Search

Background: The addition of radiation therapy (RT) to surgery in retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) remains controversial. We examined practice patterns in the use of RT for patients with RPS over time in a large, national cohort., Methods: Patients in the National Cancer Database (2004-2017) who underwent resection of RPS were included. Trends over time for proportions were calculated using contingency tables with Cochran-Armitage Trend test., Results: Of 7,485 patients who underwent resection, 1,821 (24.3%) received RT (adjuvant: 59.9%, neoadjuvant: 40.1%). The use of RT decreased annually by < 1% (p = 0.0178). There was an average annual increase of neoadjuvant RT by 13% compared to an average annual decrease of adjuvant RT by 6% (p < 0.0001). Treatment at high-volume centers (OR 14.795, p < 0.0001) and tumor > 10 cm (OR 2.009, p = 0.001) were associated with neoadjuvant RT. In contrast liposarcomas (OR 0.574, p = 0.001) were associated with adjuvant RT. There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival between patients treated with surgery alone versus surgery and RT (p = 0.07)., Conclusion: In the United States, the use of RT for RPS has decreased over time, with a shift towards neoadjuvant RT. However, a large percentage of patients are still receiving adjuvant RT and this mostly occurs at low-volume hospitals., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Surgery and radiation therapy remain the standard of care for patients with high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma that are >5 cm. Radiation therapy is time and labor-intensive for patients, and social determinants of health may affect adherence. The aim of this study was to define demographic, clinical, and treatment factors associated with the completion of radiation therapy and determine if preoperative radiation therapy improved adherence compared to postoperative radiation therapy., Methods: The cohort included patients in the National Cancer Database with high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma >5 cm without nodal or distant metastases who received limb-sparing surgery and radiation therapy with microscopically negative R0 margins. Multivariable logistic regression analyses identified factors associated with radiation therapy sequencing and adherence (defined as completion of 50 Gy preoperative radiation therapy or at least 60 Gy postoperative radiation therapy). A multivariable Cox Proportional Hazards model assessed overall survival., Results: Among 2,145 patients, 47.1% received preoperative radiation therapy (n = 1,010), and 52.9% (n = 1135) received postoperative radiation therapy. A greater proportion of patients treated with preoperative (77.2%) versus postoperative radiation therapy (64.9%, P < .0001) received the recommended dose. More patients with private insurance (49.8% vs 35.3% Medicaid vs 44.9% Medicare, P = .011) and patients treated at an academic medical center (52.6% vs 47.4%, P < .001) received preoperative radiation therapy. Patients who received preoperative radiation therapy had lower odds of receiving insufficient doses of radiation therapy (odds ratio 0.34 [95% CI 0.27-0.47]). Neither radiation therapy adherence nor sequencing were independent predictors of overall survival., Conclusions: Patients who received preoperative radiation therapy were more likely to complete therapy and receive an optimal dose than patients treated with postoperative radiation therapy. Preoperative radiation therapy improves adherence and should be widely considered in patients with high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma, particularly in patients at risk for not completing therapy., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Some patients elect for self-pay proton radiation therapy (PT) in the United States, but price transparency is a significant concern. The U.S. government recently declared that hospitals must provide a comprehensive list of "standard" charges for all services. Yet, the proportion of compliant proton centers is unknown, as is the extent to which prices vary nationally., Methods and Materials: We obtained online chargemasters from U.S. proton centers. Technical charges for per fraction delivery of PT of varying complexity were obtained by billing code (77520, 77522, 77523, 77525) and keyword searches. Prices were adjusted for cost-of-living differences using the Medicare geographic cost price index. The relationship between prices for each PT billing code and cost of living was assessed. The interrelationship in cost between codes was examined. The effect of geographic region and other key variables on pricing was explored., Results: Thirty-six proton centers were identified. Twenty-eight (78%) had accessible chargemasters with 20 (56%) listing at least one PT charge. The median prices for billing codes 77520, 77522, 77523, 77525 were $4707, $4712, $5904, and $6690, respectively, with a trend toward greater cost for more complex therapy (77523, 77525; P = .056). Large ranges ($16,863, $16,059, $18,414, $22,143) resulted in ratios of maximum/minimum prices of 5 to 10x. Only prices for code 77522 were associated with cost of living (P = .039). Across institutions, prices for all 4 codes were positively interrelated (all P < .0001). Prices differed between regions (P < .0001) but not by National Cancer Institute designation., Conclusions: List prices for PT differ dramatically between institutions and regions without obvious explanation, raising the concerning possibility that such variation is largely arbitrary. Policy solutions that promote rationalized pricing would greatly benefit this patient population., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Radiation Oncology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)