Search

The Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) audit of radical radiotherapy (RR) for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in 2013 concluded that there was under-treatment compared to international comparators and marked variability between cancer networks. Elderly patients were less likely to receive guideline recommended treatments. Access to technological developments was low. Various national and local interventions have since taken place. This study aims to re-assess national practice. Radiotherapy departments completed one questionnaire for each patient started on RR for 4 weeks in January 2023. Ninety-three percent of centres returned data on 295 patients. RR has increased 70% since 2013 but patients on average wait 20% longer to start treatment (p = 0.02). Staging investigations were often outside a desirable timeframe (79% of PET/CT scans). Advanced planning techniques are used more frequently: 4-dimensional planning increased from 33% to 90% (P < 0.001), cone beam imaging from 67% to 97% (p < 0.001) and colleague led peer review increased from 41% to 73% (P < 0.001). There have been significant improvements in care. There has been a considerable increase in clinical oncology workload with evidence of stress on the system that requires additional resourcing. • 70% increase in radical NSCLC radiotherapy. • Technical improvements. • Workload out-stripping capacity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lung cancer outcomes in the UK are worse than those in many similar countries. The RCR developed a series of 43 consensus statements (CS) to facilitate improvements in care for patients treated with radiotherapy. We asked all 61 UK radiotherapy centres to self-assess the implementation of the CS and to describe their departmental key strengths and weaknesses in September 2021. 87% of centres returned their assessments. Whilst developmental activity was seen in most areas for most centres, 24 of the statements were felt to be difficult to implement within the next 2 years by at least one centre. The most frequently reported strengths were in the implementation of SABR (stereotactic body radiotherapy), concurrent chemoradiation for non-small cell lung cancer and technological aspects of treatment planning. The most frequently described departmental weaknesses were in pre-habilitation, timeliness of PET/CT scans and prophylaxis for Pneumocystis jiroveci Pneumonia (PJP). Barriers to implementation were often due to insufficient resource, a requirement for organisations to work together, and a perceived lack of evidence base. Strengths were often attributed to good team working, a local champion and being an early adopter. This work confirms the commitment of lung cancer radiotherapy teams across the UK to improve outcomes for their patients. Most of the statements have been implemented at least partially. Themes have been identified to aid further progress, one of which is a requirement for significant investment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in the UK. The quality of curative-intent radiotherapy is associated with better outcomes. National quality standards from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) on patient work-up and treatment selection were used, with guidance from the Royal College of Radiologists on the technical delivery of radiotherapy, to assess the quality of curative-intent non-small cell lung cancer radiotherapy and to describe current UK practice. Materials and methods Radiotherapy departments completed one questionnaire for each patient started on curative-intent radiotherapy for 8 weeks in 2013. Results Eighty-two per cent of centres returned a total of 317 proformas. Patient selection with positron emission tomography/computed tomography, performance status and Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second (FEV1) was usually undertaken. Fifty-six per cent had pathological confirmation of mediastinal lymph nodes and 22% staging brain scans; 20% were treated with concurrent chemoradiation, 12% with Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) and 8% with Continuous Hyperfractionated Accelerated Radiotherapy (CHART). Sixty-three per cent of patients received 55 Gy/20 fractions. Although respiratory compensation was routinely undertaken, only 33% used four-dimensional computed tomography. Seventy per cent of patients were verified with cone beam computed tomography. There was consistency of practice in dosimetric constraints for organs at risk and follow-up. Conclusions This audit has described current UK practice. The latest recommendations for patient selection with pathological confirmation of mediastinal lymph nodes, brain staging and respiratory function testing are not universally followed. Although there is evidence of increasing use of newer techniques such as four-dimensional computed tomography and cone beam image-guided radiotherapy, there is still variability in access. Efforts should be made to improve access to modern technologies and quality assurance of radiotherapy plans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) have been proposed as prognostic markers in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The objective of this study was to examine the association of NLR/ALC before and after curative-intent radiotherapy for NSCLC on disease recurrence and overall survival. A retrospective study of consecutive patients who underwent curative-intent radiotherapy for NSCLC across nine sites in the UK from 1 October 2014 to 1 October 2016. A multivariate analysis was carried out to assess the ability of pre-treatment NLR/ALC, post-treatment NLR/ALC and change in NLR/ALC, adjusted for confounding factors using the Cox proportional hazards model, to predict disease recurrence and overall survival within 2 years of treatment. In total, 425 patients were identified with complete blood parameter values. None of the NLR/ALC parameters were independent predictors of disease recurrence. Higher pre-NLR, post-NLR and change in NLR plus lower post-ALC were all independent predictors of worse survival. Receiver operator curve analysis found a pre-NLR > 2.5 (odds ratio 1.71, 95% confidence interval 1.06–2.79, P < 0.05), a post-NLR > 5.5 (odds ratio 2.36, 95% confidence interval 1.49–3.76, P < 0.001), a change in NLR >3.6 (odds ratio 2.41, 95% confidence interval 1.5–3.91, P < 0.001) and a post-ALC < 0.8 (odds ratio 2.86, 95% confidence interval 1.76–4.69, P < 0.001) optimally predicted poor overall survival on both univariate and multivariate analysis when adjusted for confounding factors. Median overall survival for the high-versus low-risk groups were: pre-NLR 770 versus 1009 days (P = 0.34), post-NLR 596 versus 1287 days (P ≤ 0.001), change in NLR 553 versus 1214 days (P ≤ 0.001) and post-ALC 594 versus 1287 days (P ≤ 0.001). NLR and ALC, surrogate markers for systemic inflammation, have prognostic value in NSCLC patients treated with curative-intent radiotherapy. These simple and readily available parameters may have a future role in risk stratification post-treatment to inform the intensity of surveillance protocols. • Multi-centre UK study of 425 patients undergoing curative intent radiotherapy for NSCLC. • Higher pre-NLR, post-NLR and change in NLR plus lower post-ALC were all independent predictors of worse survival. • Pre-NLR > 2.5, post-NLR > 5.5, change in NLR > 3.6 and post-ALC < 0.8 optimally predicted poor survival. • Median OS high vs low-risk group: pre-NLR 770 vs 1009, post-NLR 596 vs 1287, change in NLR 553 vs 1214 and post-ALC 594 vs 1287 days. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a paucity of evidence on which to produce recommendations on neither the clinical nor the imaging follow-up of lung cancer patients after curative-intent radiotherapy. In the 2019 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence lung cancer guidelines, further research into risk-stratification models to inform follow-up protocols was recommended. A retrospective study of consecutive patients undergoing curative-intent radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer from 1 October 2014 to 1 October 2016 across nine UK trusts was carried out. Twenty-two demographic, clinical and treatment-related variables were collected and multivariable logistic regression was used to develop and validate two risk-stratification models to determine the risk of disease recurrence and death. In total, 898 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 72 years, 63% (562/898) had a good performance status (0–1) and 43% (388/898), 15% (134/898) and 42% (376/898) were clinical stage I, II and III, respectively. Thirty-six per cent (322/898) suffered disease recurrence and 41% (369/898) died in the first 2 years after radiotherapy. The ASSENT score (age, performance status, smoking status, staging endobronchial ultrasound, N-stage, T-stage) was developed, which stratifies the risk for disease recurrence within 2 years, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for the total score of 0.712 (0.671–0.753) and 0.72 (0.65–0.789) in the derivation and validation sets, respectively. The STEPS score (sex, performance status, staging endobronchial ultrasound, T-stage, N-stage) was developed, which stratifies the risk of death within 2 years, with an AUROC for the total score of 0.625 (0.581–0.669) and 0.607 (0.53–0.684) in the derivation and validation sets, respectively. These validated risk-stratification models could be used to inform follow-up protocols after curative-intent radiotherapy for lung cancer. The modest performance highlights the need for more advanced risk prediction tools. • Two validated risk prediction models for disease recurrence and death are presented. • The performance of the scores are modest. • Rates of further curative intent treatment for disease recurrence were low (4%). • The majority with disease recurrence were managed with best supportive care (57%). • More advanced risk prediction tools and research into optimal follow-up is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Understanding patterns of mortality and place of death during the COVID-19 pandemic is important to help provide appropriate services and resources., Aims: To analyse patterns of mortality including place of death in the United Kingdom (UK) (England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) during the COVID-19 pandemic to date., Design: Descriptive analysis of UK mortality data between March 2020 and March 2021. Weekly number of deaths was described by place of death, using the following definitions: (1) expected deaths: average expected deaths estimated using historical data (2015-19); (2) COVID-19 deaths: where COVID-19 is mentioned on the death certificate; (3) additional non-COVID-19 deaths: above expected but not attributed to COVID-19; (4) baseline deaths: up to and including expected deaths but excluding COVID-19 deaths., Results: During the analysis period, 798,643 deaths were registered in the UK, of which 147,282 were COVID-19 deaths and 17,672 were additional non-COVID-19 deaths. While numbers of people who died in care homes and hospitals increased above expected only during the pandemic waves, the numbers of people who died at home remained above expected both during and between the pandemic waves, with an overall increase of 41%., Conclusions: Where people died changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, with an increase in deaths at home during and between pandemic waves. This has implications for planning and organisation of palliative care and community services. The extent to which these changes will persist longer term remains unclear. Further research could investigate whether this is reflected in other countries with high COVID-19 mortality.

Aims: Curative-intent (radical) radiotherapy aims to control local disease and cure non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The predominant subtypes of NSCLC are adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). The radiotherapy paradigm offered to patients does not differ according to these two subtypes. Relapse patterns and disease control rates for adenocarcinoma and SCC treated with radical radiotherapy were determined., Materials and Methods: A radical radiotherapy database covering the period from 2004 to June 2016 was examined to determine the first sites of relapse and the actuarial local and distant control rates., Results: In total, 537 patients with known pathological subtype were treated over the period. In 39 (7%), the site of first relapse was uncertain. Of the remainder, 203 (41%) had adenocarcinoma and 295 (59%) had SCC. At a median follow-up of 16.4 months, 58% had relapsed. There was a difference in relapse patterns (chi-squared test P < 0.0005), with a higher rate of first relapse locally in SCC (42% of all patients versus 24%) and a higher rate of first relapse in the brain for adenocarcinoma (14% versus 3%). The actuarial local control rate was worse for SCC (hazard ratio 0.6, 95% confidence interval 0.5-0.9, P = 0.002). The brain metastasis-free survival was worse for adenocarcinoma (hazard ratio 4.1, 95% confidence interval 2.2-7.5, P < 0.0001)., Conclusion: There is a difference in relapse patterns between NSCLC histological subtypes, indicating that these are distinct entities. This may have implications for follow-up policy and strategies to improve disease control., (Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)