ÖGRO survey on radiotherapy capacity in Austria : Status quo and estimation of future demands.

BACKGROUND: A comprehensive evaluation of the current national and regional radiotherapy capacity in Austria with an estimation of demands for 2020 and 2030 was performed by the Austrian Society for Radiation Oncology, Radiobiology and Medical Radiophysics (ÖGRO). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All Austrian centers provided data on the number of megavoltage (MV) units, treatment series, fractions, percentage of retreatments and complex treatment techniques as well as the daily operating hours for the year 2014. In addition, waiting times until the beginning of radiotherapy were prospectively recorded over the first quarter of 2015. National and international epidemiological prediction data were used to estimate future demands. RESULTS: For a population of 8.51 million, 43 MV units were at disposal. In 14 radiooncological centers, a total of 19,940 series with a mean number of 464 patients per MV unit/year and a mean fraction number of 20 (range 16-24) per case were recorded. The average re-irradiation ratio was 14%. The survey on waiting times until start of treatment showed provision shortages in 40% of centers with a mean waiting time of 13.6 days (range 0.5-29.3 days) and a mean maximum waiting time of 98.2 days. Of all centers, 21% had no or only a limited ability to deliver complex treatment techniques. Predictions for 2020 and 2030 indicate an increased need in the overall number of MV units to a total of 63 and 71, respectively. CONCLUSION: This ÖGRO survey revealed major regional differences in radiooncological capacity. Considering epidemiological developments, an aggravation of the situation can be expected shortly. This analysis serves as a basis for improved public regional health care planning.

Epidemiological aspects of hadron therapy: a prospective nationwide study of the Austrian project MedAustron and the Austrian Society of Radiooncology (OEGRO).

BACKGROUND: The planned MedAustron hadron therapy facility is designed to compare proton and carbon ion beam therapy under the same technical conditions. For the calculation of the number of potential patients for hadron therapy so far, only epidemiological estimations on cancer incidence are available without inclusion of the percentage of patients routinely referred to conventional radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nationwide prospective survey to collect disease and treatment related data on patients receiving conventional radiotherapy at all 12 treatment facilities. Epidemiological cancer incidence (Statistic Austria 1999) were correlated with the number of patients receiving conventional radiotherapy. Based on published clinical and experimental results on proton and carbon ion therapy, a calculation of patient's subgroups suitable for hadron therapy was performed at five European University hospitals involved in the HICAT, CNAO, ETOILE and MEDAustron project. Using the mean values of the University specific percentages per tumour site, the number of potential patients was estimated. RESULTS: In Austria, a total of 3783 patients started radiotherapy during the study period of 3 months resulting in an approximated number of 15132 patients per year. The number of potential patients was estimated to 2044 per year, representing 5.6% of all newly diagnosed cancer patients and 13.5% of all irradiated cancer patients. CONCLUSION: There is a clear place for a hadron therapy facility in Austria, based on pattern of care in radiotherapy, cancer incidence and indications.

The med AUSTRON/OGRO patterns of care study on radiotherapy indications in Austria.

PURPOSE: In Austria a national survey was conducted by Med AUSTRON/Osterreichische Gesellschaft for Radio--Onkologie, Radiobiologie und Medizinische Radiophysik (OGRO) in order to estimate the indications, patient numbers and radiotherapy treatment planning procedures and performances at all Austrian radiotherapy institutes. Results were correlated with incidence rates (Austrian cancer registry) to determine patterns of radiotherapy practice in Austria. MATERIAL AND METHODS: At 12 radiotherapy departments of Austria data of all patients receiving irradiation within a 3 months (2002/2003) period were assessed. On the basis of a questionnaire number of treated patients, indications, and parameters of disease (stage, histology) and treatment modalities were evaluated. Results were analysed with regard to different tumour groups, according to academic and non academic hospitals, and correlated with epidemiological data on cancer incidence. RESULTS: In total, 3783 patients were registered within this period. According to the different tumour entities percentages of patients receiving radiotherapy within initial treatment varied from 3% to 90 % (e.g. brain tumours: 77%, breast cancer: 90%, prostate cancer: 35%). The most frequent indications to radiotherapy per radiotherapy department were breast cancer (range 22%-35%; mean 26%), urological tumours (range 6%-27%; mean 12%) and bone metastases (mean 10%, range 3%-17%). CONCLUSION: In Austria breast cancer, urological tumours and bone metastases are representing the most common indications to radiotherapy. Among the different departments variations in indications to radiotherapy were observed. Our study is the first evaluation of radiotherapeutic management in Austria.