Search

Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer, representing those between 15 and 39 years of age, face distinctive challenges balancing their life stage with the physical, emotional, and social impacts of a cancer diagnosis. These challenges include fertility concerns, disruptions to educational and occupational pursuits, issues related to body image and sexual health, and the need for age-appropriate psychosocial support within their communities. The Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (PM), a quaternary care center, established a specialized AYA program in 2014, offering holistic and developmentally tailored psychosocial support and currently, efforts are underway to expand this to other regions in the province to address the need for equitable access. The establishment process involves securing funding, conducting an environmental scan, identifying service gaps, developing clinical pathways, and implementing AYA supportive care. An accessible AYA program should also consider social determinants of health, social location, intersectionality, and an interdisciplinary health approach in understanding health inequities in AYA oncology care. This paper describes the processes implemented and challenges faced in creating a community-based AYA program beyond major resource-rich cities and efforts to address intersectionality.

Background: While the hidden curriculum (HC) is becoming recognized as an important component of medical education, ideal methods of assessing the HC are not well known. The aim of this study was to review the literature for methods of assessing the HC in the context of healthcare education. Methods: We conducted a scoping review on methods to measure or assess the HC in accordance with the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and ProQuest ERIC databases were searched from inception until August 2023. Studies which focused on healthcare education, including medicine, as well as other professions such as nursing, social work, pharmacy were included. We then obtained stakeholder feedback utilizing the results of this review to inform the ongoing HC assessment process within our own medical education program. Results: Of 141 studies included for full text review, 41 were included for analysis and data extraction. Most studies were conducted in North America and qualitative in nature. Physician education was best represented with most studies set in undergraduate medical education (n = 21, 51%). Assessment techniques included interviews (n = 19, 46%), cross-sectional surveys (n = 14, 34%), written reflections (n = 7, 17%), and direct observation of the working environment (n = 2, 5%). While attempts to create standardized HC evaluation methods were identified, there were no examples of implementation into an educational program formally or longitudinally. No studies reported on actions taken based on evaluation results. Confidential stakeholder feedback was obtained from postgraduate medical learners in our program, and this feedback was then used to modify our longitudinal HC assessment process. Conclusions: While the HC has as increasing presence in the medical education community, the ideal way to practically assess it within a healthcare education context remains unclear. We described the HC assessment process utilized at our program, which may be informative for other institutions attempting to implement a similar technique. Future attempts and studies would benefit from reporting longitudinal data and impacts of assessment results

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to identify clinical and dosimetric factors associated with radiotherapy induced bone injury (RIBI) following stereotactic lung radiotherapy. Methods Inoperable patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer, treated with SBRT, who received 54 or 60 Gy in 3 fractions, and had a minimum of 6 months follow up were reviewed. Archived treatment plans were retrieved, ribs delineated individually and treatment plans re-computed using heterogeneity correction. Clinical and dosimetric factors were evaluated for their association with rib fracture using logistic regression analysis; a dose-event curve and nomogram were created. Results 46 consecutive patients treated between Oct 2004 and Dec 2008 with median follow-up 25 months (m) (range 6 – 51 m) were eligible. 41 fractured ribs were detected in 17 patients; median time to fracture was 21 m (range 7 – 40 m). The mean maximum point dose in non-fractured ribs (n = 1054) was 10.5 Gy ± 10.2 Gy, this was higher in fractured ribs (n = 41) 48.5 Gy ± 24.3 Gy (p 0.5), and the volume of the rib receiving at least 25 Gy (V25), were significantly associated with RIBI. As D0.5 and V25 were cross-correlated (Spearman correlation coefficient: 0.57, p 0.5 as a representative dose parameter. On multivariate analysis, age (odds ratio: 1.121, 95% CI: 1.04 – 1.21, p = 0.003), female gender (odds ratio: 4.43, 95% CI: 1.68 – 11.68, p = 0.003), and rib D0.5 (odds ratio: 1.0009, 95% CI: 1.0007 – 1.001, p Using D0.5, a dose-event curve was constructed estimating risk of fracture from dose at the median follow up of 25 months after treatment. In our cohort, a 50% risk of rib fracture was associated with a D0.5 of 60 Gy. Conclusions Dosimetric and clinical factors contribute to risk of RIBI and both should be included when modeling risk of toxicity. A nomogram is presented using D0.5, age, and female gender to estimate risk of RIBI following SBRT. This requires validation.

Abstract Background This practice guideline was developed to provide recommendations to clinicians in Ontario on the preferred standard radiotherapy fractionation schedule for the treatment of painful bone metastases. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed and published elsewhere. The Supportive Care Guidelines Group, a multidisciplinary guideline development panel, formulated clinical recommendations based on their interpretation of the evidence. In addition to evidence from clinical trials, the panel also considered patient convenience and ease of administration of palliative radiotherapy. External review of the draft report by Ontario practitioners was obtained through a mailed survey, and final approval was obtained from the Practice Guidelines Coordinating Committee. Results Meta-analysis did not detect a significant difference in complete or overall pain relief between single treatment and multifraction palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases. Fifty-nine Ontario practitioners responded to the mailed survey (return rate 62%). Forty-two percent also returned written comments. Eighty-three percent of respondents agreed with the interpretation of the evidence and 75% agreed that the report should be approved as a practice guideline. Minor revisions were made based on feedback from the external reviewers and the Practice Guidelines Coordinating Committee. The Practice Guidelines Coordinating Committee approved the final practice guideline report. Conclusion For adult patients with single or multiple radiographically confirmed bone metastases of any histology corresponding to painful areas in previously non-irradiated areas without pathologic fractures or spinal cord/cauda equine compression, we conclude that: • Where the treatment objective is pain relief, a single 8 Gy treatment, prescribed to the appropriate target volume, is recommended as the standard dose-fractionation schedule for the treatment of symptomatic and uncomplicated bone metastases. Several factors frequently considered in clinical practice when applying this evidence such as the effect of primary histology, anatomical site of treatment, risk of pathological fracture, soft tissue disease and cord compression, use of antiemetics, and the role of retreatment are discussed as qualifying statements. Our systematic review and meta-analysis provided high quality evidence for the key recommendation in this clinical practice guideline. Qualifying statements addressing factors that should be considered when applying this recommendation in clinical practice facilitate its clinical application. The rigorous development and approval process result in a final document that is strongly endorsed by practitioners as a practice guideline.

BackgroundThe 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.MethodsFor 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.ResultsIn 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.ConclusionThis 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 Background Why waiting lists arise and how to address them remains unclear, and an improved understanding of these waiting list "dynamics" could lead to better management. The purpose of this study is to understand how the current shortage in radiation therapy in Ontario developed; the implications of prolonged waits; who is held accountable for managing such delays; and short, intermediate, and long-term solutions. Methods A case study of the radiation therapy shortage in 1998-99 at Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Relevant documents were collected; semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with ten administrators, health care workers, and patients were conducted, audio-taped and transcribed; and relevant meetings were observed. Results The radiation therapy shortage arose from a complex interplay of factors including: rising cancer incidence rates; broadening indications for radiation therapy; human resources management issues; government funding decisions; and responsiveness to previous planning recommendations. Implications of delays include poorer cancer control rates; patient suffering; and strained doctor-patient relationships. An incompatible relationship exists between moral responsibility, borne by government, and legal liability, borne by physicians. Short-term solutions include re-referral to centers with available resources; long-term solutions include training and recruiting health care workers, improving workload standards, increasing compensation, and making changes to the funding formula. Conclusion Human resource planning plays a critical role in the causes and solutions of waiting lists. Waiting lists have harsh implications for patients. Accountability relationships require realignment.

PurposePatients with centrally located early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are at a higher risk of toxicity from high-dose ablative radiotherapy. NRG Oncology/RTOG 0813 was a phase I/II study designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), efficacy, and toxicity of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for centrally located NSCLC.Materials and methodsMedically inoperable patients with biopsy-proven, positron emission tomography-staged T1 to 2 (≤ 5 cm) N0M0 centrally located NSCLC were accrued into a dose-escalating, five-fraction SBRT schedule that ranged from 10 to 12 Gy/fraction (fx) delivered over 1.5 to 2 weeks. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as any treatment-related grade 3 or worse predefined toxicity that occurred within the first year. MTD was defined as the SBRT dose at which the probability of DLT was closest to 20% without exceeding it.ResultsOne hundred twenty patients were accrued between February 2009 and September 2013. Patients were elderly, there were slightly more females, and the majority had a performance status of 0 to 1. Most cancers were T1 (65%) and squamous cell (45%). Organs closest to planning target volume/most at risk were the main bronchus and large vessels. Median follow-up was 37.9 months. Five patients experienced DLTs; MTD was 12.0 Gy/fx, which had a probability of a DLT of 7.2% (95% CI, 2.8% to 14.5%). Two-year rates for the 71 evaluable patients in the 11.5 and 12.0 Gy/fx cohorts were local control, 89.4% (90% CI, 81.6% to 97.4%) and 87.9% (90% CI, 78.8% to 97.0%); overall survival, 67.9% (95% CI, 50.4% to 80.3%) and 72.7% (95% CI, 54.1% to 84.8%); and progression-free survival, 52.2% (95% CI, 35.3% to 66.6%) and 54.5% (95% CI, 36.3% to 69.6%), respectively.ConclusionThe MTD for this study was 12.0 Gy/fx; it was associated with 7.2% DLTs and high rates of tumor control. Outcomes in this medically inoperable group of mostly elderly patients with comorbidities were comparable with that of patients with peripheral early-stage tumors.

Copyright of Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies / Sodobna Pedagogika is the property of Association of Slovenian Educationalists and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The addition of durvalumab consolidation to concurrent chemoradiation therapy (cCRT) has fundamentally changed the standard of care for patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Nevertheless, concerns related to esophagitis and pneumonitis potentially impact the broad application of all regimen components. A Canadian expert working group (EWG) was convened to provide guidance to healthcare professionals (HCPs) managing these adverse events (AEs) and to help optimize the patient experience. Integrating literature review findings and real-world clinical experience, the EWG used a modified Delphi process to develop 12 clinical questions, 30 recommendations, and a risk-stratification guide. The recommendations address risk factors associated with developing esophagitis and pneumonitis, approaches to risk mitigation and optimal management, and considerations related to initiation and re-initiation of durvalumab consolidation therapy. For both AEs, the EWG emphasized the importance of upfront risk assessment to inform the treatment approach, integration of preventative measures, and prompt initiation of suitable therapy in alignment with AE grade. The EWG also underscored the need for timely, effective communication between multidisciplinary team members and clarity on responsibilities. These recommendations will help support HCP decision-making related to esophagitis and pneumonitis arising from cCRT ± durvalumab and improve outcomes for patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]