Radiation Oncology Department Research Articles

Impact of Workflow and Educational Interventions on MR Safety in Radiation Oncology.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is becoming increasingly integrated into radiation oncology (RO) departments with the use of MRI-Linacs and MRI simulation. Due to the number of implants in patients with cancer, adoption of comprehensive patient screening and MR safety workflows in RO is critical. Identifying MR unsafe implants only at the time of MRI simulation leads to same-day cancellations, potentially delaying treatment, and can risk MR safety events (SEs). This quality improvement study evaluated the impact of workflow and educational interventions on MR safety in RO at a single institution. In an effort to decrease same-day cancellations and improve safety surrounding use of a 3 Tesla MRI simulator at an academic center, three plan-see-do-act (PDSA) cycles were implemented from 4/18/22 - 1/19/23. MR safety oversight for the simulator was provided by a multidisciplinary team, with input from both radiology and RO. PDSA cycle 1 implemented a two-screen functional workflow, adapted from radiology at the same institution. The first screen is completed by the practice coordinator (PC) at the time of scheduling to triage high-risk patients into a work queue (WQ) for further evaluation by the MR safety team. The second screen is performed by the MR technologist (MRT) at the point of care. PDSA cycle 2 involved education for PCs. PDSA cycle 3 was a second PC educational intervention including a visual aide to assist with WQ use. Efficacy was determined by the number of same-day cancellations, patients in the WQ (a measure of the number of patients identified at the initial screen as having an implant), and SEs in each PDSA cycle. PDSA cycle 1 spanned 56 workdays during which 91 MR simulations were scheduled with 6 cancellations (6.5%). PDSA cycle 2 spanned 84 days during which 173 MR simulations were scheduled with 18 cancellations (10.4%). PDSA cycle 3 spanned 39 workdays and had 94 MR simulations, with 7 cancellations (7.4%). The cancellation rate during each PDSA cycle was 0.11, 0.21, and 0.17 cancellations/day, respectively. The number of patients in the WQ during each PDSA cycle, representing successfully screened high-risk patients, was 0, 0, and 3, respectively. There were no SEs during the study. In this study, an MR safety workflow from radiology was successfully implemented in RO. There were no SEs during the study, but the number of patients successfully screened as high-risk and placed in the WQ increased after repeat PC education. Further increases in WQ use would decrease the demand for implant assessment at point of care, which could decrease burden on the MRT, same day cancellations, and potentially SEs. This will be especially important if case load increases. Future work could expand educational efforts to additional staff.

Designing Patient-Centered Health Education Materials for Radiation Dermatitis in Breast Cancer Patients: A Pilot Study and Single-Center Clinical Trial.

For breast cancer patients receiving radiotherapy (RT), radiation dermatitis is the most commonly experienced discomfort. However, patients usually do not participate in the design of health education materials regarding radiation dermatitis. We designed a pilot study to investigate the unmet need of breast cancer patients who would be receiving RT at our department and created a patient-centered educational video. We initiated a single-arm clinical trial to evaluate the effectiveness of the video in improving patient and their family's knowledge of radiation dermatitis, alleviating their anxiety, and helping patients improve self-care skills during RT course. The pilot study was executed in a radiation oncology department of a tertiary medical center in Taiwan. We designed a questionnaire to explore new breast cancer patients' idea of a comprehensive pre-RT health education. Enrolled patients would fill out an electronic questionnaire during their first visit at our outpatient clinic. They were asked to select at most two of the following items they considered most important for pre-RT health education: (1) The mechanism behind RT; (2) Self-care skills for irradiated skin; (3) Activities to be avoided during RT course; (4) The toxicity grading of radiation dermatitis. Given the above information, we created a 4-minute video set in a clinical scenario of a patient receiving pre-RT health education from a nurse. A single-arm clinical trial (IRB approval number: CMUH111-REC2-121) is currently recruiting. The video was launched on YouTube (Link: https://youtu.be/O1uTXpS_ed0) to give patients easy access to the video. Enrolled patients would complete Skindex-16 survey (translated into Chinese) at 3 timepoints: during their first visit at our clinic, in the middle of RT course, and at the first post-RT follow-up visit. Cronbach's alpha test was applied to determine the internal consistency of the questionnaires. The pilot study included 19 patients with an average age of 46.6 (range: 34 to 69) years old. All patients' primary language was Chinese Mandarin. Most patients (84%) received at least secondary education. We found by surprise that RTOG skin toxicity grading was considered very important for most patients (79%), while less than half (42%) found the mechanism behind RT important. The internal validity of the Chinese version of Skindex-16 was good (Cronbach's alpha score = 0.87). For the recruiting trial, we have enrolled 10 patients and planned to close the trial upon enrolling 50 participants. The study result should be available before August 2023. We suggest to actively involve patients in designing health education materials for patient-centered care. Toxicity grading of radiation dermatitis should be included in pre-RT health education for breast cancer patients. Whether the educational video helps reduce patients' anxiety and the incidence of severe radiation dermatitis will soon be answered by our ongoing clinical trial.

Identifying Common Topics in Patient Portal Messages with Unsupervised Natural Language Processing.

Patient portal messaging is an increasingly important form of communication between patients and medical providers. This has become particularly relevant in oncology, where patients undergo intense longitudinal treatments that require frequent communication regarding symptoms, appointments, and diagnostic results. The rise in the volume of these messages has significantly increased the workload of medical providers and consequent physician burn-out. Natural language processing (NLP), particularly transformer-based models, may offer an automated approach to characterize the content of patient messages and improve message triage and routing. In this study, we employed a state-of-the-art language model (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers; BERT) to identify data-derived categories of representative topics from real-world data thereby providing basic information to build an appropriate routing system. Patient-generated portal messages sent to a messaging pool for a single institution radiation oncology department from 2014 to 2023 were extracted. BERTopic, an NLP-based topic modeling technique based on BERT was optimized for topic modeling of patient messages. Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP) was used to reduce dimensionality and visualize topic relationships across messages. The BERTopic-identified topic categories were subsequently labeled manually by one of the physician investigators. Differences of number of messages over time were assessed using t-tests. A total of 47,492 messages were retrieved. The average number of messages per month from a single patient ranged from 1 to 18 (median 1.67, interquartile range 1.0-2.4). The total volume of patient messages showed a ten-fold increase over the study period, with 101 messages per month sent in 2014 and 999 messages per month in 2022 (p<0.001). BERTopic initially identified 35 topics whose relationships and degrees of overlap were visualized by UMAP. Due to physician-identified similarities, these topics were reduced into 13 categories. The most frequent topic category was messages about laboratory tests or imaging studies: 24.3%, followed by messages expressing appreciation: 18.9%, scheduling discussions: 15.6%, symptom-related messages: 11%, and treatment-related messages: 10.7%. Patient portal messages sent to a single institution radiation oncology department have increased dramatically in volume since implementation, corresponding to a broader national trend. NLP successfully identified common subject themes across patient messages, many of which are related to scheduling. This presents potential opportunities to apply NLP to automate message routing in the future.

Evaluation of Peer Review Practice in Radiation Oncology Treatment Planning: Single Institution Experience

Pretreatment Peer review meeting at our radiation oncology department is a weekly meeting, where the initial radiation treatment (RT) planning process for every patient is discussed including: Computed Tomography (CT) simulation and treatment planning. In this study, we are aiming to evaluate our peer review process and to report the compliance to the suggested modifications. All RT plans for all patients indicated for radiotherapy accepted by the primary radiation oncology team then presented in our weekly peer review meeting for final approval. A minimum of two radiation oncologists reviewed each plan and their suggestions documented then suggested modifications are classified as changes in: field arrangement, clinical target volume (CTV), dose and fractionation. Compliance to suggested modification also recorded as: applied and not applied with or without documented justification. Atotal of 1779 radiation treatment plans were discussed in our regular weekly peer review meetings for a period of 3 years. 67.5% of them were treated with radical intent while 32.5% treated with palliative intent. The most common technique used was three-dimensional conformal (3DCRT) followed by intensity modulated RT (IMRT) (70.6% and 29.4%, respectively). The most frequently reviewed sites were: breast (38%), Gastrointestinal (11.9%) and head and neck (9.3%).1592 plans (89.48%) were labeled as: approved, 162 (9.1%) labeled as: modified and only 25 (1.4%) plans labeled as: hold. The frequency of modifications was significantly greater in breast (39.5%) than Gastrointestinal (17.9%) followed by gynecological cancers (14.2%) (P value <0.001). Modifications were more predominant with radical plans (64.2%) than palliative ones (35.8%) (P value <0.001) and statistically greater using 3DCRT (64.2%) than IMRT (35.8%) (P value <0.001). CTV recorded as the most frequent variable suggested for modifications (34.6%), followed by dose and fractionation (24.7%) (P value = 0.035). 72.2% of recommended modifications were applied by the consultant of primary team and 22.2% of non-applied modifications were justified and documented. There was 100% compliance rate to all plans labeled as hold. The practiceof peer review in radiation oncology specialty is very challenging. Its role in quality assurance of the radiotherapy process is highly accepted by radiation oncologists at our radiation oncology department. It is reflected in their high compliance rate to the suggested modifications. We recommend its implementation routinely at any radiation oncology department to enhance the quality of RT plans.

Patient Impressions of Telemedicine in Radiation Oncology

The increasing use of telemedicine in radiation oncology (RO) since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the need to understand its role in routine practice. The objective of this study was to assess patient satisfaction with telemedicine in radiation oncology. Secondary objectives included understanding patient motivations for using telemedicine, quantifying the value of telemedicine as an option for care delivery, and characterizing preferences regarding how it should be utilized in their care. We surveyed patients at our institution about their experience with telemedicine video visits (VVs) in the RO department. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were English-speaking and participated in a VV with our RO department after January 2020. A convenience sample was obtained, with preference for enrolling patients who completed a VV within 6 months of survey administration (rolling) and for patients treated for a diversity of cancer types. Surveys were administered from August 2021 to October 2022. A total of 155 patients were approached to complete the survey. Interested patients were emailed a link to a consent form and survey, and 25 patients (16%) completed both. The study closed early due to lack of funding for staff to approach and enroll patients. 96% of patients reported being satisfied with their telemedicine experience in RO and 92% would prefer to have the option of VVs after the resolution of the COVID-19 pandemic. Regarding visit type, 50% of patients preferred in-person visits over VVs for initial consults, while 68% and 77% preferred VVs for weekly on-treatment-visits and follow-up visits, respectively. All patients agreed that their health issues could be adequately addressed with VVs, but only 80% felt that their issues could be addressed with a phone call or email message. The most reported reason for preferring VVs was reduced travel burden. 60% of patients stated they would be more likely to seek cancer treatment at a facility offering VVs and 52% would pay more for a VV than an in-person visit. 92% of patients felt their connection with their physician was as strong as or stronger with VVs than with in-person visits, and 96% trusted their physician to determine when a VV would be medically appropriate. Surveyed patients were satisfied with VVs in RO at our institution, consistent with reports published by our group and others suggesting high rates of satisfaction with VVs by both providers and patients. Our data also suggest that patients find VVs convenient and even prefer them to in-person visits in some cases, without an impact on their perceived ability to have their medical issues addressed or a degradation of their relationship with their physician. The availability of telemedicine options may influence where some patients seek care and their willingness to pay. This study supports the need for ongoing reimbursement for VVs to ensure that patients continue to have access to their cancer care teams.

Patterns of local recurrence and risk of skin recurrence in soft tissue sarcomas after surgical resection.

Soft tissue sarcomas (STSs) are rare, heterogeneous tumors primarily managed surgically with radiotherapy (RT) added to improve local control. Although there is a theoretical risk of skin seeding at the time of surgery, current ASTRO Clinical Practice Guidelines recommend against routine use of bolus during pre-operative or post-operative radiotherapy for STS due to increased risk of skin toxicity without clear benefit. However, in the modern era with contemporary treatment planning techniques, the risk of skin recurrence has not been assessed. We performed a detailed analysis of the patterns of local recurrence (LR) in patients with STS treated with surgical resection with or without RT. We performed a retrospective analysis of 206 adult patients with extremity or trunk STSs evaluated in the Department of Radiation Oncology at our institution over 14 years (2007-2021) and identified all patients with LR. The depth of the recurrence and location relative to the radiation field in patients treated with radiotherapy was evaluated. Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and cumulative incidence of distant metastasis (CIDM) was calculated with competing risk analysis from the date of LR. Of the 206 patients evaluated, 20 experienced a LR after surgical resection with or without RT. Among patients with a LR, 5 patients (25.0%) were treated with surgery alone and 15 patients (75.0%) received surgery and RT. In patients treated with RT, 46.7% had pre-operative RT, 53.3% had post operative RT, and bolus was used in 5 patients (33.3%). Surgical margins were close (<1mm) in 4 patients (20.0%) and positive in 10 patients (50.0%). Tumor grade was intermediate/high in 15 patients (75%) and the median tumor size was 9 cm (range 5-12). LR occurred in the muscle in 8 patients (40%), subcutaneous tissue in 11 patients (55.0%), and skin in 1 patient (5.0%). The patient with a skin recurrence was treated with surgery alone and the tumor involved the skin at presentation. In the patients treated with RT, LR occurred within radiation field in 10 patients (66.7%). Median follow up time after local recurrence was 12.9 months. At 3 years after LR, PFS was 43.9%, OS was 81.7%, and CIDM was 16.7%. Skin recurrences were exceedingly rare after surgical resection of STSs, and only occurred in a tumor that involved the skin at initial presentation. Due to the increased dose to the normal skin and subcutaneous tissues when bolus is used, which increases risk of toxicity, these findings support current recommendations against routine use of bolus in STSs not involving the skin at presentation.

Impact of Family Caregiver and Patient Related Factors on Quality of Life in Head Neck Cancer Patients

To study an impact of family caregiver and patient related factors on quality of life in head- neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNC) patients. A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted in department of radiation oncology at a rural tertiary cancer center from August 2019 to January 2022. Marathi speaking, newly diagnosed, non-metastatic, histopathology proven HNC patients who consented for study were included. Marathi version of an updated head neck specific European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-H&N43) was used. Indigenously prepared and validated interviewer administered questionnaire (IAQ) for patients and respective family caregiver (FCG) were used to understand attitude towards HNC(ATHNC) and FCG's attitude as a caregiver (ATC). Total score was directly proportional to ATHNC and inversely proportional to ATC. Graph-Pad, Instat-3 (California Inc) was used for statistical analysis. A total of 210 patients and respective FCG were interviewed. Subgroup analysis of QOL was done for 201 radically treated patients (RTP) with respect to age, sex, education, socioeconomic status, place of residence, duration of symptoms, stage and disease sub-site. QOL of palliative treatment group (N = 9) was compared with RTP. All these parameters had impact on QOL with medium to large effect size difference and minimum important difference/change. ATHNC was significantly better for young (p = 0.022), literate (p = 0.004) and upper socioeconomic class (USC) (p = 0.043) FCGs. It was significantly better for male (p = 0.003), literate (p = 0.001), USC (p = 0.004) patients presenting in early stage of disease (p = 0.013). Though it was not significant on multivariate analysis. ATHNC score of FCGs had significant effect on QOL of patients with respect to role function (RF) (p = 0.032), financial difficulties (FI) (p = 0.017) and sexuality (SX) (p = 0.048). Patients with higher ATHNC score had significantly better QOL with respect to social function (SF) (p = 0.0004), FI (p = 0.0002), body image (BI) (p = 0.0033) and social contact (SC) (p = 0.0057). QOL of patients having FCGs with lower ATC score was significantly better. QOL of patients with younger FCGs was significantly better with respect to FI (p = 0.0244) while it was significantly better for pain (PA) (p = 0.0462) and emotional function (EF) (p = 0.0144) if FCG was male. Suboptimal literacy and accountability level were few short comings of this study. Informer bias cannot be ruled out CONCLUSION: Age, sex, place of residence, educational level, socioeconomic status, duration of symptoms, stage, and site of lesion affects different QOL parameters differently and hence an individual QOL needs to be addressed. FCGs parameters affect QOL of patients. Understanding the determinants and its pattern of effect on QOL of patients will guide us to offer timely care and interventions in a pragmatic mode.

Total Lymphoid Irradiation in the Treatment of Heart Transplant Rejection: Single Institution Long-Term Results

Acute cardiac allograft rejection is a major cause of morbidity and mortality post-transplant. Total lymphoid irradiation (TLI) has been shown to cause long-lasting alterations in lymphocyte sub-sets, and thereby induces a state of partial response that is useful to prevent organ transplant rejection. In our previous report, treatment with TLI resulted in decreased episodes of acute rejection and steroid dosage requirements for up to 9.1 years post cardiac transplantation. In this study, we report an update on the short- and long-term effects of TLI in the treatment of cardiac transplant rejection. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with intractable cardiac allograft transplantation evaluated in the department of radiation oncology at our institution over 23 years (1998-2021). Cardiac allograft rejection was defined as multiple or persistent episodes of rejection despite aggressive immunosuppressive therapy. The prescribed dose was 8 Gy in 10 fractions to be delivered over 5 weeks. All episodes of pathologic acute cardiac rejection, duration of immunosuppression, and episodes of acute infection requiring treatment before and after TLI were documented. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method. The median time to first cardiac allograft rejection and the median time to first acute rejection was monitored. Of the 29 patients included, 21 (72.4%) had ISHLT grade 1R, 5 (17.2%), grade 2R, and 2(6.9%) grade 3R rejection. Rejection grade was unknown for 1 patient. The mean number of acute rejections after transplant was 14.4 episodes per patient (range 1-44) with median time to first rejection of 0.63 months. The median radiation dose was 8 Gy (range 7.2-8 Gy) delivered over a mean of 31 days. Treatment was stopped early in 2 (6.5%) patients (after 7.2 Gy and 7.9 Gy) for severe bone marrow suppression and drop in CD4 counts, respectively. The number of rejections dropped from 14.2 to 3.97 per patient over a median time of 29.0 months vs 28.1 months pre and post TLI (p = 0.01). The frequency of ISHLT acute grade 3R rejections decreased from 0.58 to 0.06 episodes per patient pre and post TLI (p = 0.02). Immunosuppressant requirements decreased from 2.83 before TLI to 2.69 after TLI (p = 0.71). Infection rates per patient were 0.71 pre TLI and remained at 0.63 post TLI. Treatment was well tolerated with 4 (13.8%) grade 2 or higher radiation toxicity. Median follow up was 76.3 months. Median and 3-year OS were 53.4 months and 60.9%, respectively. TLI is a safe and effective treatment for control of intractable cardiac rejection. The episodes of acute rejection and immunosuppressant requirements are decreased, but with long-term follow up, these patients continue to experience rejection. However, TLI lowers the frequency of ISHLT moderate to severe rejection episodes for up to 6.4 years. There was no increased risk of severe infections and there were only minimal short- and long-term grade 2 or higher radiation toxicities.

Comparing Patient Reported Satisfaction Following Telehealth and In-Person Medical Encounters

Telehealth patient encounters can increase access to healthcare and allow for its provision in a safe manner during pandemics. Telehealth is particularly important for oncology patients who might be at risk of severe infections during potential periodic increases of COVID-19 infections. There is a lack of studies examining the impact of telemedicine on quality of care. Herein, we report our recent institutional experience with patient reported satisfaction and engagement during telehealth encounters. Following each medical encounter in our radiation oncology department, patients are invited to complete a National Research Corporation (NRC) survey rating their satisfaction. We retrospectively analyzed the available survey results for patients who had a medical encounter between March 2020 and January 2022 at any of the four radiation oncology facilities within our institution. We examined patient responses to four questions including "provider would recommend" and "facility would recommend", both rated on a scale of 1-10, with 10 indicating the highest likelihood. The other two questions included "had enough input" into care, and "good communication with staff", both rated on a Likert scale from 1 to 4 (1 as "No", 2 as "Yes, somewhat", 3 as "Yes, mostly", 4 as "Yes, definitely"). We dichotomized the results for each question as favorable or unfavorable, with favorable being a score ≥9 for the first two questions, or ≥3 for the remaining questions. We used univariate (UVA) and multivariable (MVA) logistic regression analyses to compare telehealth and in-person encounters. Odds ratio (OR) were calculated for each question. We collected 5,672 surveys, of which 1,027 (18%) were for telehealth encounters. For all four of the examined categories in the survey, patients reported less satisfaction following telehealth visits compared to in-person visits in UVA and MVA logistic regression analyses. For MVA, we included type of encounter, patient age, patient race, patient sex, facility location, type of insurance, and year of visit. The MVA OR of a patient reporting < 9 for a telehealth compared to an in-person encounter were 1.46 ((95% CI 1.1-1.9, P 0.007) for "had enough input" into care, 1.46 (95% CI 1.1-1.9, P 0.007) for "good communication with staff", 1.43 (95% CI 1.1-1.86, P 0.007) for "facility would recommend", and 1.57 (95% CI 0.92-2.59, P 0.08) for provider would recommend. In this retrospective analysis, we found that patients were less likely to report high satisfaction with telehealth compared to in-person encounters. Further research is needed to address potential limitations of telemedicine encounters to increase access to health, particularly for patients at risk of severe infections, without compromising overall quality of care.

Characterizing Wellness Leadership in Academic Radiation Oncology Departments in the United States

Burnout is prevalent in radiation oncology (RO), with 56% of respondents in a 2020 survey reporting symptoms of burnout. This has led to an increased effort to promote physician wellness via formal wellness-directed initiatives in recent years. However, little is known about the specifics of wellness activities and their impact. We aim to characterize current wellness leadership positions and efforts within academic RO departments. A total of 120 US academic RO department chairs were contacted to inquire whether they had a departmental wellness leader, with a request for leader contact information, if applicable. Wellness leaders were invited to complete an anonymous survey in January and February 2023 via a survey platform. Questions assessed leader demographics, role structure, resources, current initiatives, and impacts to date. Descriptive statistics and summaries of free text responses are reported. Seventy-one chairs (59%) responded, among which 43 (61%) reported having departmental wellness leaders. On interim analysis, 11 (26%) responded to the survey. 82% were female and 73% were physician faculty. Leaders spanned career stages, and respondent ages ranged from 32-66. Wellness leaders were commonly in formal departmental committees (n = 4) or implemented hospital initiatives without independent departmental programming (n = 5). Committees had all been started since 2020. 5 respondents stated departmental wellness leadership was required by their institution. Some leaders were provided with administrative support (n = 4) and/or departmental program funding (n = 4), however only 1 had protected time for wellness work. Challenges included limited bandwidth (n = 7), lack of departmental interest (n = 4), and limited funding (n = 4). The most commonly completed initiatives include programming and education (n = 4) and improved support for caregivers (n = 3). No departments had hired physician coaches or created a peer support network. Of 14 initiatives, departments had, on average, implemented 2. 36% and 27% of respondents agree that because of wellness initiatives the department is more aware of the importance of wellness and wellness-promoting strategies, respectively. Only 9% and 18% felt initiatives changed a culture of constant availability and encouraged use of full PTO and limiting work off hours, respectively. Leaders highlight the importance of a dedicated individual to tangibly implement changes and the unique opportunity of someone within RO to understand the specific challenges faced by those in our field. Wellness leadership roles exist in many RO departments. However, these roles are new and evolving, with a limited number of fully implemented initiatives to date. Longitudinal data collection and follow-up will help establish the impact of these roles on bringing positive change to departments. Full results will be presented at ASTRO 23.

Treatment Terminations during Radiation Therapy: A Ten-Year Experience

Disruptionsin cancer care adversely affect clinical outcomes, particularly when a patient does not complete the prescribed course of treatment. The impact of treatment termination (TT) during radiation therapy has not been well studied. This study addresses TT in a large multi-center department of radiation oncology over a 10-year time period. TTs of patients undergoing radiation treatment between January 2013 and December 2022 were prospectively tracked as part of departmentalquality and safety monitoring. A TT was defined as the discontinuation of therapy at any point following consent and simulation. Causes of TTs were categorized as: hospice/death, physician choice related to toxicity, physician choice unrelated to toxicity, patient choice related to toxicity, patient choice unrelated to toxicity, progression of disease, non-cancer illness, or other. The rate of TT was calculated as a percentage of all new patients who start radiation treatments. As part of our ongoing department quality and safety program, incremental changes were made to pre-treatment evaluation and scheduling processes, collectively referred to as the "No-Fly" policy. TT rates during three iterations of this policy were compared. Outof 28,707 planned treatment courses, a total of 1,467 TTs were identified (5.1%). 688 (46.9%) involved patients treated with curative intent, 770 (52.5%) with palliative intent, and 9 (0.6%) for benign disease. The rate of TT decreased from 9.3% in 2013 to 3.3% in 2022. Relative to evolutions of our No-Fly policy, the overall TT rate decreased from 8.8% under No-Fly 1 (2013-2014), to 5.2% during No-Fly 2 (2015-2018), and 4.0% with No-Fly 3 (2019-2022) (ANOVA, p<0.001). The most common sites for TT were H&N (19.3%), CNS (17.9%), and Bone Metastases (17.9%). The most common cause of TT was hospice and/or death (36.5%), 69.1% of which were in patients receiving palliative treatments. Other common causes included patient choice unrelated to toxicity (35%), physician choice unrelated to toxicity (8.8%), and progression of disease (7.6%). There were 473 TTs without radiation dose given (1.6% of planned treatments, 32.3% of TTs). Radiation TTs reflect major deviations from the original care plan. This large cohort study highlights the value of open departmental discourse about TTs, which prompted quality improvement changes that reduced TTs over time. Future studies addressing clinical outcomes can direct treatment decision-making and improve care for our patients.

Long-Term Outcomes of Multidisciplinary Radiation Oncology Equity and Inclusion Committee Programming at an Academic Health System

Academic radiation oncology departments are increasingly implementing educational programs to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion, but data on their impact remains sparse. This study aimed to assess learning outcomes and perceived impact of the programming of a multidisciplinary radiation oncology equity and inclusion committee (EIC). Since August 2020, a committee of radiation therapists (RTTs), physicians (MDs), nurses (RNs), and administrators (ADs) has led an alternate-monthly online EIC meeting open to all radiation oncology employees at one health system. Learning goals of EIC programming are (1) to understand disparities in healthcare practice and outcomes for marginalized populations, (2) to discuss current events relevant to marginalized groups, and (3) to identify and address personal bias. EIC has featured expert guest speakers, open discussion, cultural events, and individual storytelling. In February 2023, we conducted a department-wide survey evaluating participation in one or more EIC meetings. EIC participants also completed an evaluation focused on learning goal achievement and program strengths/weaknesses. Multiple choice responses and 5-point Likert scale survey items were descriptively analyzed; open responses were qualitatively coded and categorized into themes. There were 84 survey respondents, corresponding to a department response rate of 53%. Of these, 37 (44%) indicated participation in at least one EIC meeting. Participants were 35% RTTs, 16% MDs, 14% ADs, 3% physicists/dosimetrists, 3% RNs, and 19% undisclosed profession; 46% identified as a racial, ethnic, sexual, and/or gender minority. 41% of participants attended 5 or more sessions. Participants reported high overall value of the EIC meeting (mean value 3.7 / 5, SD 1.2) and 89% would recommend participation. There was strong agreement with achievement of EIC learning goals (mean agreement [MA] 3.9 / 5, SD 0.91), and most participants reported improved capability to understand (61%, MA 3.72 / 5, SD 0.99) and address (61%, MA 3.75 / 5, SD 0.83) the specific needs of their patients from marginalized groups. The three most common themes of EIC strengths were educational value, speaker quality, and improved work relationships. Commonly requested improvements included more practice scenarios, increasing participation, and giving more equitable attention to all minority groups. Among EIC non-participants, 75% reported non-participation due to scheduling, 71% felt that having an EIC was valuable, and 59% reported a desire to attend an EIC meeting in the future. Nearly 3 years since implementation, EIC programming is highly valued. The majority of participants report achievement of learning goals and perceive self-improvement in care for marginalized groups as a result of participation. Further research is needed to externally validate the impact of this programming on learning and patient care domains.

Assessment of Electronic Health Literacy among Patients in an Urban, Academic Radiation Therapy Department

The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically affected health outcomes and healthcare access, especially with the abrupt transition to virtual care. Cancer patients in the New York City borough of the Bronx, a potentially marginalized community with high rates of poverty and non-English speakers, may be particularly vulnerable to healthcare disparities, given their advanced age and possible difficulty navigating telemedicine appointments due to decreased electronic health literacy (EHL). We investigated EHL levels using both subjective and objective measures and associated predictors of EHL in patients within an academic, urban radiation oncology department. We conducted a prospective IRB-approved study of patients aged ≥18 presenting for care in our department. Patients' internet access and established habits were surveyed via Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). Subjective EHL, self-reported comfort using the internet for health information, was assessed via the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS), which calculates a score by adding participants' answers for 8 questions (each on a 1 to 5-point Likert scale). Subjective EHL was categorized as low (8-23), moderate (24-31), or good (32-40). Objective EHL was determined by the eHealth Literacy Objective Scale (eHeLiOS), which tests responses to 9 common scenarios on gathering and assessing electronic health information via multiple-choice questions. The numbers of correct answers were totaled and categorized into low (1-4), moderate (5-7), or good (8-9) EHL. Patients were enrolled between December 2020 and December 2022. 56 patients completed the subjective eHEALS assessment, while 49 completed the eHeLiOS objective test. 52% and 27% of patients identified as Black and Hispanic, respectively; 66% were male, and the median age was 67 (range 28-86). 76% reported accessing the internet regularly, of which 92% reported doing so via broadband network. The prevalence of good EHL was 10% using objective and 29% using subjective surveys. Using a proportional odds logistic model, only age was associated with EHL. For every increased year of age, there was an 11% decrease in objective (OR 0.89, p = 0.02) and 5% decrease in subjective (OR 0.95, p = 0.08) EHL odds, respectively. Gender, race/ethnicity, income, insurance, and employment status were not significantly associated with EHL. Few study patients, who represent an older and potentially marginalized population, showed good EHL levels; more perceived good EHL via subjective testing than we observed using our objective measure. These data suggest implementation of an objective EHL assessment would aid in identifying patients who may benefit from learning activities to improve EHL and support to navigate telehealth visits effectively. Further research is needed to optimize telemedicine strategies for older cancer patients with low EHL.

Academic U.S. Radiation Oncology Department Chairs: Who are They?

Historically, there has been a gender imbalance in the composition of the academic radiation oncology (RO) workforce. Given the increasing diversity of patients treated by academic radiation oncologists across the US, sufficient representation of women in academic RO, especially in leadership, is of paramount importance. In this study, we sought to better understand the characteristics of individuals currently serving as academic RO chairpersons whose departments are affiliated with ACGME-accredited RO residency training programs. We created a comprehensive database of academic RO chairpersons in the US by utilizing information from publicly available sources, including residency training program websites, hospital/institutional websites, Doximity, LinkedIn, the American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) website, the American College of Radiation Oncology (ACRO) website, and the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System National Provider Identifier Registry. We used the Mann-Whitney U test and two-proportion z tests to evaluate for statistical significance among medians and proportions, respectively. We identified 85/90 chairpersons (94.4%) whose departments are affiliated with an ACGME-accredited RO residency program. 4/85 (4.7%) chairpersons hold interim positions and were excluded from further analyses. Of the remaining 81 chairpersons in permanent positions, 10 (12.3%) are females and 71 (87.7%) are males (p < 0.01). 77 (95.1%) chairpersons are full professors and 19 (23.5%) hold dual MD-PhD degrees. 33 (40.7%) chairpersons hold an official leadership role, such as "director" or "chair," in the cancer institution affiliated with their institution; while such titles are more common among male than female chairpersons, the difference is not statistically significant (43.7% vs 20%, p = 0.15). 74/81 chairpersons secured their current positions a median of 16 years (range 6-33 years) after completing RO residency, with no statistically significant difference between male and female chairpersons (median 16 vs 18 years, respectively; p = 0.38). 36 (44.4%) chairpersons were promoted to chair from another position at their respective institutions (men 70.0% vs females 40.8%, p = 0.08). The majority of chairpersons are ASTRO Fellows (61.7%); notably fewer are ASTRO (3.7%) or ACRO (2.5%) Gold Medalists. There are no statistical differences among male and female chairpersons in the proportion who have received an ASTRO Fellow designation (60.6% vs 70.0%, p = 0.57) or ASTRO (4.2% vs 0.0%, p = 0.51) or ACRO (2.8% vs 0.0%, p = 0.59) Gold Medal. In our benchmark study of the characteristics of current academic US RO chairpersons, we found that significantly more men than women currently serve as RO chairpersons. Future interventions that promote the recruitment, retention, and promotion of talented female academic RO physicians through the academic pipeline are warranted.

Impact of the G8 Score on Treatment Strategies and Outcome in Definitive Radiotherapy for the Elderly Esophageal Cancer Patients

Although chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is widely used as a curative treatment for esophageal cancer, it is often difficult to perform standard CRT for the elderly in the real world. This study aimed to investigate the impact of the Geriatric 8 (G8) score on treatment strategies and outcome in definitive radiotherapy (RT) for elderly esophageal cancer patients. We analyzed 81 esophageal cancer patients aged ≥65 years who received definitive RT between 2018 and 2021. The G8 score was acquired at the first visit to the radiation oncology department. The treatment strategy was decided by a multi-disciplinary conference, and the G8 score was not used to determine the treatment strategy. Standard treatment (standard CRT) was defined as RT with elective nodal irradiation and a total dose ≥50 Gy, and chemotherapy with two cycles of platinum (70 mg/m2) and 5FU (700 mg/m2 for 4 days) concurrently. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to generate actual survival curves. The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0 was used to assess toxicities. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the two groups, and statistical significance was set at p<0.05. The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve was used to calculate the cutoff value. The Median follow-up time was 30 months (range: 8-51) for survivors. The mean G8 scores by treatment strategy were 13.9 (range: 9-17) for standard CRT group (n = 26), 12.1 (range: 7-16) for reduced CRT group (n = 30), and 9.7 (range: 4.5-14) for RT alone group (n = 25). G8 score was significantly higher for standard CRT (p = 0.017) and significantly lower for RT alone (p<0.01). The cut-off value of the G8 score for standard treatment, calculated by the ROC curve, was 12.5 points. In the non-standard treatment group, the cut-off value of the G8 score for RT alone, calculated by the ROC curve, was 10.5 points. The 2-year overall survival (OS) rates for standard CRT, reduced CRT and RT alone were 74%, 71% and 35%, respectively, and significantly lower in RT alone (p<0.001). The 2-years OS rates for G8 score >10.5 points and ≤10.5 points were 69% and 48%, respectively (p = 0.039). Grade 3 or higher acute toxicities were observed in 33 patients (41%); 14 (54%) in standard CRT, 17 (57%) in reduced CRT and 2 (8%) in RT alone. Grade 5 acute toxicity was not observed. G8 scores tended to be higher in the patients with grade 3 or higher acute toxicities, but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.057). Grade 3 or higher late toxicities were observed in 7 patients. Our results suggest that there is an association between the G8 score and clinicians' treatment decisions. Although RT alone could be safely performed even in patients with low G8 scores, administration of chemotherapy strongly affected prognosis. These results suggest the importance of developing less toxic systemic therapy regimens for patients with low G8 scores.

Evaluating Childcare Support in NCI Designated Cancer Centers for Patients with Young Children Undergoing Treatment

The daily nature of radiotherapy treatment can be challenging for parents diagnosed with cancer who have young children. Access to affordable and convenient childcare can be a considerable hurdle to treatment adherence. We aim to determine the breadth of childcare services and support provided by NCI-designated cancer centers to decrease the burden and stress of receiving radiotherapy treatment of patients with children. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of the 70 NCI-designated cancer centers. Centers were originally contacted by phone call utilizing their publicly available website, and the researcher asked to speak with the radiation oncology department social worker. Calls were conducted from June 2022 through February 2023. As a result of low response rate, a second methodological design was developed through a collaboration with Association for Directors of Radiation Oncology Programs (ADROP) whereby their listserv was utilized to connect with social workers. For both query designs, social workers were asked what childcare services are offered by the center, if such services are internal, if patients are referred to external organizations, as well as if such organizations operate charitably or require payment for their services. Centers were stratified by type of childcare support offered and compared across private versus public institutions. Sixty-three of the 70 NCI-designated cancer centers were contacted for data collection, excluding 6 identified as basic laboratories and 1 center serving only pediatric patients. Contact was established with the social work department of 39 cancer centers (62%), of which only 19 (49%) had a radiation oncology departmental social worker. Response data were gathered from 11 (58%) total centers regarding their childcare services. Of the centers surveyed, 10 (91%) indicated the primary form of support offered was via referral to external organizations. Four centers (36%) described offering financial support for childcare, three of which are privately-funded institutions. When queried about the need for childcare support provided by cancer centers, 4 of the 5 surveyed public institutions expressed a need for expansion of these services; the 6 private institutions denied a need for these services among their patient population. Lack of access to childcare presents a significant burden to adherence to radiotherapy among parents undergoing radiotherapy with young children. Our study showed that external community organizations currently play a crucial role in providing childcare support to parents with cancer and demonstrates an inequity between private and public institutions in the perceived need of childcare support for their patients as well as ability to offer direct financial support.

Toward Burnout Prevention: Can One Short Virtual Reality Relaxation and Mindfulness Training Session for Staff and Patients Decrease Stress and Improve Subjective Sense of Wellbeing?

Mental wellness of healthcare workers has deteriorated recently, increasing burnout rates. Cancer patients are also often highly distressed, reporting fear, pain, and fatigue. Relaxation and mindfulness training have been shown to decrease stress and anxiety. Currently, the use of virtual reality (VR) for relaxation and mindfulness for cancer patients and oncology clinical staff is an ongoing area of research. We aimed to test the preliminary efficacy of incorporating an innovative digital therapeutic (DTx) we developed at our center in this population. Cancer patients and clinic staff from one institution's Gastrointestinal and Radiation Oncology departments participated in the immersive VR-enhanced relaxation and mindfulness experience for this IRB-exempt study. Users completed a pre-VR survey via iPad assessing baseline knowledge and practice of stress reduction techniques, baseline stress, and familiarity with VR. In the VR app deployed on an Oculus Quest 2, users chose a relaxing water scene (e.g., stream, beach) and optional soothing background music. Users could also choose a relaxation or mindfulness training audio track. A post-VR survey assessed whether the experience affected their subjective stress and sense of wellbeing ("Yes" or "No") as well as the feasibility of using the app. A binomial test on a single proportion was used to test whether more participants (>50%) indicated their stress was reduced following the VR training than did not. Post-VR qualitative verbal feedback was also collected to identify future changes to the VR app. Six patients, a patient's son, and forty-three employees used the VR app. Users were aged ≤ 30 years old (18%), 30-50 years (60%), and 50-70 years (22%). Users completed the VR experience in a median of 14 min (IQR: 11-19 min). In the pre-survey, most (78%) reported they felt stress at this point in their lives. In the post-survey, significantly more than the expected proportion of participants (>50%) reported feeling less stressed after using the VR app (88%, n = 44, p <0.001). Most (90%) reported that the VR app improved their subjective sense of wellbeing. All (100%) users reported it was easy to learn the VR controls. Nearly all (96%) reported they would be interested in using this VR app again, including 30% and 38% who reported they would be "extremely likely" and "very likely," respectively, to use the app again. These findings suggest our VR relaxation and mindfulness training was well accepted and could be integrated into the hospital setting in short sessions. Further work should be done based on participant feedback to expand the offerings of this VR app to offer a wider range of relaxation experiences and gamified psychological interventions that can help de-stress, recharge, and build resiliency.

Impact of Severe Weather on Operations of a Radiation Oncology Department

In 2022, two major storms in Western New York brought blizzard conditions and historic snowfall amounts to the region. Beyond the immediate impact to life and property, these weather events resulted in disruptions to cancer care as a result of hazardous travel conditions, and facility closures as a result of regional travel bans. We sought to understand the impact of these disruptive incidents on departmental operations to develop better contingency plans for future occurrences. The radiation treatment machine schedules for a large academic center in Western New York, as well as a neighboring affiliated satellite clinic were queried for daily treatment adherence rates from November 1, 2022 through February 4, 2023. We classified "severe weather days" based on travel advisories issued by the National Weather Service or from local county officials. Out of a total of 68 working days during the study period, 15 days were classified as having severe weather. We compared the percentage of scheduled patients treated (adherence rates) on severe weather days compared with days without severe weather. Statistical analysis was performed using a two-tailed Z-test for proportions. Under routine operating conditions, out of a total of 7045 scheduled treatment visits, we found a mean daily treatment adherence rate of 93.57%. On severe weather days, out of a total of 2093 scheduled treatments, we found a mean daily treatment adherence rate of 77.83%. Out of these 15 days, the satellite clinic closed for a total of 3 days, while the academic center closed for 1 day. Excluding the dates of facility closure, overall treatment adherence rate was 84.76% on severe weather days (Risk Ratio: 0.91). We found that the difference in treatment adherence rates between regular and severe weather days was statistically significant (p<0.001), even when excluding dates of facility closure. This study demonstrates a significant reduction in treatment adherence rates around severe winter storms, even when excluding dates of facility closure. We suggest that preparation for such incidents be a part of facility contingency planning. Weekend openings can be considered for closures ≥ 2 days, or sustained adherence rates of 85% or less for 3 or more days.

Extraction of Interoperable Data from Healthcare Documents by Identifying Common Data Elements: An Analysis of Radiation Therapy Planning CT Physician Order Entry Records

Introduction: Documentation as well as IT-based management of medical data is of ever-increasing relevance in modern medicine. As radiation oncology is a rather technical, data-driven discipline, standardization, and data exchange are in principle possible. We examined electronic healthcare documents to extract structured information. Planning CT order entry documents were chosen for the analysis, as this covers a common and structured step in radiation oncology, for which standardized documentation may be achieved. The aim was to examine the extent to which relevant information may be exchanged among different institutions. Materials and Methods: We contacted representatives of nine radiation oncology departments. Departments using standardized electronic documentation for planning CT were asked to provide templates of their records, which were analyzed in terms of form and content. Structured information was extracted by identifying definite common data elements, containing explicit information. Relevant common data elements were identified and classified. A quantitative analysis was performed to evaluate the possibility of data exchange. Results: We received data of seven documents that were heterogeneous regarding form and content. 181 definite common data elements considered relevant for the planning CT were identified and assorted into five semantic groups. 139 data elements (76.8%) were present in only one document. The other 42 data elements were present in two to six documents, while none was shared among all seven documents. Conclusion: Structured and interoperable documentation of medical information can be achieved using common data elements. Our analysis showed that a lot of information recorded with healthcare documents can be presented with this approach. Yet, in the analyzed cohort of planning CT order entries, only a few common data elements were shared among the majority of documents. A common vocabulary and consensus upon relevant information is required to promote interoperability and standardization.

Usability and usefulness of (electronic) patient identification systems—A cross-sectional evaluation in German-speaking radiation oncology departments

PurposePatient misidentification in radiation oncology (RO) is a significant concern due to the potential harm to patient health and the burden on healthcare systems. Electronic patient identification systems (ePIS) are increasingly being used as an alternative or supplement to organizational systems (oPIS). The objective of this study was to assess the usability and usefulness of ePIS and oPIS in German-speaking countries.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was designed by a group of experts from various professional backgrounds in RO. The survey consisted of 38 questions encompassing quantitative and qualitative data on usability, user experience, and usefulness of PIS. It was available between August and October 2022.ResultsOf 118 eligible participants, 37% had implemented some kind of ePIS. Overall, 22% of participants who use an oPIS vs. 10% of participants who use an ePIS reported adverse events in terms of patients’ misidentification in the past 5 years. Frequent or very frequent drop-outs of electronic systems were reported by 31% of ePIS users. Users of ePIS significantly more often affirmed a positive cost–benefit ratio of ePIS as well as an improvement of workflow, whereas users of oPIS more frequently apprehended a decrease in staffs’ attention through ePIS. The response rate was 8%.ConclusionThe implementation of ePIS can contribute to efficient PI and improved processes. Apprehensions by oPIS users and assessments of ePIS users differ significantly in aspects of the perceived usefulness of ePIS. However, technical problems need to be addressed to ensure the reliability of ePIS. Further research is needed to assess the impact of different PIS on patient safety in RO.