Search

Lower brachytherapy utilization for cervical cancer patients is associated with decreased survival. This study examines more recent trends in brachytherapy utilization from 2004 to 2020 to assess any trend reversal after awareness increased regarding the importance of brachytherapy. This study analyzed data from the National Cancer Database of patients with Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) IB to IVA cervical cancer treated with radiation therapy between 2004 and 2020. To compare brachytherapy utilization over time, 2- to 3-year categories were created to account for potential variation seen in individual years. A multivariate log binomial regression with robust variance was used to estimate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of brachytherapy utilization in each year category in reference to the 2004-2006 category. Additionally, risk factors for brachytherapy utilization were identified. Overall brachytherapy utilization for cervical cancer increased from 54.9% in 2004 to 75.7% in 2020. Compared with 2004 to 2006 when rates of utilization totaled 55.2%, brachytherapy utilization significantly increased to 63.4% in 2011 to 2014 (IRR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.11-1.19), 66.0% in 2015 to 2017 (1.20 [1.16-1.23]), and 76.0% in 2018 to 2020 (1.38 [1.34-1.42]). Sociodemographic factors associated with lower brachytherapy utilization included Black race (0.94 [0.92-0.97]), Hispanic ethnicity (0.92 [0.90-0.95]), and age >59 years (age ≥60-69: 0.96 [0.94-0.98]; age ≥70-79: 0.89 [0.87-0.92]; age ≥80: 0.73 [0.69-0.77]). Positive predictors of brachytherapy utilization included having insurance (IRR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07-1.14). In patients with FIGO IB-IVA cervical cancer treated with radiation therapy from 2004 to 2020, brachytherapy utilization has increased during the past decade. These results are encouraging given the known benefit to cause-specific survival and overall survival provided by brachytherapy treatment and indicate a reversal in the trend of declining brachytherapy noted previously. Concerns related to disparities by race, ethnicity, and insurance status require further interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our previous Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) study revealed a concerning decline in brachytherapy utilization in the United States between 1988 and 2009. This study evaluates recent trends in brachytherapy utilization in cervical cancer and identifies factors and survival benefit associated with the use of brachytherapy treatment. Using SEER data, 8500 patients with International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians 2009 stage IB2-IVA cervical cancer treated with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) between 2000 and 2020 were identified. Logistic regression analysis was performed on potential factors associated with brachytherapy use: age, marital status, race, ethnicity, income, metropolitan status, year of diagnosis, SEER region, histology, grade, and stage. To adjust for differences between patients who received brachytherapy and those who did not, propensity-score matching was used. Multivariable Cox regression analysis assessed the association of brachytherapy use with cervical cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and all-cause mortality (ACM) in the matched cohort. Sixty-four percent of the 8500 women received brachytherapy in combination with EBRT; 36% received EBRT alone. The brachytherapy utilization rate declined sharply in 2003/2004 (lowest rate 44% in 2003) and then gradually improved especially in 2018 to 2020 (76%). Factors associated with higher odds of brachytherapy use included younger age, married (vs single), later years of diagnosis, certain SEER regions, and earlier stage. In the propensity-score matched cohort, brachytherapy treatment was associated with lower 4-year cumulative incidence of cancer death (32.1% vs 43.4%; P <.001) and better overall survival (64.0% vs 51.4%; P <.001). Brachytherapy treatment was independently associated with lower CSM (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.64-0.76; P <.001) and ACM (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.67-0.78; P <.001). Brachytherapy utilization among SEER regions has improved since 2004 in patients with stage IB2-IVA cervical cancer. Brachytherapy use remains independently associated with significantly lower CSM and ACM and is an essential component of treatment for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To understand the reasons behind current low utilization of brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer in the United States. A 17-item survey was e-mailed to the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) listserv of active members in 2018. Responses of attending physicians in the United States were included in the analysis. Among a total of 135 respondents, 81 completed the survey. Eighty-four percent agree/strongly agree that cervical brachytherapy is underutilized, and 46.9% disagree/strongly disagree that residents are receiving adequate training for brachytherapy; 75.3% agree/strongly agree that inadequate maintenance of brachytherapy skills is a major obstacle to brachytherapy use; and 71.6% agree/strongly agree that increased time requirement constitutes a major obstacle. Over 97% will recommend brachytherapy for most patients with cervical cancer if given access/time; 72.8% always perform their own brachytherapy, whereas 29.6% reported some type of barrier exists in performing brachytherapy themselves, with time required to perform brachytherapy (9.9%) being a leading factor. A quarter (24.7%) routinely refer to other radiation oncologists for brachytherapy. Even among ABS members, 37.0% reported that they would perform an intensity-modulated radiation therapy or stereotactic body radiation therapy boost in specific scenarios in potentially curable patients. The most common scenario is inability to place a uterine tandem (56.7%). The underutilization of brachytherapy in cervical cancer is widely recognized by ABS members with inadequate training during residency and inadequate maintenance of skills being possible major contributing factors. Even among ABS members, there are identifiable barriers. Continued advocacy and future initiatives in enhancing access to brachytherapy training and efficiency are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To conduct a survey of radiation oncologists in India, to better understand specific educational needs of radiation oncology in India and define areas of collaboration with US institutions.Methods and Materials: A 20-question survey was distributed to members of the Association of Indian Radiation Oncologists and the Indian Brachytherapy Society between November 2013 and May 2014.Results: We received a total of 132 responses. Over 50% of the physicians treat more than 200 patients per day, use 2-dimensional or 3-dimensional treatment planning techniques, and approximately 50% use image guided techniques. For education needs, most respondents agreed that further education in intensity modulated radiation therapy, image guided radiation therapy, stereotactic radiation therapy, biostatistics, and research methods for medical residents would be useful areas of collaboration with institutions in the United States. Other areas of collaboration include developing a structured training module for nursing, physics training, and developing a second-opinion clinic for difficult cases with faculty in the United States.Conclusion: Various areas of potential collaboration in radiation oncology education were identified through this survey. These include the following: establishing education programs focused on current technology, facilitating exchange programs for trainees in India to the United States, promoting training in research methods, establishing training modules for physicists and oncology nurses, and creating an Indo-US. Tumor Board. It would require collaboration between the Association of Indian Radiation Oncologists and the American Society for Radiation Oncology to develop these educational initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To determine the trends in brachytherapy use in cervical cancer in the United States and to identify factors and survival benefits associated with brachytherapy treatment. Methods and Materials: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, we identified 7359 patients with stages IB2-IVA cervical cancer treated with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) between 1988 and 2009. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for differences between patients who received brachytherapy and those who did not from 2000 onward (after the National Cancer Institute alert recommending concurrent chemotherapy). Results: Sixty-three percent of the 7359 women received brachytherapy in combination with EBRT, and 37% received EBRT alone. The brachytherapy utilization rate has decreased from 83% in 1988 to 58% in 2009 (P<.001), with a sharp decline of 23% in 2003 to 43%. Factors associated with higher odds of brachytherapy use include younger age, married (vs single) patients, earlier years of diagnosis, earlier stage and certain SEER regions. In the propensity score-matched cohort, brachytherapy treatment was associated with higher 4-year cause-specific survival (CSS; 64.3% vs 51.5%, P<.001) and overall survival (OS; 58.2% vs 46.2%, P<.001). Brachytherapy treatment was independently associated with better CSS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.71), and OS (HR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.74). Conclusions: This population-based analysis reveals a concerning decline in brachytherapy utilization and significant geographic disparities in the delivery of brachytherapy in the United States. Brachytherapy use is independently associated with significantly higher CSS and OS and should be implemented in all feasible cases. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Aim/objectives/background: The American College of Radiology (ACR), the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS), and the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) have jointly developed the following practice parameter for the performance of low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy. LDR brachytherapy is the application of radioactive sources in or on tumors in a clinical setting with therapeutic intent. The advantages of LDR brachytherapy include improving therapeutic ratios with lower doses to nontarget organs-at-risk and higher doses to a specific target., Methods: This practice parameter was developed according to the process described under the heading. The Process for Developing ACR Practice Parameters and Technical Standards on the ACR website (https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Practice-Parameters-and-Technical-Standards) by the Committee on Practice Parameters-Radiation Oncology of the Commission on Radiation Oncology, in collaboration with ABS and ASTRO., Results: This practice parameter was developed to serve as a tool in the appropriate application of this evolving technology in the care of cancer patients or other patients with conditions where radiation therapy is indicated. It addresses clinical implementation of LDR brachytherapy including personnel qualifications, quality assurance standards, indications, and suggested documentation. This includes a contemporary literature search., Conclusions: This practice parameter is a tool to guide the use of LDR brachytherapy and does not assess relative clinical indication for LDR brachytherapy when compared with other forms of brachytherapy or external beam therapy, but to focus on the best practices required to deliver LDR brachytherapy safely and effectively, when clinically indicated. Comparative costs of versus other modalities therapy may also need to be considered., Competing Interests: L.L.L. reports grants from National Cancer Institute, other from Astrazeneca, other from Pfizer, outside the submitted work. P.O. reports personal fees from Palette Life Sciences, outside the submitted work. D.S. reports grants from the National Cancer Institute, outside the submitted work. W.S. reports personal fees from Carl Zeiss Meditech, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Varian, grants from University of Utah, other from NRG Oncology, outside the submitted work. The remaining authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The optimal overall treatment time (OTT) from radical surgery to the end of adjuvant radiation therapy for some squamous cell carcinomas has been found to impact treatment outcomes. This study aims to identify the impact of OTT on overall survival (OS) for women with completely resected, node-positive squamous cell carcinomas of the vulva., Materials and Methods: The National Cancer Data Base was queried for women with surgically resected, node-positive vulvar squamous cell carcinomas between 2004 and 2016 who were treated with adjuvant radiation therapy. Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards tests were utilized for OS calculations., Results: A total of 1500 women met inclusion criteria. The median OTT was 104 days. Shorter OTT was associated with age, facility volume, private insurance, and duration of post-operative hospitalization. Median OS with OTT ≤ 104 days was 56.1 months vs 45.4 months if ≥105 days (p = 0.015). On multivariable Cox analysis, OTT was independently associated with an increased risk of death of 0.4% per additional day (95%CI 1.001-1.007, p = 0.003), as were age at diagnosis (HR 1.031 [95%CI 1.024-1.037], p < 0.001), number of nodes positive (HR 1.031 [95%CI 1.024-1.037], p = 0.006), the use of concurrent chemotherapy (HR 0.815 [95%CI 0.693-0.960], p = 0.014) and increasing pT/pN stage. After propensity adjustment for factors predicting a shorter OTT, OTT continued to be associated with an increased risk of death per additional day (HR 1.004 [95%CI 1.001-1.007], p = 0.007)., Conclusion: Overall treatment time is an independent risk factor for death in women being treated with adjuvant radiation therapy following complete resection of node-positive squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors of this manuscript do not have any conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The American Brachytherapy Society brachytherapy schools have been pivotal in teaching and evolving the art of brachytherapy over the past decades. Founded in 1995, the schools have consistently provided content for the major disease sites including gynecologic, prostate, and breast with ocular, vascular, head and neck, pediatric, intraluminal, systemic, and intraoperative approaches more selectively addressed. In addition, Physics schools, either coupled with clinical schools or as stand-alone venues, have provided an essential educational component for practicing physicists, a pivotal part of the brachytherapy team. Celebrating 25 years in existence, this historical overview of the American Brachytherapy Society brachytherapy schools is a tribute to the many teachers who have shared their expertise, to the many students who have been enthusiastic and interactive participants, and the staff who have made it all possible, with the reward of perpetuating the important and timely art of brachytherapy., (Copyright © 2020 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: We evaluated patterns of event reporting across five clinical locations within an academic radiation oncology department, with the goal of better understanding variability across sites., Methods and Materials: We analyzed 1,351 events reported to a departmental incident learning system over 1 calendar year across the five locations with respect to volume of events, event type, process map location of origin and detection, and event reporter., Results: We found marked variability in reporting patterns, including reporting rate, event type, event severity, event location of origin and detection within the departmental process map, and discipline of event reporters. These differences relate both to variability in process and workflow (reflected by frequency of specific workflow events at each site) and in reporting culture (reflected by volume or rate of event reporting, and discipline of event reporter)., Conclusions: These data highlight the variability in reporting culture even within a single department, and therefore the need to tailor and individualize safety and quality programs to the unique clinical site, with the long-term goal of achieving a common culture of safety while supporting unique processes at individual locations. This work also raises concern about extrapolating single-institution incident learning system results without understanding the unique workflow and culture of clinical sites., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

In this era of globalization and rapid advances in radiation oncology worldwide, the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) is committed to help decrease profound regional disparities through the work of the International Education Subcommittee (IES). The IES has expanded its base, reach, and activities to foster educational advances through a variety of educational methods with broad scope, in addition to committing to the advancement of radiation oncology care for cancer patients around the world, through close collaboration with our sister radiation oncology societies and other educational, governmental, and organizational groups., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To present recommendations for the use of interstitial brachytherapy in patients with vaginal cancer or recurrent endometrial cancer in the vagina., Methods: A panel of members of the American Brachytherapy Society reviewed the literature, supplemented that with their clinical experience, and formulated recommendations for interstitial brachytherapy for primary or recurrent cancers in the vagina., Results: Patients with bulky disease (approximately >0.5cm thick) should be considered for treatment with interstitial brachytherapy. The American Brachytherapy Society reports specific recommendations for techniques, target volume definition, and dose-fractionation schemes. Three-dimensional treatment planning is recommended with CT scan and/or MRI. The treatment plan should be optimized to conform to the clinical target volume and should reduce the dose to critical organs, including the rectum, bladder, urethra, and sigmoid colon. Suggested doses in combination with external beam radiation therapy and summated equivalent doses in 2Gy fractions are tabulated., Conclusion: Recommendations are made for interstitial brachytherapy for vaginal cancer and recurrent disease in the vagina. Practitioners and cooperative groups are encouraged to use these recommendations to formulate treatment and dose-reporting policies. Such a process will result in meaningful outcome comparisons, promote technical advances, and lead to appropriate utilization of these techniques., (Copyright © 2012 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: This report presents an update to the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy guidelines for locally advanced cervical cancer., Methods: Members of the ABS with expertise in cervical cancer formulated updated guidelines for HDR brachytherapy using tandem and ring, ovoids, cylinder, or interstitial applicators for locally advanced cervical cancer. These guidelines were written based on medical evidence in the literature and input of clinical experts in gynecologic brachytherapy., Results: The ABS affirms the essential curative role of tandem-based brachytherapy in the management of locally advanced cervical cancer. Proper applicator selection, insertion, and imaging are fundamental aspects of the procedure. Three-dimensional imaging with magnetic resonance or computed tomography or radiographic imaging may be used for treatment planning. Dosimetry must be performed after each insertion before treatment delivery. Applicator placement, dose specification, and dose fractionation must be documented, quality assurance measures must be performed, and followup information must be obtained. A variety of dose/fractionation schedules and methods for integrating brachytherapy with external-beam radiation exist. The recommended tumor dose in 2-Gray (Gy) per fraction radiobiologic equivalence (normalized therapy dose) is 80-90Gy, depending on tumor size at the time of brachytherapy. Dose limits for normal tissues are discussed., Conclusion: These guidelines update those of 2000 and provide a comprehensive description of HDR cervical cancer brachytherapy in 2011., (Copyright © 2012 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To develop a guideline for quality practice of low-dose-rate (LDR) and pulsed-dose-rate (PDR) brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer., Methods: Members of the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) with expertise in cervical cancer brachytherapy formulated updated guidelines for LDR and PDR brachytherapy for locally advanced (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics [FIGO] Stages IB2-IVA) cervical cancer based on literature review and clinical experience., Results: The ABS strongly recommends the use of brachytherapy as a component of the definitive treatment of locally advanced cervical carcinoma. Precise applicator placement is necessary to maximize the probability of achieving local control without major side effects. The ABS recommends a cumulative delivered dose of approximately 80-90Gy for definitive treatment. Dosimetry must be performed after each insertion before treatment delivery. The dose delivered to point A should be reported for all intracavitary brachytherapy applications regardless of treatment planning technique. The ABS also recommends adoption of the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie-European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology guidelines for contouring, image-based treatment planning and dose reporting. Interstitial brachytherapy may be considered for a small proportion of patients whose disease cannot be adequately encompassed by intracavitary application and should be performed by practitioners with special expertise in these procedures. Quality management measures must be performed, and follow-up information should also be obtained., Conclusions: Updated ABS guidelines are provided for LDR and PDR brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. Practitioners and cooperative groups are encouraged to use these guidelines to formulate their clinical practices and to adopt dose-reporting policies that are critical for outcome analysis., (Copyright © 2012 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To develop brachytherapy recommendations covering aspects of pretreatment evaluation, treatment, and dosimetric issues for locally advanced cervical cancer., Methods: Members of the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) with expertise in cervical cancer brachytherapy formulated updated recommendations for locally advanced (Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stages IB2-IVA) cervical cancer based on literature review and clinical experience., Results: The ABS recommends the use of brachytherapy as a component of the definitive treatment of locally advanced cervical carcinoma. Precise applicator placement is necessary to maximize the probability of achieving local control without major side effects. The ABS recommends a cumulative delivered dose of approximately 80-90Gy for definitive treatment. The dose delivered to point A should be reported for all brachytherapy applications regardless of treatment-planning technique. The ABS also recommends adoption of the Groupe Européen Curiethérapie-European Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) guidelines for contouring, image-based treatment planning, and dose reporting. Interstitial brachytherapy may be considered for a small proportion of patients whose disease cannot be adequately encompassed by intracavitary application. It should be performed by practitioners with special expertise in these procedures., Conclusions: Updated ABS recommendations are provided for brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. Practitioners and cooperative groups are encouraged to use these recommendations to formulate their clinical practices and to adopt dose-reporting policies that are critical for outcome analysis., (Copyright © 2012 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To develop recommendations for the use of adjuvant vaginal cuff brachytherapy after hysterectomy and update previous American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) guidelines., Methods and Materials: A panel of members of the ABS performed a literature review, supplemented their clinical experience, and formulated recommendations for adjuvant vaginal cuff brachytherapy., Results: The ABS endorses the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for indications for radiation therapy for patients with endometrial cancer and cervical cancer and the guidelines on quality assurance of the American Association on Physicists in Medicine. The ABS made specific recommendations for applicator selection, insertion techniques, target volume definition, dose fractionation, and specifications for postoperative adjuvant vaginal cuff therapy. The ABS recommends that applicator selection should be based on patient anatomy, target volume geometry, and physician judgment. The dose prescription point should be clearly specified. Suggested doses were tabulated for treatment with brachytherapy alone, and in combination with external beam radiation therapy, when applicable. A properly fitted brachytherapy applicator should be selected that conforms to the vaginal apex and achieves mucosal contact with optimal tumor and normal tissue dosimetry. Dose prescription points may be individually selected but doses should be reported at the vaginal surface and at 0.5-cm depth., Conclusions: Recommendations are made for adjuvant vaginal cuff brachytherapy. Practitioners and cooperative groups are encouraged to use these recommendations to formulate their treatment and dose reporting policies. These recommendations will permit meaningful comparisons of reports from different institutions and lead to better and more appropriate use of vaginal brachytherapy., (Copyright © 2012 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)