Search

Abstract Prediction and identification of tumor recurrence are critical for brain cancer treatment design and planning. Stereotactic radiation therapy delivered with Gamma Knife has been developed as one of the common treatment approaches combined with others by delivering radiation that targets accurately on the tumor while not affecting nearby healthy tissues. In this paper, we release a fully publicly available brain cancer MRI dataset and the companion Gamma Knife treatment planning and follow-up data for the purpose of tumor recurrence prediction. The dataset contains original patient MRI images, radiation therapy data, and clinical information. Lesion annotations are provided, and inclusive preprocessing steps have been specified to simplify the usage of this dataset. A baseline framework based on a convolutional neural network is proposed companionably with basic evaluations. The release of this dataset will contribute to the future development of automated brain tumor recurrence prediction algorithms and promote the clinical implementations associated with the computer vision field. The dataset is made publicly available on The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA) ( https://doi.org/10.7937/xb6d-py67 ).

As the global COVID-19 pandemic escalates there is a need within radiation oncology to work to support our patients in the best way possible. Measures are required to reduce infection spread between patients and within the workforce. Departments need contingency planning to create capacity and continue essential treatments despite a reduced workforce.The #radonc community held an urgent online journal club on Twitter in March 2020 to discuss these issues and create some consensus on crucial next steps. There were 121 global contributors. This document summarises these discussions around themes of infection prevention, rationalisation of workload and working practice in the presence of infection. Keywords: Radiotherapy, COVID-19, Pandemic, Hypofractionation, Cancer

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has proposed alternate payment models to improve the efficiency and decrease the redundancy of health care. Bundled payments or episode-based care is one example. Herein, we report on the successful implementation of a quality improvement project in which changing the clinical workflow for postoperative radiation treatment to the hip to prevent heterotopic ossification improved the efficiency of patient care and decreased cost by eliminating redundant imaging through multidisciplinary participation. This project is a model for interdisciplinary collaboration to improve patient care and reduce unnecessary health care spending in the era of bundled payment/episodes of care program implementation.

Abstract Palliative concurrent chemoradiotherapy has not been well evaluated for patients who are not a candidate for definitive treatment. Even though stereotactic radiotherapy has established a role in the re‐irradiation of recurrent head and neck tumors, its role is not established as a possible primary treatment modality for patients who are not eligible for curative treatment. This article reviews the available literature on the role of chemoradiotherapy and stereotactic radiation for palliation of previously untreated head and neck cancers.

Exposure to radiation oncology (RO) is limited among medical students, excluding those who wish to pursue a radiation oncology career. Consequently, RO knowledge in gynecological malignancies may differ among obstetricians and gynecologists (OB&G), depending on their experience and training level. Establishing a program to educate OB&G residents about basic radiation oncology principles may improve patients' coordination and treatment with gynecological malignancies. At our institution, radiation oncology residents conducted a 2-part training session for OB&G colleagues, which included a lecture and hands-on training. Educational sessions targeting OB&G residents are needed to enhance knowledge about radiation treatments and improve patient care.

Abstract Although extremely rare, sarcomas including malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors should be considered in the differential diagnosis of sino‐nasal tract lesions. Long‐term cure is possible through definitive operative management followed by adjuvant therapy.

The purpose of this research was to assess the existing variations in the residency training resources among radiation oncology (RO) residency programs in the United States. We queried each residency program website and Fellowship Residency Electronic Interactive Data Access System website (www.freida.ama-assn.org) to obtain information on faculty and available treatment modalities. The data were continuously updated, most recently as of April 30, 2019. A total of 94 RO residency programs were identified during the academic year 2018-2019, and data were collected. The median number of attending physicians was 13 (range, 4 -71). The median number of physicists and biologists were 9 and 3, respectively. The conventional techniques, including 3 dimensional conformal radation therapy, intensity modulated radiation therapy, electron therapy, and stereotactic body radiation therap/stereotactic radiosurgery, were available in all residency programs. In terms of specialized external beam radiation therapy machines, gamma knife, CyberKnife, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) linear accelerator were available in 49 (52%), 21(22%), and 7 (8%) programs, respectively. Only 19 programs (20%) had in-house proton therapy availability; however, 37 programs (39%) offered proton therapy training via resident rotation at an affiliated institution. Prostate, gynecologic, and breast brachytherapy were available in 81 (86%), 82 (87%), and 58 (62%) programs, respectively. Eighty-one (86%) programs reported to have high dose rate, and only 20 (21%) programs had low dose rate brachytherapy. Our study found that marked variations exist among RO residency programs in the United States during academic year 2018-2019 and will serve as a baseline for future intervention.

The purpose of this research was to evaluate the variations in research, education, and wellness resources for residents among radiation oncology (RO) residency programs across the United States. A list of accredited programs for the academic year 2018 to 2019 was collected using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education website. Individual residency program websites were used as the primary source of the data, and the Fellowship Residency Electronic Interactive Data Access System website complemented any missing data. We collected data on dedicated research time, resident rotations, wellness resources, and salary information. Excel 2013 was used for analysis. Information from the 94 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education accredited RO residency programs during the academic year 2018 to 2019 was collected. Seventy-five (80%) programs reported the duration of dedicated research time on their websites. At least 6 months are allowed in 48 (51%) programs, and 27 (29%) programs report that dedicated research time is negotiable. Outstandingly, 20 (21%) programs allow 1 year of dedicated research time, and the median dedicated research time is 9 months. From our study, only 13 (14%) residency programs allow residents to rotate in other departments of the same institution. Fifty-nine (63%) programs allow away rotations at other institutions (external electives). An international rotation is permitted only in 19 (20%) programs. Wellness resoursces specifically fatigue managment, resident retreat and resident mentoring programs were available in 53%, 26% and 42% of programs, respectively. The salary information is obtainable for 63 institutions, and the yearly compensation ranges between $51,000 and $78,000. Moonlighting is allowed only in 28 (30%) programs. Our study found that major variations exist among RO residency programs in the United States regarding research, education, and wellness resources for residents.

Background: Inconsistent findings have been reported in the literature regarding racial differences in survival outcomes between African American and white patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa). The current study utilized a national database to determine whether racial differences exist among the target population to address this inconsistency.Methods: This study retrospectively reviewed prostate cancer (PCa) patient data (N = 1,319,225) from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The data were divided into three groupings based on the metastatic status: (1) no metastasis (N = 318,291), (2) bone metastasis (N = 29,639), and (3) metastases to locations other than bone, such as brain, liver, or lung (N = 952). Survival probabilities of African American and white PCa patients with bone metastasis were examined through parametric proportional hazards Weibull models and Bayesian survival analysis. These results were compared to patients with no metastasis or other types of metastases.Results: No statistically supported racial disparities were observed for African American and white men with bone metastasis (p = 0.885). Similarly, there were no racial disparities in survival for those men suffering from other metastases (liver, lung, or brain). However, racial disparities in survival were observed among the two racial groups with non-metastatic PCa (p < 0.001) or when metastasis status was not taken into account (p < 0.001). The Bayesian analysis corroborates the finding.Conclusion: This research supports our previous findings and shows that there are no racial differences in survival outcomes between African American and white patients with mPCa. In contrast, racial disparities in the survival outcome continue to exist among non-metastatic PCa patients. Further research is warranted to explain this difference.

Abstract Background Peer review systems within radiation oncology are important to ensure quality radiation care. Several individualized methods for radiation oncology peer review have been described. However, despite the importance of peer review in radiation oncology barriers may exist to its effective implementation in practice. The purpose of this study was to quantify the rate of plan changes based on our group peer review process as well as the quantify amount of time and resources needed for this process. Methods Data on cases presented in our institutional group consensus peer review conference were prospectively collected. Cases were then retrospectively analyzed to determine the rate of major change (plan rejection) and any change in plans after presentation as well as the median time of presentation. Univariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with major change and any change. Results There were 73 cases reviewed over a period of 11 weeks. The rate of major change was 8.2% and the rate of any change was 23.3%. The majority of plans (53.4%) were presented in 6–10 min. Overall, the mean time of presentation was 8 min. On univariable logistic regression, volumetric modulated arc therapy plans were less likely to undergo a plan change but otherwise there were no factors significantly associated with major plan change or any type of change. Conclusion Group consensus peer review allows for a large amount of informative clinical and technical data to be presented per case prior to the initiation of radiation treatment in a thorough yet efficient manner to ensure plan quality and patient safety.