156.8). In countries with higher GNI per capita, all personnel categories treat fewer courses per annum than in less affluent countries. This relationship is most evident for RTTs and nurses. Different clusters of countries can be distinguished on the basis of available personnel resources and socio-economic status. Conclusions The average personnel figures in Europe are now consistent with, or even more favourable than the QUARTS recommendations, probably reflecting a combination of better availability as such, in parallel with the current use of more complex treatments than a decade ago. A considerable variation in available personnel and delivered courses per year however persists among the highest and lowest staffing levels. This not only reflects the variation in cancer incidence and socio-economic determinants, but also the stage in technology adoption along with treatment complexity and the different professional roles and responsibilities within each country. Our data underpin the need for accurate prediction models and long-term education and training programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background and purpose: Innovative therapies are not only characterized by major uncertainties regarding clinical benefit and cost but also the expected recruitment of patients. An original model was developed to simulate patient recruitment to a costly particle therapy by varying layout of the facility and patient referral (one vs. several countries) and by weighting the treated indication by the expected benefit of particle therapy. Material and methods: A multi-step probabilistic spatial model was used to allocate patients to the optimal treatment strategy and facility taking into account the estimated therapeutic gain from the new therapy for each tumour type, the geographical accessibility of the facilities and patient preference. Recruitment was simulated under different assumptions relating to the demand and supply. Results: Extending the recruitment area, reducing treatment capacity, equipping all treatment rooms with a carbon ion gantry and inclusion of proton protocols in carbon ion facilities led to an increased proportion of indications with the highest expected benefit. Assuming the existence of a competing carbon ions facility, lower values of therapeutic gain, and a greater unwillingness of patients to travel for treatment increased the proportion of indications with low expected benefit. Conclusions: Modelling patient recruitment may aid decision-making when planning new and expensive treatments. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: A large amount of clinical evidence has recently accumulated supporting the efficacy and safety of hypofractionated radiotherapy for post-operative breast cancer. These schedules, typically delivering a lower total dose in fewer, but larger than 2 Gy fractions, are more convenient for the patients by limiting the number of treatment attendances. Moreover, the reduced resource use in terms of personnel and machine time is advantageous for radiotherapy departments and translates into lower treatment costs. In order to formally validate this therapeutic approach from a societal perspective, however, cost-effectiveness evaluations weighing long-term outcome against the societal costs incurred until many years after treatment are needed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Time measurements were performed on daily treatment delivery with the aim to quantify the impact of quality assurance (QA) using an electronic portal imaging device (EPID) on RT delivery time and to validate the time burden of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) as an example of advanced technology. Both increased QA and the delivery of IMRT were found to be significant parameters determining daily treatment time (TT), which in turn translates in increased treatment costs. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

• Nodal definition and delineation for lung cancer is variable in clinical practice. • Knowledge of anatomy and strict guidelines are crucial for high contouring quality. • A qualitative review is essential to understanding interobserver variability. • Quantitative evaluations are more robust if performed after a qualitative review. • Standardization and peer review of clinical practice at country level is feasible. The Quality Assurance project for stage III non-small cell lung cancer radiotherapy ProCaLung performed a multicentric two-step exercise evaluating mediastinal nodal Target Volume Definition and Delineation (TVD) variability and the opportunity for standardization. The TVD variability before and after providing detailed guidelines and the value of qualitative contour reviewing before applying quantitative measures were investigated. The case of a patient with stage III NSCLC and involved mediastinal lymph nodes was used as a basis for this study. Twenty-two radiation oncologists from nineteen centers in Belgium and Luxembourg participated in at least one of two phases of the project (before and after introduction of ProCaLung contouring guidelines). The resulting thirty-three mediastinal nodal GTV and CTV contours were then evaluated using a qualitative-before-quantitative (QBQ) approach. First, a qualitative analysis was performed, evaluating adherence to most recent guidelines. From this, a list of observed deviations was created and these were used to evaluate contour conformity. The second analysis was quantitative, using overlap and surface distance measures to compare contours within qualitative groups and between phases. A 'most robust' reference volume for these analyses was created using the STAPLE-algorithm and an averaging method. Five GTV and seven CTV qualitative groups were identified. Second step contours were more often in higher-conformity groups (p = 0.012 for GTV and p = 0.024 for CTV). Median Residual Mean Square Distances improved from 2.34 mm to 1.36 mm for GTV (p = 0.01) and from 4.53 mm to 1.58 mm for CTV (p < 0.0001). Median Dice coefficients increased from 0.81 to 0.84 for GTV (p = 0.07) and from 0.82 to 0.89 for CTV (p ≤ 0.001). Using HC-contours only to generate references translated in more robust quantitative evaluations. Variability of mediastinal nodal TVD was reduced after providing the ProCaLung consensus guidelines. A qualitative review was essential for providing meaningful quantitative measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background With increasing recognition of growing cancer incidence globally, efficient means of expanding radiotherapy capacity is imperative, and understanding the factors impacting human and financial needs is valuable. Materials and methods A time-driven activity-based costing analysis was performed, using a base case of 2-machine departments, with defined cost inputs and operating parameters. Four income groups were analysed, ranging from low to high income. Scenario analyses included department size, operating hours, fractionation, treatment complexity, efficiency, and centralised versus decentralised care. Results The base case cost/course is US$5,368 in HICs, US$2,028 in LICs; the annual operating cost is US$4,595,000 and US$1,736,000, respectively. Economies of scale show cost/course decreasing with increasing department size, mainly related to the equipment cost and most prominent up to 3 linacs. The cost in HICs is two or three times as high as in U-MICs or LICs, respectively. Decreasing operating hours below 8 h/day has a dramatic impact on the cost/course. IMRT increases the cost/course by 22%. Centralising preparatory activities has a moderate impact on the costs. Conclusions The results indicate trends that are useful for optimising local and regional circumstances. This methodology can provide input into a uniform and accepted approach to evaluating the cost of radiotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Purpose: To quantify changes in radiotherapy costs occurring in a decade of medical–technological evolution. Materials and methods: The activity-based costing (ABC) model of the University Hospitals Leuven (UHL) radiotherapy (RT) department was adapted to current RT standards. It allocated actual resource costs to the treatments based on the departmental work-flow and patient mix in 2009. A benchmark with the former model analyzed the cost increases related to changes in RT infrastructure and practice over 10years. Results: A considerable increase in total RT costs was observed, resulting from higher capital investments (96%) and personnel cost (103%), the latter dominating the total picture. Treatment delivery remains the most costly activity, boosted by the cost of improved quality assurance (QA), 23% of total product costs, coming along with more advanced RT techniques. Hence, cost increases at the product level are most obvious for complex treatments, such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), representing cost increases ranging between 38% and 88% compared to conformal approaches. Conclusions: The ABC model provides insight into the financial consequences of evolving technology and practice. Such data are a mandatory first step in our strive to prove RT cost-effectiveness and thus support optimal reimbursement and provision of radiotherapy departments. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This planning study in Hodgkin’s disease confirmed smaller irradiated volumes and subsequently lower doses to lungs, heart and breasts for involved node radiotherapy compared to involved field irradiation. However, shifting the arms from alongside the body to above the head offsets the observed benefit on dose to heart and breasts. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

• Recommendations for risk-mitigation pandemic scenario: • Do not to compromise the prognosis of lung cancer patients by departing from guideline-recommended radiotherapy practice. • Postponement or interruption of radiotherapy of COVID-19 positive patients is generally recommended Severe pandemic scenario characterized by reduced resources: • Factors for patient triage include potential for cure, relative benefit of radiation, life expectancy, and performance status. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused radiotherapy resource pressures and led to increased risks for lung cancer patients and healthcare staff. An international group of experts in lung cancer radiotherapy established this practice recommendation pertaining to whether and how to adapt radiotherapy for lung cancer in the COVID-19 pandemic. For this ESTRO & ASTRO endorsed project, 32 experts in lung cancer radiotherapy contributed to a modified Delphi consensus process. We assessed potential adaptations of radiotherapy in two pandemic scenarios. The first, an early pandemic scenario of risk mitigation, is characterized by an altered risk–benefit ratio of radiotherapy for lung cancer patients due to their increased susceptibility for severe COVID-19 infection, and minimization of patient travelling and exposure of radiotherapy staff. The second, a later pandemic scenario, is characterized by reduced radiotherapy resources requiring patient triage. Six common lung cancer cases were assessed for both scenarios: peripherally located stage I NSCLC, locally advanced NSCLC, postoperative radiotherapy after resection of pN2 NSCLC, thoracic radiotherapy and prophylactic cranial irradiation for limited stage SCLC and palliative thoracic radiotherapy for stage IV NSCLC. In a risk-mitigation pandemic scenario, efforts should be made not to compromise the prognosis of lung cancer patients by departing from guideline-recommended radiotherapy practice. In that same scenario, postponement or interruption of radiotherapy treatment of COVID-19 positive patients is generally recommended to avoid exposure of cancer patients and staff to an increased risk of COVID-19 infection. In a severe pandemic scenario characterized by reduced resources, if patients must be triaged, important factors for triage include potential for cure, relative benefit of radiation, life expectancy, and performance status. Case-specific consensus recommendations regarding multimodality treatment strategies and fractionation of radiotherapy are provided. This joint ESTRO-ASTRO practice recommendation established pragmatic and balanced consensus recommendations in common clinical scenarios of radiotherapy for lung cancer in order to address the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Chemoradiation therapy trials of different tumors, including lung cancer, have shown a correlation between protocol deviations and adverse outcomes. Radiation therapy quality assurance (RTQA) was mandated for all patients treated in the PROCLAIM trial evaluating 2 different chemoradiation therapy regimens. The RTQA results were evaluated from the PROCLAIM study, and the impact of irradiation deviations on efficacy outcomes was investigated.Methods and Materials: The study was conducted from 2008 to 2014. Review of the irradiation plan was mandated for all patients. Real-time review was performed prior to irradiation start for the first enrolled patient at each site and randomly in 20% of additional patients, with non-real-time review in the remainder. The RTQA criteria evaluated included planning target volume coverage, dose homogeneity, volume of lung receiving ≥20 Gy, and maximum point dose to spinal cord.Results: Major RTQA violations occurred in 40 of 554 patients, treated at 28 sites. Seven sites treated ≥2 patients with major violations. Stage IIIB disease and larger planning target volume were observed more frequently in patients with major violations. Major violations were more prevalent in sites treating either <6 patients or >15 patients. Patients treated at sites enrolling ≥2 patients with major violations (n = 86) had lower median overall survival (21.1 months vs 29.8 months; hazard ratio, 1.442) and progression-free survival (7.3 months vs 11.3 months; hazard ratio, 1.345) than patients treated at sites without major violations. These findings remained significant for overall survival on multivariate analysis.Conclusions: Major violations in treatment plans were uncommon in the PROCLAIM study, possibly reflecting mandatory RTQA. The RTQA violations were more frequent in patients requiring more complex chemoradiation therapy plans. Poorer observed outcomes at centers with multiple major violations are hypothesis generating. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radiation therapy is a core modality of cancer treatment; however, concerns have been expressed regarding its underutilization and its lack of prioritization as a research domain relative to other cancer treatment modalities, despite its rapid technical evolution. It is therefore important to understand, from a public policy perspective, the evolution of global radiation therapy research, to identify strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities. This study used a bibliometric approach to undertake a quantitative analysis of global radiation therapy research published between 2001 and 2015 and available in the Web of Science (Wos) database, with particular focus on the 25 leading research-active countries. A total of 62,550 radiation therapy research articles from 127 countries, published in 2531 international journals, were analyzed. The United States was responsible for 32.3% of these outputs, followed by Japan (8.0%) and Germany (7.7%). Nearly half of all publications related to preparation and delivery of radiation therapy, combined-modality regimens, and dose fractionation studies. Health services research, palliative care, and quality of life studies represented only 2%, 5%, and 4% of all research outputs, respectively. Countries varied significantly in their commitment to different research domains, and trial-related publications represented only 5.1% of total output. Research impact was analyzed according to 3 different citation scores, with research outputs from Denmark, The Netherlands, and the United States consistently the highest ranked. Globally, radiation therapy publication outputs continue to increase but lag behind other spheres of cancer management. The types of radiation therapy research undertaken appear to be regionally patterned, and there is a clear disconcordance between the volume of research output from individual countries and its citation impact. Greater support for radiation therapy research in low- and middle-income countries is required, including international collaboration. The study findings are expected to provide the requisite knowledge to guide future radiation therapy research programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radiotherapy (RT) plays a major role in the curative treatment of locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Therefore, the ACROP committee was asked by the ESTRO to provide recommendations on target volume delineation for standard clinical scenarios in definitive (chemo)radiotherapy (RT) and adjuvant RT for locally advanced NSCLC. The guidelines given here are a result of the evaluation of a structured questionnaire followed by a consensus discussion, voting and writing procedure within the committee. Hence, we provide advice for methods and time-points of diagnostics and imaging before the start of treatment planning and for the mandatory and optional imaging to be used for planning itself. Concerning target volumes, recommendations are given for GTV delineation of primary tumour and lymph nodes followed by issues related to the delineation of CTVs for definitive and adjuvant radiotherapy. In the context of PTV delineation, recommendations about the management of geometric uncertainties and target motion are given. We further provide our opinions on normal tissue delineation and organisational and responsibility questions in the process of target volume delineation. This guideline intends to contribute to the standardisation and optimisation of the process of RT treatment planning for clinical practice and prospective studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose The optimal number of radiotherapy fractions is a relevant input for planning resource needs. An estimation of the total number of fractions by country and tumour site is assessed for 2012 and 2025. Methods European cancer incidence data by tumour site and country for 2012 and 2025 were extracted from the GLOBOCAN database. Incidence and stage data were introduced in the Australian Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE) model, producing an evidence-based proportion of incident cases with an indication for radiotherapy and fractions by indication. An indication was defined as a clinical situation in which radiotherapy was the treatment of choice. Results The total number of fractions if radiotherapy was given according to guidelines to all patients with an indication in Europe was estimated to be 30 million for 2012; with a forecasted increase of 16.1% by 2025, yet with differences by country and tumour. The average number of fractions per course was 17.6 with a small range of differences following stage at diagnosis. Among the treatments with radical intent the average was 24 fractions, while it decreased to 2.5 among palliative treatments. Discussion An increase in the total number of fractions is expected in many European countries in the coming years following the trends in cancer incidence. In planning radiotherapy resources, these increases should be balanced to the evolution towards hypofractionation, along with increased complexity and quality assurance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Evolving practice in adjuvant breast radiotherapy inevitably impacts healthcare budgets. This is reflected in a rise of health economic evaluations (HEE) in this domain. The available HEE literature was analysed qualitatively and quantitatively, using available instruments. Methods HEEs published between 1/1/2000 and 31/10/2016 were retrieved through a systematic search in Medline, Cochrane and Embase. A quality-assessment using CHEERS (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards) was translated into a quantitative score and compared with Tufts Medical Centre CEA registry and Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) results. Results Twenty cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) and thirteen cost comparisons (CC) were analysed. In qualitative evaluation, valuation or justification of data sources, population heterogeneity and discussion on generalizability, in addition to declaration on funding, were often absent or incomplete. After quantification, the average CHEERS-scores were 74% (CI 66.9–81.1%) and 75.6% (CI 70.7–80.5%) for CEAs and CCs respectively. CEA-scores did not differ significantly from Tufts and QHES-scores. Conclusion Quantitative CHEERS evaluation is feasible and yields comparable results to validated instruments. HEE in adjuvant breast radiotherapy is of acceptable quality, however, further efforts are needed to improve comprehensive reporting of all data, indispensable for assessing relevance, reliability and generalizability of results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose The impact of differences in the distribution of major cancer sites and stages at diagnosis among 4 European countries on the optimal utilization proportion (OUP) of patients who should receive external beam radiotherapy was assessed within the framework of the ESTRO-HERO project. Materials and methods Data from Australian Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE) were used. Population based stages at diagnosis from the cancer registries of Belgium, Slovenia, the Greater Poland region of Poland, and The Netherlands were used to assess the OUP for each country. A sensitivity analysis was carried out. Results The overall OUP by country varied from the lowest of 48.3% in Australia to the highest of 53.4% in Poland; among European countries the variation was limited to 3%. Cancer site specific OUPs showed differences according to the variability in stage at diagnosis across countries. The most important impact on the OUP by country was due to changes in relative frequency of tumours rather than stage at diagnosis. Conclusions This methodology can be adapted using European data, thus facilitating the planning of resources required to cope with the demand for radiotherapy in Europe, taking into account the national variability in cancer incidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose In planning to meet evidence based needs for radiotherapy, guidelines for the provision of capital and human resources are central if access, quality and safety are not to be compromised. A component of the ESTRO-HERO (Health Economics in Radiation Oncology) project is to document the current availability and content of guidelines for radiotherapy in Europe. Materials and methods An 84 part questionnaire was distributed to the European countries through their national scientific and professional radiotherapy societies with 30 items relating to the availability of guidelines for equipment and staffing and selected operational issues. Twenty-nine countries provided full or partial evaluable responses. Results The availability of guidelines across Europe is far from uniform. The metrics used for capital and human resources are variable. There seem to have been no major changes in the availability or specifics of guidelines over the ten-year period since the QUARTS study with the exception of the recent expansion of RTT staffing models. Where comparison is possible it appears that staffing for radiation oncologists, medical physicists and particularly RTTs tend to exceed guidelines suggesting developments in clinical radiotherapy are moving faster than guideline updating. Conclusion The efficient provision of safe, high quality radiotherapy services would benefit from the availability of well-structured guidelines for capital and human resources, based on agreed upon metrics, which could be linked to detailed estimates of need. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Documenting the distribution of radiotherapy departments and the availability of radiotherapy equipment in the European countries is an important part of HERO – the ESTRO Health Economics in Radiation Oncology project. HERO has the overall aim to develop a knowledge base of the provision of radiotherapy in Europe and build a model for health economic evaluation of radiation treatments at the European level. The aim of the current report is to describe the distribution of radiotherapy equipment in European countries. Methods An 84-item questionnaire was sent out to European countries, principally through their national societies. The current report includes a detailed analysis of radiotherapy departments and equipment (questionnaire items 26–29), analyzed in relation to the annual number of treatment courses and the socio-economic status of the countries. The analysis is based on validated responses from 28 of the 40 European countries defined by the European Cancer Observatory (ECO). Results A large variation between countries was found for most parameters studied. There were 2192 linear accelerators, 96 dedicated stereotactic machines, and 77 cobalt machines reported in the 27 countries where this information was available. A total of 12 countries had at least one cobalt machine in use. There was a median of 0.5 simulator per MV unit (range 0.3–1.5) and 1.4 (range 0.4–4.4) simulators per department. Of the 874 simulators, a total of 654 (75%) were capable of 3D imaging (CT-scanner or CBCT-option). The number of MV machines (cobalt, linear accelerators, and dedicated stereotactic machines) per million inhabitants ranged from 1.4 to 9.5 (median 5.3) and the average number of MV machines per department from 0.9 to 8.2 (median 2.6). The average number of treatment courses per year per MV machine varied from 262 to 1061 (median 419). While 69% of MV units were capable of IMRT only 49% were equipped for image guidance (IGRT). There was a clear relation between socio-economic status, as measured by GNI per capita, and availability of radiotherapy equipment in the countries. In many low income countries in Southern and Central-Eastern Europe there was very limited access to radiotherapy and especially to equipment for IMRT or IGRT. Conclusions The European average number of MV machines per million inhabitants and per department is now better in line with QUARTS recommendations from 2005, but the survey also showed a significant heterogeneity in the access to modern radiotherapy equipment in Europe. High income countries especially in Northern-Western Europe are well-served with radiotherapy resources, other countries are facing important shortages of both equipment in general and especially machines capable of delivering high precision conformal treatments (IMRT, IGRT). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Purpose: To test the hypothesis that cardiac comorbidity before the start of radiotherapy (RT) is associated with an increased risk of radiation-induced lung toxicity (RILT) in lung cancer patients. Material and methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of a prospective cohort of 259 patients with locoregional lung cancer treated with definitive radio(chemo)therapy between 2007 and 2011 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00572325 and NCT00573040). We defined RILT as dyspnea CTCv.3.0 grade ⩾2 within 6months after RT, and cardiac comorbidity as a recorded treatment of a cardiac pathology at a cardiology department. Univariate and multivariate analyses, as well as external validation, were performed. The model-performance measure was the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: Prior to RT, 75/259 (28.9%) patients had cardiac comorbidity, 44% of whom (33/75) developed RILT. The odds ratio of developing RILT for patients with cardiac comorbidity was 2.58 (p <0.01). The cross-validated AUC of a model with cardiac comorbidity, tumor location, forced expiratory volume in 1s, sequential chemotherapy and pretreatment dyspnea score was 0.72 (p <0.001) on the training set, and 0.67 (p <0.001) on the validation set. Conclusion: Cardiac comorbidity is an important risk factor for developing RILT after definite radio(chemo)therapy of lung cancer patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: To evaluate the long-term impact of locoregional breast radiotherapy (RT) on pulmonary function tests (PFTs). Methods and Materials: This study included 75 women who underwent postoperative locoregional breast RT. PFTs were performed before RT and 3, 6, and 12 months and 8 to 10 years after RT. By use of univariate and multivariate analyses, the impact of treatment- and patient-related factors on late changes in PFTs was evaluated. Results: During the first year after RT, all PFTs significantly worsened at 3 to 6 months after RT (p < 0.05). At 12 months, forced vital capacity (FVC), vital capacity (VC), and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) recovered almost to baseline values, whereas total lung capacity (TLC) and diffusion capacity of carbon monoxide (DLCO) recovered only slightly and were still found to be decreased compared with baseline (p < 0.05). At 8 to 10 years after RT, mean reductions in FEV1 of 4% (p = 0.03) and in VC, DLCO, and TLC of 5%, 9%, and 11% (all p < 0.0001), respectively, were observed compared with pre-RT values. On multivariate analysis, tamoxifen use negatively affected TLC at 8 to 10 years after RT (p = 0.033), whereas right-sided irradiation was associated with a late reduction in FEV1 (p = 0.027). For FEV1 and DLCO, an early decrease was predictive for a late decrease (p = 0.003 and p = 0.0009, respectively). Conclusions: The time course of PFT changes after locoregional RT for breast cancer follows a biphasic pattern. An early reduction in PFTs at 3 to 6 months with a partial recovery at 12 months after RT is followed by a late, more important PFT reduction up to 8 to 10 years after RT. Tamoxifen use may have an impact on this late decline in PFTs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Radiotherapy, combined with chemotherapy, is the treatment of choice for a large group of non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Recent developments in the treatment of these patients have led to improved survival. However, the clinical TNM stage is highly inaccurate for the prediction of survival, and alternatives are lacking. The objective of this study was to develop and validate a prediction model for survival of NSCLC patients, treated with chemoradiotherapy. Patients and Methods: The clinical data from 377 consecutive inoperable NSCLC patients, Stage I-IIIB, treated radically with chemoradiotherapy were collected. A prognostic model for 2-year survival was developed, using 2-norm support vector machines. The performance of the model was expressed as the area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic and assessed using leave-one-out cross-validation, as well as two external data sets. Results: The final multivariate model consisted of gender, World Health Organization performance status, forced expiratory volume in 1 s, number of positive lymph node stations, and gross tumor volume. The area under the curve, assessed by leave-one-out cross-validation, was 0.74, and application of the model to the external data sets yielded an area under the curve of 0.75 and 0.76. A high- and low-risk group could be clearly identified using a risk score based on the model. Conclusion: The multivariate model performed very well and was able to accurately predict the 2-year survival of NSCLC patients treated with chemoradiotherapy. The model could support clinicians in the treatment decision-making process. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]