Raymond Mailhot Vega

Cost effectiveness of proton therapy compared with photon therapy in the management of pediatric medulloblastoma.

Proton therapy has been a hotly contested issue in both scientific publications and lay media. Proponents cite the modalitys ability to spare healthy tissue, but critics claim the benefit gained from its use does not validate its cost compared with photon therapy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of proton therapy versus photon therapy in the management of pediatric medulloblastoma.

Cost effectiveness of proton versus photon radiation therapy with respect to the risk of growth hormone deficiency in children.

Proton therapy in pediatrics may improve the risk/benefit profile of radiotherapy at a greater upfront financial cost, but it may prove to be cost effective if chronic medical complications can be avoided. Tools to assist with decision making are needed to aid in selecting pediatric patients for protons, and cost‐effectiveness models can provide an objective method for this.

Breast, chest wall, and nodal irradiation with prone set-up: Results of a hypofractionated trial with a median follow-up of 35 months

PURPOSE To test clinical feasibility, safety, and toxicity of prone hypofractionated breast, chest wall, and nodal radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS Following either segmental or total mastectomy with axillary node dissection, patients were treated in an institutional review board-approved prospective trial of prone radiation therapy to the breast, chest wall, and supraclavicular and level III axillary lymph nodes. A dose of 40.5 Gy/15 fractions with a concomitant daily boost to the tumor bed of 0.5 Gy (total dose, 48 Gy) was prescribed. In postmastectomy patients, the same treatment was prescribed, but without a tumor bed boost. The primary endpoint was incidence of >grade 2 acute skin toxicity. The secondary endpoints were feasibility of treatment using prone set-up, compliance with protocol-defined dosimetric constraints, and incidence of late toxicity. A dosimetric comparison was performed between protocol plans (prone) and nonprotocol plans (supine), targeting the same treatment volumes. RESULTS Sixty-nine patients with stage IB-IIIA breast cancer enrolled in this trial. Surgery was segmental mastectomy (n = 45), mastectomy (n = 23), and bilateral mastectomy (n = 1), resulting in 70 cases. None experienced >grade 2 acute skin toxicity according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, v 3.0, meeting our primary endpoint. Ninety-six percent of patients could be treated with this technique prone. However, 17 plans (24%) exceeded protocol constraints to the brachial plexus. Maximum long-term toxicity was 1 grade 2 arm lymphedema, 1 grade 3 breast retraction, and no occurrence of brachial plexopathy. Dosimetric comparison of protocol with nonprotocol plans demonstrated significantly decreased lung and heart doses in prone plans. CONCLUSIONS Prone hypofractionated breast, chest wall, and nodal radiation therapy is safe and well tolerated in this study. Although the initial pattern of local and regional control is encouraging, longer follow-up is warranted for efficacy and late toxicity assessment, particularly to the brachial plexus.

Establishing Cost-Effective Allocation of Proton Therapy for Breast Irradiation

PURPOSE Cardiac toxicity due to conventional breast radiation therapy (RT) has been extensively reported, and it affects both the life expectancy and quality of life of affected women. Given the favorable oncologic outcomes in most women irradiated for breast cancer, it is increasingly paramount to minimize treatment side effects and improve survivorship for these patients. Proton RT offers promise in limiting heart dose, but the modality is costly and access is limited. Using cost-effectiveness analysis, we provide a decision-making tool to help determine which breast cancer patients may benefit from proton RT referral. METHODS AND MATERIALS A Markov cohort model was constructed to compare the cost-effectiveness of proton versus photon RT for breast cancer management. The model was analyzed for different strata of women based on age (40 years, 50 years, and 60 years) and the presence or lack of cardiac risk factors (CRFs). Model entrants could have 1 of 3 health states: healthy, alive with coronary heart disease (CHD), or dead. Base-case analysis assumed CHD was managed medically. No difference in tumor control was assumed between arms. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to test model robustness and the influence of including catheterization as a downstream possibility within the health state of CHD. RESULTS Proton RT was not cost-effective in women without CRFs or a mean heart dose (MHD) <5 Gy. Base-case analysis noted cost-effectiveness for proton RT in women with ≥1 CRF at an approximate minimum MHD of 6 Gy with a willingness-to-pay threshold of

Novel Pilot Curriculum for International Education of Lymphoma Management Using E-Contouring

100,000/quality-adjusted life-year. For women with ≥1 CRF, probabilistic sensitivity analysis noted the preference of proton RT for an MHD ≥5 Gy with a similar willingness-to-pay threshold. CONCLUSIONS Despite the cost of treatment, scenarios do exist whereby proton therapy is cost-effective. Referral for proton therapy may be cost-effective for patients with ≥1 CRF in cases for which photon plans are unable to achieve an MHD <5 Gy.

Food as medicine: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of home delivered, medically tailored meals (HDMTM) on quality of life (QoL) in metastatic lung and non-colorectal GI cancer patients.

Purpose The International Lymphoma Radiation Oncology Group (ILROG) published consensus guidelines on the management of Hodgkin disease (HD) and nodal non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), which became the most downloaded articles from International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, and Physics. E-contouring workshops allow for interactive didactic sessions, allowing participants to see case-based contouring in real time. A pilot 1-hour curriculum was developed with the objective of reviewing ILROG guidelines for HD and NHL management with incorporation of e-contouring tools. This represents the first international education intervention in Spanish using e-contouring with a pre- and postintervention questionnaire. Methods A 1-hour presentation was prepared in Spanish reviewing the ILROG recommendations for HD and NHL. The review was followed by the author’s demonstration of contour creation using patients with HD and NHL prepared for the American Society for Radiation Oncology’s 2015 e-contouring lymphoma session. A five- question evaluation was prepared and administered before and after intervention. A two-tailed paired t test was performed to evaluate any significant change in test value before and after intervention. Results A total of nine quizzes were collected before and after the intervention. The average test score before the intervention was 75.6%, and the average test score after the intervention was 86.7% (P = .051). Four students scored 100% on both the pre- and postintervention evaluations, and no student had a decrease in score from pre- to postintervention evaluation. The topic with the lowest score tested dose consideration. Conclusion A substantial but nonsignificant improvement in test evaluation was seen with this pilot curriculum. This pilot intervention identified obstacles for truly interactive didactic sessions that, when addressed, can lead to fully developed interactive didactic sessions.

Cost in Perspective: Comparing Physician Theoretical Willingness-to-Pay with Actual Cost of Additional Shielding Required for Cobalt-60

155 Background: Malnutrition incidence in cancer approaches 85%, disproportionately burdening those with lung, GI, and advanced stage cancers. Malnourished patients have impaired chemotherapy response, shorter survival, longer hospital stays, and decreased QoL. Home delivered meals are nutritional interventions that improve patient well-being, nutrition, and lower healthcare costs in the elderly but have not been studied as an intervention in cancer patients. HDMTM are nutritionist prescribed home delivered meals tailored to patients symptoms, co-morbidities, and health needs. Preliminary data in 211 cancer patients showed with HDMTM 87% ate more than half of meals, 91% lived more independently, 89% ate more nutritiously, and 70% had less fatigue. HDMTM may be a strategy to reduce financial toxicity and healthcare utilization and improve QoL in cancer patients, but no primary data exists evaluating its efficacy. METHODS We sought to develop the first RCT evaluating patient-centered QoL improvement from nutritional intervention with HDMTM in those with metastatic lung and non-colorectal GI cancer. We established a partnership with Gods Love We Deliver, a 501c3 non-profit specializing in HDMTM. RESULTS We developed a protocol for a single-institution RCT of standard of care (SoC) versus SoC and HDMTM in metastatic lung and non-colorectal GI cancer patients with primary aim comparing QoL between arms at 12 weeks using the FACT-G questionnaire. Sample size is 180. Secondary aims assess HDMTMs impact on nutritional status, weight, mood, survival, food security, financial toxicity, healthcare utilization, and cost effectiveness. Eligible patients tolerate oral alimentation, have PS 0-3, and newly diagnosed (< 6 weeks) metastatic cancer. All patients have pre-randomization nutritional evaluation by an oncologic dietician. CONCLUSIONS We present the first PRMC reviewed and IRB approved RCT evaluating the efficacy of HDMTM in metastatic cancer patients with primary endpoint of patient reported QoL. Investigating HDMTM expands our knowledge of nutrition as an effective arm of palliative oncology.