Search

Purpose: Men with localized prostate cancer may receive either photon-based intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or proton beam therapy (PBT). The PARTIQoL trial (NCT01617161) demonstrates the feasibility of performing a large, multicenter phase 3 randomized trial comparing IMRT with PBT for localized prostate cancer. Here, we report baseline features of patients enrolled on this trial and present strategies to improve feasibility of other similar trials., Methods and Materials: Patients with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer were randomly assigned to either PBT or IMRT with stratification by institution, age, use of rectal spacer, and fractionation schedule (conventional fractionation: 79.2 Gy in 44 fractions vs moderate hypofractionation: 70.0 Gy in 28 fractions). The primary endpoint is a change from baseline bowel health using the Expanded Prostate Index Composite score 24 months after radiation therapy. Secondary objectives include treatment-related differences in urinary and erectile functions, adverse events, and efficacy endpoints., Results: Between July 2012 and November 2021, 450 patients were successfully accrued. Patients were randomly assigned to either PBT (N = 226) or to IMRT (N = 224); 13 were ineligible or withdrew before treatment. The median age of 437 analyzed patients was 68 years (range, 46-89 years). A total of 41% of patients had low-risk and 59% had intermediate-risk disease. In total, 49% of patients were treated with conventional fractionation and 51% with moderately hypofractionation. 48% of patients used a rectal spacer. For patients receiving PBT, pencil beam scanning was used in 48%. PBT and IMRT arms were balanced for baseline variables., Conclusions: Despite significant challenges, the PARTIQoL trial demonstrated that, with targeted recruitment approaches, multicenter collaboration, payer engagement, and protocol updates to incorporate contemporary techniques, it is feasible to perform a large phase 3 randomized clinical trial to assess whether PBT improves outcomes. We will separately report primary results and continue to monitor participants for longer follow-up and secondary endpoints., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background : Although the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been associated with increased Medicaid coverage among prostate cancer patients, the association between Medicaid expansion with risk group at diagnosis, time to treatment initiation (TTI), and the refusal of locoregional treatment (LT) among patients requires further exploration. Methods : Using the National Cancer Database, we performed a retrospective cohort analysis of all patients aged 40 to 64 years diagnosed with localized prostate cancer from 2011 to 2016. Difference-in-difference (DID) analysis was used to compare changes in insurance status, risk group at diagnosis, TTI, and the refusal of LT among patients residing in Medicaid expansion versus non-expansion states. In a secondary analysis, we used DID to compare changes in the above outcomes among racial minorities versus White patients living in expansion states. Results : Of the 112,434 patients with prostate cancer in our analysis, 50,958 patients lived in Medicaid expansion states, and 61,476 patients lived in non-expansion states. In the adjusted analysis, we found that the proportion of uninsured patients (adjusted DID: -0.87%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: -1.28 to -0.46) and patients who refused radiation therapy (adjusted DID: -0.71%; 95% CI: -0.95 to -0.47) decreased more in expansion states compared to non-expansion states. Similarly, we observed that the racial disparity of select outcomes in expansion states narrowed, as racial minorities experienced larger absolute decreases in uninsured status and the refusal of radiation therapy (RT) regimens than White patients following ACA implementation ( p < 0.01 for all). However, residence in a Medicaid expansion state was not associated with changes in risk group at diagnosis, TTI, nor the refusal of LT ( p > 0.01 for all); racial disparities in TTI were also exacerbated in expansion states following ACA implementation. Conclusions : The association between Medicaid expansion and prostate cancer outcomes and disparities remains unclear. While ACA implementation was associated with increased insurance coverage and decreased refusal of RT, there was no significant association with earlier risk group at diagnosis, TTI within 180 days, or refusal of LT. Similarly, racial minorities in expansion states had larger decreases in uninsured status and the refusal of RT regimens, as well as smaller increases in intermediate-/high-risk disease at presentation than White patients following ACA implementation, but experienced no significant changes in TTI. More research is needed to understand how Medicaid expansion affects cancer outcomes and whether these effects are borne equitably among different populations.

Background and Objective: Innovations have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer (PC). Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of topics that greatly impact daily practice. The 2024 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) surveyed experts on key questions in clinical management in order to supplement evidence-based guidelines. Here we present voting results for questions from APCCC 2024., Methods: Before the conference, a panel of 120 international PC experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 183 multiple-choice consensus questions on eight different topics. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the voting panel members ("panellists")., Key Findings and Limitations: Consensus was a priori defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. The voting results show varying degrees of consensus, as discussed in this article and detailed in the Supplementary material. These findings do not include a formal literature review or meta-analysis., Conclusions and Clinical Implications: The voting results can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers in prioritising areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised on the basis of patient and cancer characteristics, and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2024 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: More than half of patients with cancer receive radiotherapy, which often requires daily treatments for several weeks. The impact of geographic and sociodemographic factors on the odds of patients with cancer being recommended radiotherapy, starting radiotherapy, and completing radiotherapy is not well understood., Methods: This was a retrospective patient cohort study that included patients diagnosed with one of the 10 most common solid cancers from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2021, in the National Cancer Database. The primary predictor was radial distance from a patient's home to their cancer treatment hospital. Other covariates included baseline patient characteristics (age, sex, comorbidities, metastatic disease, cancer site), sociodemographic characteristics (race, ethnicity, median income quartile, insurance status), geographic region, and facility type. The three primary outcomes were being recommended radiotherapy, starting recommended radiotherapy, and completing radiotherapy., Results: Of the 3,068,919 patients included, patients living >50 miles away had lower odds of being recommended radiotherapy than those living <10 miles away. Compared to White patients, Asian and Hispanic patients had lower odds of being recommended radiotherapy, and Black patients had lower odds of starting recommended radiotherapy. Uninsured patients, those with Medicaid or Medicare, and patients in lower median income quartiles had lower odds of starting or completing radiotherapy., Conclusions: Geographic and sociodemographic factors impact access to radiotherapy at different levels in cancer care and understanding these factors could aid policymakers and practices in identifying and supporting at-risk patients., (© 2024 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Technical efficiency evaluates a hospital's economic performance and plays an important role in variations in quality of care and outcomes. The study objective was to examine the association between hospital efficiency and quality of care among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer and to assess if race moderates this association., Design: Retrospective study using Surveillance, Epidemiological, and End Results-Medicare (SEER-Medicare) data from 1998 to 2016 for prostate cancer patients aged ≥ 66. We computed hospital technical efficiency using a data envelopment analysis. Outcomes were emergency room visits, hospitalizations, cost, and mortality (all-cause and prostate cancer-specific). We used competing risk regression for survival, log-link GLM models for cost, and Poisson models for count data. The propensity score approach was used to minimize selection bias., Results: The cohort consisted of 323,325 patients. Compared to higher efficiency hospitals (upper quartile), low hospital efficiency (i.e., lower quartile) was associated with a higher hazard of long-term mortality (Hazard ratio (HR) = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.05, 1.08) and long-term prostate cancer-specific mortality (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.11, 1.17). Compared to higher efficiency levels, lower levels were associated with impaired emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and costs. A one unit increase in the efficiency score was associated with greater benefits for cost and mortality for African American and white patients. The benefit was larger for African American patients compared to white patients., Conclusions: Increasing hospital efficiency may help improve outcomes among Medicare prostate cancer patients. Policies to redirect patients to hospitals with higher efficiency can enhance the quality of care and outcomes.

Purpose: Accurate diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer are crucial to improving patient care. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted positron emission tomography with computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging has demonstrated superiority for initial staging and restaging in patients with prostate cancer. Referring physicians and PET/CT readers must agree on a consistent communication method and application of information derived from this imaging modality. While several guidelines have been published, a single PSMA PET/CT reporting template has yet to be widely adopted. Based on the consensus from community and academic physicians, we developed a standardized PSMA PET/CT reporting template for radiologists and nuclear medicine physicians to report and relay key imaging findings to referring physicians. The aim was to improve the quality, clarity, and utility of imaging results reporting to facilitate patient management decisions., Methods: Based on community and expert consensus, we developed a standardized PSMA PET/CT reporting template to deliver key imaging findings to referring clinicians., Results: Core category components proposed include a summary of any prior treatment history; presence, location, and degree of PSMA radiopharmaceutical uptake in primary and/or metastatic tumor(s), lesions with no uptake, and incidentally found lesions with positive uptake on PET/CT., Conclusions: This article provides recommendations on best practices for standardized reporting of PSMA PET/CT imaging. The generated reporting template is a proposed supplement designed to educate and improve data communication between imaging experts and referring physicians., Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable. Consent to publish: Not applicable. Competing Interests: SE – No relevant competing interests. S.A.E. is supported by NCI K08CA259626 and has received research support from Sofie Biosciences, Telix and Novartis. MM – (none). OS - Received research or grant support from Advanced Accelerator Applications, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Constellation, Endocyte, Invitae, Janssen, Lantheus, Merck, Progenics, Tenebio; is a consultant for Advanced Accelerator Applications (AAA), Amgen, ArtBio, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blue Earth Diagnostics, Inc., Clarity Pharmaceuticals, Clovis, Constellation, Convergent, Dendreon, EMD Serono, Foundation Medicine, Fusion, Genzyme, Hengrui, Isotopen Technologien Meunchen, Merck, Janssen, Morphimmune, Myovant, Myriad, Noria Therapeutics, Inc., NorthStar, Novartis, Noxopharm, Progenics, POINT Biopharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, Tenebio, Telix, Tessa, Theragnostics. MF – (none). SF – Grants/honoraria/travel support from AAA, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Debio, GE, Immedica, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Sofie, Telix, Associate Editor of JNM, Editor of EJNMMI. JC - Reports prior consulting activities outside the submitted work for Advanced Accelerator Applications, Blue Earth Diagnostics, CuriumPharma, GE Healthcare, Janssen, POINT Biopharma, Progenics, Radiomedix, and Telix Pharmaceuticals. He is the recipient of grants from the Prostate Cancer Foundation (2020 Young Investigator Award 20YOUN05), the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (2019 Molecular Imaging Research Grant for Junior Academic Faculty), the Philippe Foundation Inc. (New York, USA), and the ARC Foundation (France) (International Mobility Award SAE20160604150)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Importance: Asian American individuals are not underrepresented in medicine; however, aggregation in prior workforce analyses may mask underlying disparities., Objective: To assess representation by Asian race and disaggregated subgroups in the US allopathic medical school workforce., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) special reports, generated using the AAMC Applicant-Matriculant Data File, Student Records System, Graduate Medical Education Track Survey, and faculty roster. Participants included medical school applicants, matriculants, graduates, residents, and faculty enrolled or employed at US allopathic medical schools between 2013 and 2021. Data were analyzed between March and May 2024., Exposure: Asian race or ethnic subgroup as per AAMC and US Census Bureau Office of Management and Budget criteria, including Bangladeshi American, Cambodian American, Chinese American, Filipino American, Indian American, Indonesian American, Japanese American, Korean American, Pakistani American, Taiwanese American, and Vietnamese American., Main Outcomes and Measures: Representation quotients (RQ) were used to indicate representation that was equivalent (RQ of 1), higher (RQ greater than 1), or lower (RQ less than 1) than expected representation based on US population estimates. One-way analysis of variance and linear regression models assessed mean RQ differences by career stage and over time, with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons., Results: In this study, Asian American individuals accounted for 94 934 of 385 775 applicants (23%), 39 849 of 158 468 matriculants (24%), 37 579 of 152 453 graduates (24%), 229 899 of 1 035 512 residents (22%), and 297 413 of 1 351 187 faculty members (26%). The mean (SD) RQ was significantly greater among Asian American residents (3.44 [0.15]) and faculty (3.54 [0.03]) compared with Asian applicants (3.3 [0.04]), matriculants (3.37 [0.03]), or graduates (3.31 [0.06]). Upon disaggregation, RQ was significantly lower among residents and faculty in 10 of 12 subgroups. Although subgroups, such as Taiwanese American, Indian American, and Chinese American, had RQs greater than 1 (eg, Chinese American graduates: mean [SD], RQ, 3.90 [0.21]), the RQs were less than 1 for Laotian, Cambodian, and Filipino American subgroups (eg, Filipino American graduates: mean [SD], RQ, 0.93 [0.06]) at almost every career stage. No significant RQ changes were observed over time for Laotian American and Cambodian American trainees, with a resident RQ of 0 in 8 of 25 and 4 of 25 specialties, respectively. Faculty RQ increased in 9 of 12 subgroups, but Cambodian American, Filipino American, Indonesian American, Laotian American, and Vietnamese American faculty (eg, Vietnamese American faculty: mean [SD], RQ, 0.59 [0.08]) had RQs less than 1., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of Asian representation in US allopathic medical schools, Laotian American, Cambodian American, and Filipino American individuals were underrepresented at each stage of the physician workforce pathway. Efforts to promote diversity in medicine should account for these disparities to avoid perpetuating inequities.

Purpose: Achieving gender equity in radiation oncology is an important goal, as a smaller proportion of women enter radiation oncology residency compared with those graduating from medical school. As invited speaking opportunities at academic medical conferences are vital for promotion/tenure, we investigated the prevalence of all-men panels ("manels") at American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and Canadian Society of Radiation Oncology (CARO) annual meetings., Methods and Materials: Using ASTRO and CARO online meeting programs, 2018 to 2021 faculty information was obtained, including gender, panel role (chair vs nonchair), type of session, and topic. Primary outcomes included percentage of manels and proportion of female panelists over time. Representation of women among chairs was also evaluated., Results: Over the 4-year study period across both conferences, a total of 765 panel sessions were held with 2973 faculty members, of whom 1287 (43.3%) were women. Of these sessions, 127 of 765 (16.6%) were manels. ASTRO meetings had 1169 of 2742 (42.6%) female faculty members and held 107 of 680 (15.7%) manels, whereas CARO meetings had 118 of 231 (51.1%) female faculty and held 20 of 85 manels (23.5%). From 2018 to 2021, the proportion of manels decreased at ASTRO and CARO meetings from 25.6% to 8.2% (P < .001) and from 29.6% to 15.0% (P = .130), respectively. The role of chair was majority male in every year from 2018 to 2021 at ASTRO meetings (58.6% overall), but more balanced at CARO meetings (48.0% overall). Among session types, the highest proportion of manels was observed for scientific sessions (19.1%, P = .011) at ASTRO meetings and leadership sessions (29.4%, P = .533) at CARO meetings. The lowest proportion of female panelists was on genitourinary cancer topics at ASTRO meetings (31.9%, P = .018) and physics topics at CARO meetings (40.4%, P = .085)., Conclusions: During the study period, the proportion of female panelists increased with a corresponding decrease in manels. ASTRO and CARO should strive for further involvement of women and the elimination of manels whenever possible., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The role of elective pelvic nodal irradiation in salvage radiotherapy (sRT) remains controversial. Utilizing 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT, this study aimed to investigate differences in disease distribution after whole pelvic (WPRT) or prostate bed (PBRT) radiotherapy and to identify risk factors for pelvic lymph node (LN) relapse., Methods: This retrospective study included patients with PSA > 0.1 ng/mL post-radical prostatectomy (RP) or post-RP and sRT who underwent 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT. Disease distribution on 18 F-DCFPyL PET/CT after sRT was compared using Chi-square tests. Risk factors were tested for association with pelvic LN relapse after RP and salvage PBRT using logistic regression., Results: 979 18 F-DCFPyL PET/CTs performed at our institution between 1/1/2022 - 3/24/2023 were analyzed. There were 246 patients meeting criteria, of which 84 received salvage RT after RP (post-salvage RT group) and 162 received only RP (post-RP group). Salvage PBRT patients (n = 58) had frequent pelvic nodal (53.6%) and nodal-only (42.6%) relapse. Salvage WPRT patients (n = 26) had comparatively lower rates of pelvic nodal (16.7%, p = 0.002) and nodal-only (19.2%, p = 0.04) relapse. The proportion of distant metastases did not differ between the two groups. Multiple patient characteristics, including ISUP grade and seminal vesicle invasion, were associated with pelvic LN disease in the post-RP group., Conclusion: At PSA persistence or progression, salvage WPRT resulted in lower rates of nodal involvement than salvage PBRT, but did not reduce distant metastases. Certain risk factors increase the likelihood of pelvic LN relapse after RP and can help inform salvage RT field selection., Competing Interests: Disclosure Manuj Agarwal is the holder of a patent, US 8192381B2, a device to treat and/or prevent shoulder subluxation, and serves as the American Brachytherapy Society Education Council Chair. Yu-Ning Wong receives travel support from the Prostate Cancer Foundation. Vivek Narayan declares institutional research grants from Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Regeneron, Pfizer and Janssen, receives consulting fees from Eisai, AstraZeneca, Merck, Regeneron, Janssen, Myovant Sciences, Exelixis and Amgen, receives payment or honoraria from Pfizer, and participates on the Clinical Trial Adjudication Committee at Myovant Sciences. Samuel Takvorian receives grants or contracts from the NIH/National Cancer Institute, participates in the Advisory Board at Genentech and AstraZeneca, and serves on the ASCO Clinical Practice Committee. Austin Pantel receives institutional support from Progenics, receives consulting fees from Blue Earth, Progenics, and GE, and obtains travel support from Blue Earth and GE. Naomi B. Haas receives consulting fees from Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, and Exelixis, and participates in the Data Safety Monitoring Board at Johns Hopkins. All other authors report no relevant disclosures., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

What are the factors that physicians could consider in an academic radiation oncology practice job offer? In this minireview, we discuss how prospective academic faculty could evaluate the "big 3" domains: (1) the compensation, including the direct and indirect payments; (2) the daily job, including aspects of the clinic, research, and education; and (3) the location, including geography, atmosphere, environment, and culture. If a prospective academic radiation oncologist believes that the academic practice is "great" in at least 2 of the 3 and "good" in the remaining 1, then they should likely sign the contract., Competing Interests: Disclosures Nicholas G. Zaorsky is supported by the American Cancer Society – Tri State CEOs Against Cancer Clinician Scientist Development Grant, CSDG-20-013-01-CCE (2020-) and the Department of Defense (2020 - ). Nicholas G. Zaorsky receives remuneration from the American College of Radiation Oncology for chart review and accreditation of radiation oncology facilities nationally (2020-). Nicholas G. Zaorsky was supported by the National Institutes of Health Grant LRP 1 L30 CA231572-01 (2018-2022). Nicholas G. Zaorsky and Daniel M Trifiletti received remuneration from Springer Nature for the textbook, Absolute Clinical Radiation Oncology Review (2019). Nicholas G. Zaorsky received payments from Weatherby Healthcare, unrelated to research (2018-2019)., (Copyright © 2024 American Society for Radiation Oncology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Evidence supports the value of shorter, similarly efficacious, and potentially more cost-effective hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) regimens in many clinical scenarios for breast cancer (BC) and prostate cancer (PC). However, practice patterns vary considerably. We used the most recent Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data to assess trends in RT cost and practice patterns among episodes of BC and PC., Methods and Materials: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of all external beam RT episodes for BC and PC from 2015 to 2019 to assess predictors of short-course RT (SCRT) use and calculated spending differences. Multivariable logistic regression defined adjusted odds ratios of receipt of SCRT over longer-course RT (LCRT) by treatment modality, age, year of diagnosis, type of practice, and the interaction between year and treatment setting. Medicare spending was evaluated using multivariable linear regression controlling for duration of RT regimen (SCRT vs LCRT) in addition to the above covariables., Results: Of 143,729 BC episodes and 114,214 PC episodes, 63,623 (44.27%) and 25,955 (22.72%) were SCRT regimens, respectively. Median total spending for SCRT regimens among BC episodes was $9418 (interquartile range [IQR], $7966-$10,983) versus $13,602 (IQR, $11,814-$15,499) for LCRT. Among PC episodes, median total spending was $6924 (IQR, $4,509-$12,905) for stereotactic body RT, $18,768 (IQR, $15,421-$20,740) for moderate hypofractionation, and $27,319 (IQR, $25,446-$29,421) for LCRT. On logistic regression, receipt of SCRT was associated with older age among both BC and PC episodes as well as treatment at hospital-affiliated over freestanding sites (P < .001 for all)., Conclusions: In this evaluation of BC and PC RT episodes from 2015 to 2019, we found that shorter-course RT resulted in lower costs than longer-course RT. SCRT was also more common in hospital-affiliated sites. Future research focusing on potential payment incentives encouraging SCRT when clinically appropriate in the 2 most common cancers treated with RT will be valuable as the field continues to prospectively evaluate cost-effective hypofractionation in other disease sites., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This practice parameter was revised collaboratively by the American College of Radiology (ACR), the American College of Nuclear Medicine, the American Radium Society, the American Society for Radiation Oncology, and the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. The document is intended to serve as a resource for appropriately trained and licensed physicians who perform therapeutic procedures with unsealed sources, referred to in the document using the more inclusive terminology of radiopharmaceuticals, for which a written directive is required for authorized users under NRC 10 CFR 35.300., 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 ACR Commission on Radiation Oncology in collaboration with the American Radium Society., Results: This practice parameter addresses the overall role of the applicable physician-authorized user, Qualified Medical Physicist, and other specialized personnel involved in the delivery of radiopharmaceutical therapy. Therapeutic radiopharmaceuticals include those administered as elemental radioactive isotopes (radionuclides) or the radioactive element incorporated into a targeting molecule (ligand) by one or more chemical bonds. This document provides guidance regarding general principles of radionuclide therapies and indications of various alpha, beta, gamma, and mixed emission agents with references to several recent practice parameters on new and commonly performed radiopharmaceutical therapies., Conclusion: This document addresses clinical circumstances, elements of available agents, and the qualifications and responsibilities of various members of the radiation care team, specifications of consultation and other clinical documentation, post-therapy follow-up, radiation safety precautions, elements of quality control and improvement programs, infection control, and patient education to ensure optimal patient care and safety when utilizing radiopharmaceuticals., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: For women with breast cancer, seminal studies have shown that adjuvant hypofractionated external beam radiation therapy (hEBRT) maintains similar outcomes and may reduce overall costs compared with conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (cEBRT). However, it is unclear whether hEBRT may be associated with differential risk of development of radiation-induced second malignancies compared with cEBRT. Because the occurrence of second malignancies is small, large databases may improve our understanding of the relative risk of second malignancies between hEBRT and cEBRT., Materials and Methods: Using the National Cancer Database, we carried out a retrospective cohort analysis of women diagnosed with non-metastatic, stage 0-III breast cancer from 2004 to 2017. All patients had a lumpectomy or mastectomy and a follow-up time of at least 60 months after diagnosis. The probability of second malignancies in women receiving adjuvant cEBRT or hEBRT was compared using multivariable logistic regression adjusting for sociodemographic, geographical, clinical and treatment factors, allowing for relative (but not absolute) comparison of second malignancy risk. Temporal sensitivity analyses stratified by year of diagnosis and length of follow-up time were also conducted., Results: Of the 125 228 women in our study, 115 576 (92.3%) received cEBRT and 9652 (7.71%) received hEBRT. The median age of the cohort was 60 (interquartile range 51-68) years at diagnosis and the median follow-up time was 99.61 (interquartile range 77.5-128.49) months. Upon adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors, patients who received hEBRT had no difference in relative risk than patients who received cEBRT (odds ratio 0.937, 95% confidence interval 0.869-1.010, P = 0.091). In analyses stratified by year of diagnosis, and stratified by length of follow-up, there was no difference in second malignancy probability between patients who completed hEBRT and patients who completed cEBRT., Conclusions: In this analysis of over 120 000 women with non-metastatic breast cancer, hEBRT was not associated with different odds of developing second malignancies compared with cEBRT. Our findings may inform patient counselling in the choice of radiation regimens for breast cancer and further support the safety of hypofractionated regimens for breast cancer., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: We sought to characterize and compare late patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after moderately hypofractionated intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and proton beam therapy (PBT) for localized prostate cancer (PC)., Methods: This multi-institutional analysis included low- or intermediate-risk group PC patients treated with moderately hypofractionated radiation to an intact prostate stratified by treatment modality: IMRT or PBT. The primary outcomes were prospectively collected patient-reported late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity assessed by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Expanded PC Index Composite (EPIC). Multivariable regression analysis (MVA) controlling for age, race, and risk group tested the effect of time, treatment, and their interaction., Results: 287 IMRT and 485 PBT patients were included. Intermediate risk group (81.2 vs. 68.2%; p < 0.001) and median age at diagnosis (70 vs. 67 years; p < 0.001) were higher in the IMRT group. On MVA, there was no significant difference between modalities. PBT IPSS did not differ from IMRT IPSS at 12 months (odds ratio [OR], 1.19; p = 0.08) or 24 months (OR, 0.99; p = 0.94). PBT EPIC overall GI function at 12 months (OR, 3.68; p = 0.085) and 24 months (OR 2.78; p = 0.26) did not differ from IMRT EPIC overall GI function. At 24 months, urinary frequency was no different between PBT and IMRT groups (OR 0.35; p = 0.096)., Conclusions: This multi-institutional analysis of low- or intermediate-risk PC treated with moderately hypofractionated PBT and IMRT demonstrated low rates of late patient-reported GI and GU toxicities. After covariate adjustment, late GI and GU PROs were not significantly different between PBT or IMRT cohorts., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Purpose: Most medical students have limited exposure to radiation oncology (RO) before deciding which specialty to choose for residency. This may limit the number and diversity of RO applicants. The purpose of this study was to determine students' views on a combined pathway program of RO with internal medicine (IM), as well as other related medical specialties, as a potential means of overcoming barriers to interest in RO and the early decision point to solo training in a highly specialized field., Methods and Materials: In July to August 2022, all 299 United States student and postgraduate year 1 members of the American Society for Radiation Oncology were sent an electronic survey assessing their views on advantages and disadvantages of a combined IM/RO training pathway, and interest in several options of combined pathway programs., Results: Eighty participants completed the survey (response rate 27%). Thirty-four (43%) were very or extremely interested in IM/RO residency (median Likert-type rating 3, IQR 2-4). The most important potential advantages of an IM/RO pathway included greater flexibility in employment options (n = 51, 64%), enhanced general medical knowledge to facilitate ambitions in other career pathways (n = 46, 58%), improved patient care (n = 43, 54%), and having a pathway for combined hematologic/oncology and RO board certification (n = 46, 58%). In comparison to IM/RO, participants were significantly more interested in a combined RO and hematology/oncology program (median Likert-type rating 5, IQR 5-5, P = .005). Among the subgroup of 26 survey participants who believed it less likely they would apply for RO residency, 18 (69%) thought an IM/RO pathway would increase their interest in RO (median Likert-type rating 4, IQR 3-5). Interest in IM/RO did not differ by gender, race, or ethnicity., Conclusions: Combined training pathways involving RO were viewed positively by survey respondents, and may be particularly appealing to those less committed to a career in RO. Further research will help guide recommendations for the creation of these programs., Competing Interests: Malcolm D. Mattes receives grant funding from the Radiation Oncology Institute and Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation, and New Jersey Health Foundation. Neha Vapiwala leadership includes ASTRO Board of Directors, Secretary/Treasurer. Curtiland Deville's leadership includes ASTRO Board of Directors, Vice Chair, Council on Health Equity, Diversity & Inclusion. Idalid Franco receives grant funding from a Diversity Supplement through the National Institutes of Health, Center to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities (NIH-3R01CA240582-01A1S1), NIH/NCI Loan Repayment Program, and Career Development Award from the Center for Diversity and Inclusion of the Brigham and Women's Hospital., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Background: Pain flares have a substantive impact on the quality of life and well-being of patients with cancer. We identified longitudinal trajectories (clusters) of cancer pain flares in ambulatory patients and sociodemographic and clinical predictors of these trajectories., Methods: In a prospective cohort study using ecological momentary assessment (mEMA), we collected patient-reported daily pain flare ratings data over 5 months and identified predictors and correlates using validated measures., Results: The mean age of the sample (N = 270) was 60.9 years (SD = 11.2), 64.8% were female, and 32.6% self-identified as African American. Four pain flare clusters were identified. The "high-occurrence" cluster (23% of patients) experienced 5.5 (SD = 5.47) daily flares, whereas low-moderate clusters (77%) reported 2.4 (SD = 2.74) daily flares (P < .000). Those in the high-occurrence cluster reported higher pain scores (P = .000), increased pain-related interference (P = .000), depressive symptoms (P = .023), lower quality of life (P = .001), and reduced pain self-efficacy (P = .006). Notably, 67.2% of those prescribed opioids as needed (PRN only) were in the high-occurrence pain flare cluster, compared with 27.9% with PRN and around-the-clock opioid prescriptions (P = .024). Individual predictors of high-occurrence pain flares were income below $30 000, unemployment, being African American, lower education level, Medicaid insurance, current opioid misuse (COMM), baseline inpatient hospital stay duration, and PRN-only opioid regimen. In the multiple predictor model, lower education level, unemployment, COMM score, extended inpatient duration, and PRN-only opioid regimen remained significant., Conclusion: In ambulatory patients with cancer, high occurrence of pain flares may be mitigated by attention to opioid prescription factors and addressing social determinants of health needs of underserved patients., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Opinion Statement: High-risk localized prostate cancer is a challenging clinical entity to treat, with heterogeneous responses to an evolving array of multidisciplinary treatment approaches. In addition, this disease state is growing in incidence due to a variety of factors, including shifting recommendations that discouraged routine prostate cancer screening. Current guidelines now incorporate an informed decision-making process for prostate cancer screening and evaluation. More work is underway to improve targeted screening for certain at-risk populations and to implement greater personalization in the use of diagnostic tools. Once diagnosed with high-risk localized disease, a multimodality treatment paradigm is warranted. Radiation-in its various forms and combinations-plays a large and continually evolving role in the management of high-risk prostate cancer, yet treatment outcomes are still suboptimal. There is a growing need to improve upon current treatment approaches, and better personalize a particular treatment recommendation based on both tumor and patient characteristics, as well as patient preference and goals of therapy. Given that treatment generally requires more than one therapy, there are notable implications on long-term quality of life, especially with respect to overlapping and cumulative side effects of local and systemic therapies, respectively. The desire for aggressive therapy to optimize cancer control outcomes must be weighed against the risk of morbidities and overtreatment and discussed with each patient so that an informed decision about treatment and care can be determined. High-level evidence to support treatment recommendations, where available, is critical for a data-driven and tailored approach to address all goals of care., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: Our purpose was to develop a summary of recommendations regarding the management of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer based on the American Urologic Association/ ASTRO Guideline on Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer., Methods: The American Urologic Association and ASTRO convened a multidisciplinary, expert panel to develop recommendations based on a systematic literature review using an a priori defined consensus-building methodology. The topics covered were risk assessment, staging, risk-based management, principles of management including active surveillance, surgery, radiation, and follow-up after treatment. Presented are recommendations from the guideline most pertinent to radiation oncologists with an additional statement on health equity, diversity, and inclusion related to guideline panel composition and the topic of clinically localized prostate cancer., Summary: Staging, risk assessment, and management options in prostate cancer have advanced over the last decade and significantly affect shared decision-making for treatment management. Current advancements and controversies discussed to guide staging, risk assessment, and treatment recommendations include the use of advanced imaging and tumor genomic profiling. An essential active surveillance strategy includes prostate-specific antigen monitoring and periodic digital rectal examination with changes triggering magnetic resonance imaging and possible biopsy thereafter and histologic progression or greater tumor volume prompting consideration of definitive local treatment. The panel recommends against routine use of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) for patients with prostate cancer after prostatectomy with negative nodes and an undetectable prostate-specific antigen, while acknowledging that patients at highest risk of recurrence were relatively poorly represented in the 3 largest randomized trials comparing adjuvant RT to early salvage and that a role may exist for adjuvant RT in selected patients at highest risk. RT for clinically localized prostate cancer has evolved rapidly, with new trial results, therapeutic combinations, and technological advances. The recommendation of moderately hypofractionated RT has not changed, and the updated guideline incorporates a conditional recommendation for the use of ultrahypofractionated treatment. Health disparities and inequities exist in the management of clinically localized prostate cancer across the continuum of care that can influence guideline concordance., Competing Interests: Disclosures All authors’ disclosure statements were reviewed before being invited and were shared with other task force members throughout development. Those disclosures are published within this document. Where potential conflicts were detected, remedial measures to address them were taken. Curtiland Deville (chair): ASTRO (Board of Directors and Council on Health Equity, Diversity & Inclusion vice chair), International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, and Physics (deputy editor). Sophia Kamran: ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium (annual meeting renal & rare tumors track chair), DAVA Oncology (honoraria, travel expense – ended 11/2022), NRG Oncology (research – PI), Prostate Cancer Foundation (research – PI), Varian (honoraria – ended 7/2022), and family member employed by Sanofi. Scott Morgan: Knight Therapeutics (research – PI), NRG Oncology (institutional research – steering committee). Neha Vapiwala: ASTRO Board of Directors (secretary/treasurer), ASTRO genitourinary resource panel and finance/audit committee (chair positions), ECOG-ACRIN (GU subcommittee cochair), Elsevier and Springer Publishing (honoraria), National Cancer Institute (research – PI), Prostate Cancer Foundation (research). Kosj Yamoah: National Institutes of Health, Department of Defense, and Prostate Cancer Foundation (all research), Janssen Research & Development (health equity advisory board). Recommendations reprinted with permission. © 2022 All rights reserved. Eastham JA, Auffenberg GB, Barocas DA, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline. Available at: https://www.auanet.org/guidelines-and-quality/guidelines/clinically-localized-prostate-cancer-aua/astro-guideline-2022. Accessed April 10, 2023. Eastham JA, Auffenberg GB, Barocas DA, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline part I: Introduction, risk assessment, staging, and risk-based management. J Urol. 2022;208:10-18. Eastham JA, Auffenberg GB, Barocas DA, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline part II: Principles of active surveillance, principles of surgery, and follow-up. J Urol. 2022;208:19-25. Eastham JA, Auffenberg GB, Barocas DA, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline part III: Principles of radiation and future directions. J Urol. 2022;208:26-33., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Radiation Oncology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Medical school acceptance rates in the United States (US) have been lower for applicants who identify as Underrepresented-in-Medicine (UiM) compared to non-UiM applicants. The gap between UiM and no-UiM groups is narrowing in recent years. Less well-studied are associations of acceptance decisions with family income and parental education. This study's purpose is to evaluate the relationships between medical school acceptance and family income, parental education status, racial/ethnic background, Grade Point Average (GPA), Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) score, and participation in extracurricular activities., Methods: This is a cross-sectional study of first-time US medical school applicants between 2017 and 2020. Acceptance rates for first-time applicants were calculated for first-generation (FG), low-income (LI), and UiM applicants. Associations of these attributes with MCAT scores, science GPAs, and seven categories of extracurricular activities were evaluated. Regression analyses estimated associations between acceptance to medical school with all variables with and without interaction terms (FG*URM, LI*URM, FG*LI)., Results: The overall acceptance rate for first-time applicants from 2017-2020 was 45.3%. The acceptance rates among FG, LI and UiM applicants were 37.9%, 39.6% and 44.2%, respectively. In univariable logistic regression analyses, acceptance was negatively associated with being FG (OR: 0.68, CI: 0.67-0.70), LI (OR: 0.70, CI: 0.69-0.72), and UiM (OR: 0.95, CI: 0.93-0.97). In multivariable regression, acceptance was most strongly associated with science GPA (OR: 7.15, CI: 6.78-7.54 for the highest quintile) and UiM (OR: 5.56, CI: 5.48-5.93) status and MCAT score (OR: 1.19, CI: 1.18-1.19), FG (OR: 1.14, CI: 1.10-1.18), and most extracurricular activities. Including interaction terms revealed a negative association between acceptance and LI (OR:0.90, CI: 0.87-0.94) and FG was no longer significant (OR:1.10, CI:0.96-1.08)., Conclusions: Collectively these results suggest medical school admissions committees may be relying on holistic admission practices. While MCAT and GPA scores continue to predict acceptance, individuals from racially and ethnically UiM backgrounds have favorable odds of acceptance when controlling for MCAT and GPA. However, these positive associations were not seen for low-income and first-generation applicants. Additional preparation for college and the MCAT for these latter groups may help further diversify the medical profession., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Importance: Novel hormonal therapy (NHT) agents have been shown to prolong overall survival in numerous randomized clinical trials for patients with advanced prostate cancer (PCa). There is a paucity of data regarding the pattern of use of these agents in patients from different racial and ethnic groups., Objective: To assess racial and ethnic disparities in the use of NHT in patients with advanced PCa., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study comprised all men diagnosed with de novo advanced PCa (distant metastatic [M1], regional [N1M0], and high-risk localized [N0M0] per Systemic Therapy in Advancing or Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Evaluation of Drug Efficacy [STAMPEDE] trial criteria) with Medicare Part A, B, and D coverage between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2017, in a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database including prescription drug records. Data analysis took place from January through May 2023., Exposures: Race and ethnicity (Black [non-Hispanic], Hispanic, White, or other [Alaska Native, American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander, or not otherwise specified and unknown]) abstracted from the SEER data fields., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was receipt of an NHT agent (abiraterone, enzalutamide, apalutamide, or darolutamide) using a time-to-event approach., Results: The study included 3748 men (median age, 75 years [IQR, 70-81 years]). A total of 312 (8%) were Black; 263 (7%), Hispanic; 2923 (78%), White; and 250 (7%) other race and ethnicity. The majority of patients had M1 disease (2135 [57%]) followed by high-risk N0M0 (1095 [29%]) and N1M0 (518 [14%]) disease. Overall, 1358 patients (36%) received at least 1 administration of NHT. White patients had the highest 2-year NHT utilization rate (27%; 95% CI, 25%-28%) followed by Hispanic patients (25%; 95% CI, 20%-31%) and patients with other race or ethnicity (23%; 95% CI, 18%-29%), with Black patients having the lowest rate (20%; 95% CI, 16%-25%). Black patients had significantly lower use of NHT compared with White patients, which persisted at 5 years (37% [95% CI, 31%-43%] vs 44% [95% CI, 42%-46%]; P = .02) and beyond. However, there was no significant difference between White patients and Hispanic patients or patients with other race or ethnicity in NHT utilization (eg, 5 years: Hispanic patients, 38% [95% CI, 32%-46%]; patients with other race and ethnicity: 41% [95% CI, 35%-49%]). Trends of lower utilization among Black patients persisted in the patients with M1 disease (eg, vs White patients at 5 years: 51% [95% CI, 44%-59%] vs 55% [95% CI, 53%-58%]). After adjusting for patient, disease, and sociodemographic factors in multivariable analysis, Black patients continued to have a significantly lower likelihood of NHT initiation (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.61-0.94, P = .01)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with advanced PCa, receipt of NHT agents was not uniform by race, with decreased use observed in Black patients compared with the other racial and ethnic groups, likely due to multifactorial obstacles. Future studies are needed to identify strategies to address the disparities in the use of these survival-prolonging therapies in Black patients.

Background: Vast differences in barriers to care exist among Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) groups and may manifest as disparities in stage at presentation and access to treatment. Thus, we characterized AANHPI patients with stage 0-IV colon cancer and examined differences in (1) stage at presentation and (2) time to surgery relative to white patients., Patients and Methods: We assessed all patients in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) with stage 0-IV colon cancer from 2004 to 2016 who identified as white, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Native Hawaiian, Korean, Vietnamese, Laotian, Hmong, Kampuchean, Thai, Asian Indian or Pakistani, and Pacific Islander. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression defined adjusted odds ratios (AORs), with 95% confidence intervals (CI), of (1) patients presenting with advanced stage colon cancer and (2) patients with stage 0-III colon cancer receiving surgery at ≥ 60 days versus 30-59 days versus < 30 days postdiagnosis, adjusting for sociodemographic/clinical factors., Results: Among 694,876 patients, Japanese [AOR 1.08 (95% CI 1.01-1.15), p < 0.05], Filipino [AOR 1.17 (95% CI 1.09-1.25), p < 0.001], Korean [AOR 1.09 (95% CI 1.01-1.18), p < 0.05], Laotian [AOR 1.51 (95% CI 1.17-1.95), p < 0.01], Kampuchean [AOR 1.33 (95% CI 1.04-1.70), p < 0.01], Thai [AOR 1.60 (95% CI 1.22-2.10), p = 0.001], and Pacific Islander [AOR 1.41 (95% CI 1.20-1.67), p < 0.001] patients were more likely to present with more advanced colon cancer compared with white patients. Chinese [AOR 1.27 (95% CI 1.17-1.38), p < 0.001], Japanese [AOR 1.23 (95% CI 1.10-1.37], p < 0.001], Filipino [AOR 1.36 (95% CI 1.22-1.52), p < 0.001], Korean [AOR 1.16 (95% CI 1.02-1.32), p < 0.05], and Vietnamese [AOR 1.55 (95% CI 1.36-1.77), p < 0.001] patients were more likely to experience greater time to surgery than white patients. Disparities persisted when comparing among AANHPI subgroups., Conclusions: Our findings reveal key disparities in stage at presentation and time to surgery by race/ethnicity among AANHPI subgroups. Heterogeneity upon disaggregation underscores the importance of examining and addressing access barriers and clinical disparities., (© 2023. Society of Surgical Oncology.)

Purpose: In 2021, the Advanced Practice Radiation Therapy Working Group (APRTWG) was established in the United States as a grassroots alliance of multidisciplinary radiation oncology professionals-radiation therapists, physicians, dosimetrists, and administrators-located across the country, interested in studying and establishing the Advanced Practice Radiation Therapist (APRT) level of practice in the United States. The APRT model has shown success in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Singapore, and other countries, documenting the value of the APRT to the quality and advancement of clinical care. In the United States, the APRTWG seeks to coordinate activities, align resources, and drive the national agenda to collectively develop and define novel models of care using APRT in line with the evolving needs of patients and the radiation therapy profession. This environmental scan aims to examine the context of radiation oncology medical practice in the United States to inform pathways ahead for a proposed APRT model through a Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental, and Legal (PESTEL) analysis., Methods and Materials: A literature search was conducted to understand the chronological timeline of the development of APRT during the past 25 years. Items that included the activities, scope of practice, and implementation of APRT nationally and internationally were identified. Papers describing advanced practitioner roles that are commonly found in the multidisciplinary team in radiation oncology both in the United States and internationally, such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners, were excluded., Results: Despite the environmental scan outcome, it is acknowledged that data collation and analysis was not as robust as that anticipated by undertaking a systematic review. Papers were identified by the lead author that aligned with each of the PESTEL factors. Defined broadly, a new care model can adjust how health services are delivered by incorporating best practices in patient care for a specific population, person, or patient cohort. As patients enter different stages of their disease, the purpose of a new model is to provide individuals with the right care, at the right time, by the right team, in the right place. It is clear that the opportunity for positive change and impact on the current state of practice in radiation oncology exists., Conclusion: The environmental scan findings demonstrate the complexities associated with implementing APRT in the United States, with multifactorial political, environmental, societal, technological, economic, and legal aspects to consider. The APRTWG will continue to lead and participate in such activities to demonstrate and identify APRT role opportunities in the United States and drive the nationwide implementation of the APRT level of practice in this country., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Radiation oncology (RO) has seen declines in Medicare reimbursement (MCR) in the past decade under the current fee-for-service model. Although studies have explored decline in reimbursement at a per-code level, to our knowledge there are no recent studies analyzing changes in MCR over time for common RO treatment courses. By analyzing changes in MCR for common treatment courses, our study had 3 objectives: (1) to provide practitioners and policymakers with estimates of recent reimbursement changes for common treatment courses; (2) to provide an estimate of how reimbursement will change in the future under the current fee-for-service model if current trends continue; and (3) to provide a baseline for treatment episodes in the event that the episode-based Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model is eventually implemented. Specifically, we quantified inflation- and utilization-adjusted changes in reimbursement for 16 common radiation therapy (RT) treatment courses from 2010 to 2020. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary databases were used to obtain reimbursement for all RO procedures in 2010, 2015, and 2020 for free-standing facilities. Inflation-adjusted average reimbursement (AR) per billing instance was calculated for each Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System code using 2020 dollars. For each year, the billing frequency of each code was multiplied by the AR per code. Results were summed per RT course per year, and AR for RT courses were compared. Sixteen common RO courses for head and neck, breast, prostate, lung, and palliative RT were analyzed. AR decreased for all 16 courses from 2010 to 2020. From 2015 to 2020, the only course that increased in AR was palliative 2-dimensional 10-fraction 30 Gy, which increased by 0.4%. Courses using intensity modulated RT saw the largest AR decline from 2010 to 2020, ranging from 38% to 39%. We report significant declines in reimbursement from 2010 to 2020 for common RO courses, with the largest declines for intensity modulated RT. Policymakers should consider the significant cuts to reimbursement that have already occurred when considering future reimbursement adjustment under the current fee-for-service model or when considering mandatory adoption of a new payment system with further cuts and the negative effect of such cuts on quality and access to care., Competing Interests: Disclosures Minesh P. Mehta reports consulting relationships with honoraria with Karyopharm Therapeutics, Mevion Medical Systems, ZappRx, Sapience Therapeutics, and Xoft; a board of directors position with stock options with Oncoceutics; a data safety monitoring board position for Monteris; Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation patent 14/934,27, “Topical Vasoconstrictor Preparations and Methods for Protecting Cells During Cancer Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy”; and uncompensated relationships with Xcision Medical Systems and ViewRay (outside submitted work). Carlos A. Perez reports consultant stipend from Mevion Medical Systems and ViewRay Corp (outside submitted work). Jeff D. Bradley reports AstraZeneca – honoraria; Mevion Medical Systems – honoraria; Varian Medical Systems – advisory role; and Genentech – advisory role (outside submitted work). Brian C. Baumann reports service on a medical advisory panel for Sanofi/Regeneron, Boston Scientific, and Galera Therapeutics as well as honoraria from Mevion, consulting work for Boston Scientific and Varian, and research funding from Varian (outside the submitted work)., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Hospitals account for approximately 6% of United States' gross domestic product. We examined the association between hospital competition and outcomes in elderly with localized prostate cancer (PCa). We also assessed if race moderated this association., Methods: Retrospective study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) - Medicare database. Cohort included fee-for-service, African American and white men aged ≥ 66, diagnosed with localized PCa between 1998 and 2011 and their claims between 1997 and 2016. We used Hirschman-Herfindahl index (HHI) to measure of hospital competition. Outcomes were emergency room (ER) visits, hospitalizations, Medicare expenditure and mortality assessed in acute survivorship phase (two years post-PCa diagnosis), and long-term mortality. We used Generalized Linear Models for analyzing expenditure, Poisson models for ER visits and hospitalizations, and Cox models for mortality. We used propensity score to minimize bias., Results: Among 253,176 patients, percent change in incident rate of ER visit was 17% higher for one unit increase in HHI (IRR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.15-1.19). Incident rate of ER was 24% higher for whites and 48% higher for African Americans. For one unit increase in HHI, hazard of short-term all-cause mortality was 7% higher for whites and 11% lower for African Americans. The hazard of long-term all-cause mortality was 10% higher for whites and 13% higher for African Americans., Conclusions: Lower hospital competition was associated with impaired outcomes of localized PCa care. Magnitude of impairment was higher for African Americans, compared to whites. Future research will explore process through which competition affects outcomes and racial disparity., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Fatigue is a common symptom associated with cancer treatments. Brain mechanisms underlying cancer-related fatigue (CRF) and its progression following therapy are poorly understood. Previous studies have suggested a role of the default mode network (DMN) in fatigue. In this study we used arterial spin labeling (ASL) perfusion functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and compared resting cerebral blood flow (CBF) differences in the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), a core hub of the DMN, between 16 patients treated with radiation therapy (RAT) for prostate (9 males) or breast (7 females) cancer and 18 healthy controls (HC). Resting CBF in patients was also measured immediately after the performance of a fatiguing 20-min psychomotor vigilance task (PVT). Twelve of 16 cancer patients were further followed between 3 and 7 months after completion of the RAT (post-RAT). Patients reported elevated fatigue on RAT in comparison to post-RAT, but no change in sleepiness, suggesting that the underlying neural mechanisms of CRF progression are distinct from those regulating sleep drive progression. Compared to HC, patients showed significantly increased resting CBF in the PCC and the elevated PCC CBF persisted during the follow up visit. Post-PVT, but not pre-PVT, resting CBF changes in the PCC correlated with fatigue changes after therapy in patients with CRF, suggesting that PCC CBF following a fatiguing cognitive task may be a biomarker for CRF recovery., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Raizen, Bhavsar, Keenan, Liu, Kegelman, Chao, Vapiwala and Rao.)

Inter- and intra-fractional prostate motion can deteriorate the dose distribution in extremely hypofractionated intensity-modulated proton therapy. We used verification CTs and prostate motion data calculated from 1024 intra-fractional prostate motion records to develop a voxel-wise based 4-dimensional method, which had a time resolution of 1 s, to assess the dose impact of prostate motion. An example of 100 fractional simulations revealed that motion had minimal impact on planning dose, the accumulated dose in 95 % of the scenarios fulfilled the clinical goals for target coverage (D95 > 37.5 Gy). This method can serve as a complementary measure in clinical setting to guarantee plan quality., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Over the past decade, concerns have arisen in radiation oncology regarding potential workforce supply and demand imbalance. The American Society for Radiation Oncology commissioned an independent analysis in 2022, looking at supply and demand in the United States radiation oncology workforce and projecting future trends for 2025 and 2030. The final report, titled Projected Supply and Demand for Radiation Oncologists in the U.S. in 2025 and 2030, is now available. The analysis included evaluating radiation oncologist (RO) supply (new graduates, exits from the specialty), potential changes in demand (growth of Medicare beneficiaries, hypofractionation, loss of indications, new indications) as well as RO productivity (growth of work relative value units [wRVUs] produced), and demand per beneficiary. The results demonstrated a relative balance between radiation oncology supply and demand for radiation services; the growth in ROs was balanced by the rapid growth of Medicare beneficiaries over the same period. The primary factors driving the model were found to be growth of Medicare beneficiaries and change in wRVU productivity, with hypofractionation and loss of indication having only a moderate effect; although the most likely scenario was a balance of workforce supply and demand, scenarios did demonstrate the possibility of over- and undersupply. Oversupply may become a concern if RO wRVU productivity reaches the highest region; beyond 2030, this is also possible if growth in RO supply does not parallel Medicare beneficiary growth, which is projected to decline and will require corresponding supply adjustment. Limitations of the analysis included uncertainty regarding the true number of ROs, the lack of inclusion of most technical reimbursement and its effect as well as failing to account for stereotactic body radiation therapy. A modeling tool is available to allow individuals to evaluate different scenarios. Moving forward, continued study will be needed to evaluate trends (particularly wRVU productivity and Medicare beneficiary growth) to allow for continued assessment of workforce supply and demand in radiation oncology., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Disproportionate sex, racial, and ethnic diversity remains in the radiation oncology physician workforce despite widespread awareness and longitudinal efforts to improve representation. In this collaborative review, we define the rationale and components of holistic review and how it can be best used to provide a comprehensive evaluation of applicants to residency programs in radiation oncology. We initially discuss the current state of diversity in the field of radiation oncology and highlight the components of the residency selection process that may serve to perpetuate existing biases. Subsequently, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and Association of American Medical Colleges holistic review framework is reviewed in detail to demonstrate the balanced assessment of potential applicants. The implementation of holistic review in medical school and residency selection to date is examined to underscore the potential value of holistic review in the radiation oncology residency selection process. Finally, recommendations for the practical implementation of holistic review in radiation oncology trainee selection are outlined., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate United States (US) radiation oncology (RO) program directors' (PDs) attitudes and practices regarding racial/ethnic diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) to better understand potential effects on underrepresented in medicine (UIM) residents in RO., Methods and Materials: A 28-item survey was developed using the validated Ethnic Harassment Experiences Scale and the Daily Life Experiences subscale, as well as input from DEI leaders in RO. The survey was institutional review board-approved and administered to RO PDs. PDs were provided with the American Association of Medical Colleges definition of UIM, that is, "Underrepresented in medicine means those racial and ethnic populations that are underrepresented in the medical profession relative to their numbers in the general population." Descriptive statistics were used in analysis., Results: The response rate was 71% (64/90). Institutional Culture and Beliefs: 42% responded that they had a department DEI director. A minority (17%, n = 11) agreed "I believe that people from UIM backgrounds have equal access to quality tertiary education in the US." The majority (97%, n = 62) agreed "My program values residents from UIM backgrounds." Support and Resources: The majority (78%, n = 50) agreed "My program has resources in place to assist/provide support for resident physicians from UIM backgrounds." Interview and Recruitment: Most PDs (53%) had not taken part in activities aimed at recruiting UIM residents and 17% had interviewed no UIM applicants in the past 5 years for residency. Resident Experiences of Racism: 17% (n = 11) agreed "UIM residents in my program have reported incidents of racism to me," and 28% (n = 18) agreed "I believe that UIM residents in my program have been treated differently because of their race/ethnicity by faculty, staff, coresidents or patients.", Conclusions: Most PDs reported that they did not believe that UIM residents were treated differently in their department because of their race/ethnicity, and only a minority had received reports of racial discrimination experienced by residents. These data contrast resident experiences and suggest a disconnect between DEI perceptions and resident experiences among US RO PDs that should be addressed through increased programmatic action and evaluation., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: In this study, radiation oncology residents were surveyed on perceptions of diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in their residency training programs., Methods and Materials: A 23-item survey was developed by the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee resident members and faculty advisors. The survey was divided into 4 sections: institutional culture, support and resources, interview and recruitment, and experiences of bias. The survey was sent individually to residents from all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited radiation oncology programs., Results: The survey was issued to 757 residents. A total of 319 residents completed the survey, for a response rate of 42%. All postgraduate years and geographic regions were represented. Significant racial, ethnic, and gender differences were present in survey response patterns. White residents (94%, 164 of 174) and male residents (96%, 186 of 194) were more likely to strongly agree/agree that they were treated with respect by their colleagues and their coworkers than other racial groups (P < .005) or gender groups (P < .008). Only 3% (5 of 174) of White residents strongly agreed/agreed that they were treated unfairly because of their race/ethnicity, while 31% (5 of 16) of Black residents and 10% (9 of 94) of Asian residents strongly agreed/agreed (P < .0001). Similarly, Hispanic residents were more likely to strongly agree/agree (24%, 5 of 21) than non-Hispanic residents (7%, 20 of 298) (P = .003). Regarding mentorship, there were no differences by gender or ethnicity. There were differences by race in residents reporting that they had a supportive mentor (P = .022), with 89% (154 of 174) of White residents who strongly agreed/agreed, 88% (14 of 16) of Black residents, and 91% of Asian residents (86 of 94)., Conclusions: This survey reveals that experiences of support, mentorship, inclusion, and bias vary significantly among radiation oncology residents based on race, ethnicity, and gender. Radiation oncology has opportunity for growth to ensure an equitable experience for all residents., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)