Search

Purpose: Total package time, or the time from diagnosis to completion of definitive treatment, has been associated with outcomes for a variety of tumor sites, but especially to head and neck (HN) cancer. Patients with HN cancer often undergo a complex diagnosis and treatment process involving multiple disciplines both within and outside of oncology. This complexity can lead to longer package times, and each involved discipline has the responsibility to maintain an efficient and effective process. Strategic intervention to improve package time must involve not only new technology or tools, but also “soft” components such as accountability, motivation, and leadership. This combination is necessary to truly optimize radiation therapy for HN cancer, leading to shorter total package times for these patients. Methods and Materials: Two interventions were strategically executed to improve radiation therapy workflow: upgrade of the treatment planning system and implementation of an automated patient management and accountability system. The radiation therapy–related timelines of 112 patients with HN cancer treated over 2 years were reviewed, and the average time differences were compared between the patient populations before and after the strategic interventions. Results: Purely upgrading the treatment planning system did not show significant improvements, but when combined with the patient management system, significant improvement in radiation-related package time can be noted for every time point. The overall reduction of radiation-related package time was statistically significant at 22.85 days (P = .002). Conclusions: On face value, the patient management system could be credited as responsible for the improvement, but on qualitative analysis, it is noted that the new system is only a tool that can be ignored or underused. Owing to the addition of important “soft” components such as accountability, motivation, and leadership, the patient management system was optimized and implemented in such a manner as to have the desired effect.

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

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

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

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

Objectives: Stereotactic radiation surgery (SRS) and hypofractionated stereotactic radiation surgery (HF-SRS) have become an alternative to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in the adjuvant treatment of meningiomas. The purpose of this study was to identify national treatment patterns and survival outcomes for meningiomas on the basis of radiation treatment modality in the adjuvant setting. Methods and materials: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with meningioma diagnosed between 2010 and 2012. World Health Organization grade I disease with subtotal resection and all cases of grade II disease regardless of the extent of the resection were included. Logistic regression was used to determine factors that were associated with receipt of SRS/HF-SRS compared with EBRT. Cox regression was used to determine covariables associated with differences in overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 802 patients met the inclusion criteria of which 173 patients received SRS/HF-SRS (22%) and 629 patients (78%) received EBRT. The 3-year OS rate was 97.3% for the SRS/HF-SRS group and 93.4% for the EBRT group (P = .018). On subgroup analysis by grade, for grade I the 3-year OS rate was 98.3% for the SRS/HF-SRS group versus 96.7% for the EBRT group (P = .117). For grade II disease, the 3-year OS rate was 94.4% in the SRS/HF-SRS group versus 92.4% in the EBRT group (P = .199). On multivariable analysis, World Health Organization grade II histology (odds ratio [OR]: 0.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-0.56; P

Background: It is recognized that various radiation-induced malignancies often follow childhood radiotherapy. Radiation-induced neoplasms have been shown to occur with increased frequency in syndromes due to mutated tumor suppressor genes. There exist no recommendations for the management of cancer patients with germline APC gene mutations. Preclinical data suggest that APC gene mutations cause enhanced radiosensitivity, but no clinical observations exist that show that patients with this mutation are at higher risk for radiation-induced malignancies. Results: We report the case of a 32-year-old man with a genetic diagnosis of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) who initially presented at age 10 with a medulloblastoma treated with radiotherapy and surgery. Radiation-induced papillary thyroid carcinoma followed 13 years later. Finally, radiation-induced soft tissue osteosarcoma occurred with widespread metastasis 20 years thereafter. Conclusions: This is the first report of 2 malignancies in the prior radiotherapy fields of a patient with a genetic diagnosis of FAP. More important, this suggests that APC-defective cells are at an enhanced sensitivity to the carcinogenic effects of radiotherapy compared with APC-proficient cells. This could argue for genetic screening in affected members of these families and for creation of treatment recommendations to more seriously consider the risks of radiation therapy.