Pulmonary Hemorrhage in Patients Treated With Thoracic Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy and Antiangiogenic Agents.

INTRODUCTION: Severe pulmonary hemorrhage can occur in patients treated with thoracic stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) and vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (VEGFis). There is limited understanding of which patients are at risk for toxicity with the combination of thoracic SABR and VEGFis or how the risk differs over either therapy alone. METHODS: We evaluated a prospectively maintained cohort of 690 patients with 818 pulmonary tumors treated with highly conformal SABR. Rates of any-grade and grade 3 plus (G3+) pulmonary hemorrhage were compared between patients treated with or without VEGFi therapy across tumor locations. Outcomes were compared between patients treated with SABR plus VEGFi and a propensity-matched cohort of those treated with VEGFi therapy alone. RESULTS: Treatment with VEGFi plus SABR was associated with higher rates of G3+ pulmonary hemorrhage compared with those treated with SABR alone for the overall cohort (3-y incidence: 7.9% versus 0.6%, p < 0.01) and those with central tumors (19.1% versus 3.3%, p = 0.04). When further subdivided, there were significantly higher toxicity rates with VEGFi for the ultracentral (9.0% versus 45.0%, p = 0.044), but not central nonabutting tumors (0.0% versus 1.3%, p = 0.69). There was an increased incidence of G3+ hemorrhage in patients treated with VEGFi plus SABR compared with VEGFi alone (9.6% versus 1.3%, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of VEGFi and SABR was associated with an increased risk of high-grade pulmonary hemorrhage over either therapy alone. Low rates of toxicity were observed when excluding patients with SABR to ultracentral tumors and applying highly conformal SABR techniques.

Isolated Nodal Recurrence After Definitive Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) results in high rates of primary tumor control for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). For patients with isolated hilar or mediastinal nodal recurrence (INR) after SABR, the optimal salvage treatment strategy is unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of INR after SABR for early-stage NSCLC and to describe patterns of care and treatment outcomes after salvage therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This retrospective cohort study included 342 patients with stage T1-3N0M0 NSCLC treated with definitive SABR from 2003 to 2018. We evaluated the incidence of INR and baseline factors between patients who did and did not experience INR. Among patients who experienced INR, we described treatment patterns and outcomes including overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) from the time of nodal failure using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 3.3 years, the 3-year INR rate was 10.6% (95% CI, 6.6%-13.4%). Among the 34 patients experiencing INR, the 3-year rates of OS and PFS were 39.3% (24.4%-63.3%) and 26.7% (14.1%-0.3%), respectively. The 34 patients with INR were treated with radiation therapy alone (26.7%), concurrent chemoradiation therapy (43.3%), chemotherapy alone (13.3%), or observation (16.7%). Patients treated with concurrent chemoradiation therapy had the best survival outcomes, with a 3-year OS and PFS of 81.5% (61.1%-100.0%) and 63.9% (40.7%-100.0%), respectively. Of the patients treated with salvage radiation therapy or concurrent chemoradiation therapy, 14.3% experienced grade 3 toxic effects, and no patients had grade ≥4 toxic effects. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, INR occurred in approximately 10% of patients treated with SABR for early-stage NSCLC. The highest rates of OS and PFS among patients with INR were observed in those treated with salvage chemoradiation therapy.

Ophthalmic implications of biological threat agents according to the chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosives framework.

As technology continues to evolve, the possibility for a wide range of dangers to people, organizations, and countries escalate globally. The United States federal government classifies types of threats with the capability of inflicting mass casualties and societal disruption as Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Energetics/Explosives (CBRNE). Such incidents encompass accidental and intentional events ranging from weapons of mass destruction and bioterrorism to fires or spills involving hazardous or radiologic material. All of these have the capacity to inflict death or severe physical, neurological, and/or sensorial disabilities if injuries are not diagnosed and treated in a timely manner. Ophthalmic injury can provide important insight into understanding and treating patients impacted by CBRNE agents; however, improper ophthalmic management can result in suboptimal patient outcomes. This review specifically addresses the biological agents the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) deems to have the greatest capacity for bioterrorism. CBRNE biological agents, encompassing pathogens and organic toxins, are further subdivided into categories A, B, and C according to their national security threat level. In our compendium of these biological agents, we address their respective CDC category, systemic and ophthalmic manifestations, route of transmission and personal protective equipment considerations as well as pertinent vaccination and treatment guidelines.

Medical Scribe Impact on Provider Efficiency in Outpatient Radiation Oncology Clinics Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Purpose/Objectives: Medical documentation has become increasingly challenging for providers, particularly with changes to telemedicine visit formats during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Medical scribes may help mitigate this burden. Our objective was to determine how scribes affect provider efficiency during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials/Methods: Providers completed a survey in February 2020 (S1, prepandemic) and 1 year into the COVID-19 pandemic in February 2021 (S2, during pandemic). S1 evaluated perceived impact of scribes on clerical work, medical documentation, and efficiency during office visits using the Likert scale. S2 also addressed scribe use during telemedicine visits. Provider time spent on documentation with or without a scribe was evaluated using a five-level ordinal scale. Provider response was assessed using descriptive frequency statistics. Fisher's exact test was used to compare categorical variables. Analysis was performed using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC). All tests were two sided with an alpha level of 0.05. Results: Fifty-eight providers responded to the surveys: 36 (62%) for S1 and 22 (38%) for S2. Scribe use decreased perceived clerical work and facilitated chart review, and recording of physical examination findings, note documentation, and improved efficiency, both before and during the pandemic (p = 0.5, p = 0.7, p = 0.8, p = 0.8, p = 0.9, respectively). Scribe use significantly decreased time to complete documentation prepandemic (p = 0.002) and during the pandemic for both in-person (p ≤ 0.0001) and telemedicine visits (p = 0.0004). More providers took >60 min to complete medical documentation without the use of a scribe prepandemic (72% vs. 30% with a scribe, p = 0.006) and during the pandemic, after both in-person (40% vs. 0% with a scribe, p = 0.002) and telemedicine visits (35% vs. 0% with a scribe, p = 0.002). Conclusions: Scribe use decreases provider time spent on medical documentation and improves overall efficiency before and during the COVID-19 pandemic for both in-person and telemedicine visits. Integration of scribes into radiation oncology in-person and telemedicine clinics may improve provider satisfaction by reducing burden of documentation.