Curtiland Deville

Treatment Guidelines for Preoperative Radiation Therapy for Retroperitoneal Sarcoma: Preliminary Consensus of an International Expert Panel.

PURPOSE Evidence for external beam radiation therapy (RT) as part of treatment for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) is limited. Preoperative RT is the subject of a current randomized trial, but the results will not be available for many years. In the meantime, many practitioners use preoperative RT for RPS, and although this approach is used in practice, there are no radiation treatment guidelines. An international expert panel was convened to develop consensus treatment guidelines for preoperative RT for RPS. METHODS AND MATERIALS An expert panel of 15 academic radiation oncologists who specialize in the treatment of sarcoma was assembled. A systematic review of reports related to RT for RPS, RT for extremity sarcoma, and RT-related toxicities for organs at risk was performed. Due to the paucity of high-quality published data on the subject of RT for RPS, consensus recommendations were based largely on expert opinion derived from clinical experience and extrapolation of relevant published reports. It is intended that these clinical practice guidelines be updated as pertinent data become available. RESULTS Treatment guidelines for preoperative RT for RPS are presented. CONCLUSIONS An international panel of radiation oncologists who specialize in sarcoma reached consensus guidelines for preoperative RT for RPS. Many of the recommendations are based on expert opinion because of the absence of higher level evidence and, thus, are best regarded as preliminary. We emphasize that the role of preoperative RT for RPS has not been proven, and we await data from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) study of preoperative radiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for patients with RPS. Further data are also anticipated pertaining to normal tissue dose constraints, particularly for bowel tolerance. Nonetheless, as we await these data, the guidelines herein can be used to establish treatment uniformity to aid future assessments of efficacy and toxicity.

Diversity in Graduate Medical Education in the United States by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex, 2012

Author Contributions: Ms Dierickx had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Drs Cohen and Chambaere contributed equally as last author. Study concept and design: All authors. Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors. Drafting of the manuscript: Dierickx, Cohen, Chambaere. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors. Statistical analysis: Dierickx, Chambaere. Obtained funding: Deliens, Cohen. Administrative, technical, or material support: Deliens. Study supervision: Deliens, Cohen, Chambaere.

Radical Prostatectomy, External Beam Radiotherapy, or External Beam Radiotherapy With Brachytherapy Boost and Disease Progression and Mortality in Patients With Gleason Score 9-10 Prostate Cancer

Importance The optimal treatment for Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer is unknown. Objective To compare clinical outcomes of patients with Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer after definitive treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants Retrospective cohort study in 12 tertiary centers (11 in the United States, 1 in Norway), with 1809 patients treated between 2000 and 2013. Exposures Radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with androgen deprivation therapy, or EBRT plus brachytherapy boost (EBRT+BT) with androgen deprivation therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was prostate cancer–specific mortality; distant metastasis-free survival and overall survival were secondary outcomes. Results Of 1809 men, 639 underwent RP, 734 EBRT, and 436 EBRT+BT. Median ages were 61, 67.7, and 67.5 years; median follow-up was 4.2, 5.1, and 6.3 years, respectively. By 10 years, 91 RP, 186 EBRT, and 90 EBRT+BT patients had died. Adjusted 5-year prostate cancer–specific mortality rates were RP, 12% (95% CI, 8%-17%); EBRT, 13% (95% CI, 8%-19%); and EBRT+BT, 3% (95% CI, 1%-5%). EBRT+BT was associated with significantly lower prostate cancer–specific mortality than either RP or EBRT (cause-specific HRs of 0.38 [95% CI, 0.21-0.68] and 0.41 [95% CI, 0.24-0.71]). Adjusted 5-year incidence rates of distant metastasis were RP, 24% (95% CI, 19%-30%); EBRT, 24% (95% CI, 20%-28%); and EBRT+BT, 8% (95% CI, 5%-11%). EBRT+BT was associated with a significantly lower rate of distant metastasis (propensity-score-adjusted cause-specific HRs of 0.27 [95% CI, 0.17-0.43] for RP and 0.30 [95% CI, 0.19-0.47] for EBRT). Adjusted 7.5-year all-cause mortality rates were RP, 17% (95% CI, 11%-23%); EBRT, 18% (95% CI, 14%-24%); and EBRT+BT, 10% (95% CI, 7%-13%). Within the first 7.5 years of follow-up, EBRT+BT was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality (cause-specific HRs of 0.66 [95% CI, 0.46-0.96] for RP and 0.61 [95% CI, 0.45-0.84] for EBRT). After the first 7.5 years, the corresponding HRs were 1.16 (95% CI, 0.70-1.92) and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.57-1.32). No significant differences in prostate cancer–specific mortality, distant metastasis, or all-cause mortality (⩽7.5 and >7.5 years) were found between men treated with EBRT or RP (cause-specific HRs of 0.92 [95% CI, 0.67-1.26], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.70-1.14], 1.07 [95% CI, 0.80-1.44], and 1.34 [95% CI, 0.85-2.11]). Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with Gleason score 9-10 prostate cancer, treatment with EBRT+BT with androgen deprivation therapy was associated with significantly better prostate cancer–specific mortality and longer time to distant metastasis compared with EBRT with androgen deprivation therapy or with RP.

Attracting Future Radiation Oncologists: An Analysis of the National Resident Matching Program Data Trends From 2004 to 2015

PURPOSE A significant physician shortage has been projected to occur by 2025, and demand for oncologists is expected to outpace supply to an even greater degree. In response to this, many have called to increase the number of radiation oncology residency positions. The purpose of this study is to evaluate National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) data for the number of residency positions between 2004 and 2015 as well as the number and caliber of applicants for those positions and to compare radiation oncology to all residency specialties. METHODS NRMP data for all specialties participating in the match, including radiation oncology, were assessed over time examining the number of programs participating in the match, the number of positions offered, and the ratio of applicants to positions in the match from 2004 to 2015. RESULTS From 2004 to 2015, the number of total programs participating in the match has increased by 26.7%, compared to the increase of 28.6% in the number of radiation oncology programs from during the same time period. The total number of positions offered in the match increased by 53.4%, whereas radiation oncology positions increased by 56.3%, during the same time period. The ratio of applicants (defined as those selecting a specialty as their first or only choice) to positions for all specialties has fluctuated over this time period and has gone from 1.21 to 1.15, whereas radiation oncology experienced a decrease from 1.45 to 1.14. CONCLUSIONS NRMP data suggest that senior medical student applications to radiation oncology are decreasing compared to those of other specialties. If we hope to continue to attract the best and brightest to enter our field, we must continue to support early exposure to radiation oncology, positive educational experiences, and dedicated mentorship to interested medical students.

Uptake of 18F-DCFPyL in Paget’s Disease of Bone, an Important Potential Pitfall in Clinical Interpretation of PSMA PET Studies

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted positron emission tomography (PET) imaging is an emerging technique for evaluating patients with prostate cancer (PCa) in a variety of clinical contexts. As with any new imaging modality, there are interpretive pitfalls that are beginning to be recognized. In this report, we describe the findings in a 63-year-old male with biochemically recurrent PCa after radical prostatectomy who was imaged with 2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[18F]fluoro-pyridine-3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid ([18F]DCFPyL), a small-molecule inhibitor of PSMA. Diffuse radiotracer uptake was noted throughout the sacrum, corresponding to imaging findings on contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT), bone scan, and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging consistent with Pagets disease of bone. The uptake of [18F]DCFPyL in Pagets disease most likely results from hyperemia and increased radiotracer delivery. In light of the overlap in patients affected by PCa and Pagets disease, it is important for nuclear medicine physicians and radiologists to be aware of the potential for this diagnostic pitfall when interpreting PSMA PET/CT scans. Correlating findings on conventional imaging such as diagnostic CT and bone scan can help confirm the diagnosis.

Diversity, Inclusion, and Representation: It Is Time to Act

Although the available pool of qualified underrepresented minority and women medical school graduates has expanded in recent decades, their representation in the radiological professions has improved only marginally. Recognizing this deficit in diversity, many professional medical societies, including the ACR, have incorporated these values as core elements of their missions and instituted programs that address previously identified barriers to a more diverse workforce. These barriers include insufficient exposure of underrepresented minorities and women to radiology and radiation oncology; misperception of these specialties as non-patient care and not community service; unconscious bias; and delayed preparation of candidates to compete successfully for residency positions. Critical success factors in expanding diversity and inclusion are well identified both outside and within the radiological professions; these are reviewed in the current communication. Radiology leaders are positioned to lead the profession in expanding the diversity and improving the inclusiveness of our professional workforce in service to an increasingly diverse society and patient population.

Underrepresentation of Women and Minorities in the United States IR Academic Physician Workforce

PURPOSE To assess the United States interventional radiology (IR) academic physician workforce diversity and comparative specialties. METHODS Public registries were used to assess demographic differences among 2012 IR faculty and fellows, diagnostic radiology (DR) faculty and residents, DR subspecialty fellows (pediatric, abdominal, neuroradiology, and musculoskeletal), vascular surgery and interventional cardiology trainees, and 2010 US medical school graduates and US Census using binomial tests with .001 significance level (Bonferroni adjustment for multiple comparisons). Significant trends in IR physician representation were evaluated from 1992 to 2012. RESULTS Women (15.4%), blacks (2.0%), and Hispanics (6.2%) were significantly underrepresented as IR fellows compared with the US population. Women were underrepresented as IR (7.3%) versus DR (27.8%) faculty and IR fellows (15.4%) versus medical school graduates (48.3%), DR residents (27.8%), pediatric radiology fellows (49.4%), and vascular surgery trainees (27.7%) (all P < .001). IR ranked last in female representation among radiologic subspecialty fellows. Blacks (1.8%, 2.1%, respectively, for IR faculty and fellows); Hispanics (1.8%, 6.2%); and combined American Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders (1.8%, 0) showed no significant differences in representation as IR fellows compared with IR faculty, DR residents, other DR fellows, or interventional cardiology or vascular surgery trainees. Over 20 years, there was no significant increase in female or black representation as IR fellows or faculty. CONCLUSIONS Women, blacks, and Hispanics are underrepresented in the IR academic physician workforce relative to the US population. Given prevalent health care disparities and an increasingly diverse society, research and training efforts should address IR physician workforce diversity.

Adjuvant radiation therapy for bladder cancer: A dosimetric comparison of techniques

Trials of adjuvant radiation after cystectomy are under development. There are no studies comparing radiation techniques to inform trial design. This study assesses the effect on bowel and rectal dose of 3 different modalities treating 2 proposed alternative clinical target volumes (CTVs). Contours of the bowel, rectum, CTV-pelvic sidewall (common/internal/external iliac and obturator nodes), and CTV-comprehensive (CTV-pelvic sidewall plus cystectomy bed and presacral regions) were drawn on simulation images of 7 post-cystectomy patients. We optimized 3-dimensional conformal radiation (3-D), intensity-modulated radiation (IMRT), and single-field uniform dose (SFUD) scanning proton plans for each CTV. Mixed models regression was used to compare plans for bowel and rectal volumes exposed to 35% (V35%), 65% (V65%), and 95% (V95%) of the prescribed dose. For any given treatment modality, treating the larger CTV-comprehensive volume compared with treating only the CTV-pelvic sidewall nodes significantly increased rectal dose (V35% rectum, V65% rectum, and V95% rectum; p < 0.001 for all comparisons), but it did not produce significant differences in bowel dose (V95% bowel, V65% bowel, or V35% bowel). The 3-D plans, compared with both the IMRT and the SFUD plans, had a significantly greater V65% bowel and V95% bowel for each proposed CTV (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). The effect of treatment modality on rectal dosimetry differed by CTV, but it generally favored the IMRT and the SFUD plans over the 3-D plans. Comparison of the IMRT plan vs the SFUD plan yielded mixed results with no consistent advantage for the SFUD plan over the IMRT plan. Targeting a CTV that spares the cystectomy bed and presacral region may marginally improve rectal toxicity but would not be expected to improve the bowel toxicity associated with any given modality of adjuvant radiation. Using the IMRT or the SFUD plans instead of the 3-D conformal plan may improve both bowel and rectal toxicity.

The pervasive crisis of diminishing radiation therapy access for vulnerable populations in the United States, part 1: African-American patients

Introduction African Americans experience the highest burden of cancer incidence and mortality in the United States and have been persistently less likely to receive interventional care, even when such care has been proven superior to conservative management by randomized controlled trials. The presence of disparities in access to radiation therapy (RT) for African American cancer patients has rarely been examined in an expansive fashion. Methods and materials An extensive literature search was performed using the PubMed database to examine studies investigating disparities in RT access for African Americans. Results A total of 55 studies were found, spanning 11 organ systems. Disparities in access to RT for African Americans were most prominently study in cancers of the breast (23 studies), prostate (7 studies), gynecologic system (5 studies), and hematologic system (5 studies). Disparities in RT access for African Americans were prevalent regardless of organ system studied and often occurred independently of socioeconomic status. Fifty of 55 studies (91%) involved analysis of a population-based database such as Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Result (SEER; 26 studies), SEER-Medicare (5 studies), National Cancer Database (3 studies), or a state tumor registry (13 studies). Conclusions African Americans in the United States have diminished access to RT compared with Caucasian patients, independent of but often in concert with low socioeconomic status. These findings underscore the importance of finding systemic and systematic solutions to address these inequalities to reduce the barriers that patient race provides in receipt of optimal cancer care.

Industry Funding Among Leadership in Medical Oncology and Radiation Oncology in 2015

PURPOSE To quantify and determine the relationship between oncology departmental/division heads and private industry vis-à-vis potential financial conflict of interests (FCOIs) as publicly reported by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments database. METHODS AND MATERIALS We extracted the names of the chairs/chiefs in medical oncology (MO) and chairs of radiation oncology (RO) for 81 different institutions with both RO and MO training programs as reported by the Association of American Medical Colleges. For each leader, the amount of consulting fees and research payments received in 2015 was determined. Logistic modeling was used to assess associations between the 2 endpoints of receiving a consulting fee and receiving a research payment with various institution-specific and practitioner-specific variables included as covariates: specialty, sex, National Cancer Institute designation, PhD status, and geographic region. RESULTS The majority of leaders in MO were reported to have received consulting fees or research payments (69.5%) compared with a minority of RO chairs (27.2%). Among those receiving payments, the average (range) consulting fee was