Adoption of hypofractionated radiation therapy for early breast cancer in private practice: the GenesisCare experience 2014­2016.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer Australia guidelines recommend that hypofractionation should be considered for women over the age of 50 years with early breast cancer. GenesisCare is the largest provider of radiation therapy services in Australia. This study aimed to investigate variation in hypofractionation across 4 states encompassing the period when the most recent guidelines had been released. METHODS: Patients with T1 N0 and T2 N0 breast cancer who received radiation therapy as adjuvant therapy after breast conservation surgery between 2014 and 2016 were reviewed. Patient, treatment and disease-related variables were included in the univariate and multivariate models together with other potential explanatory variables such as the state, in which the patient was treated, radiation oncologist and distance from the treatment centre. RESULTS: Of 3374 patients included, 44% received a hypofractionated schedule. There was an increase in the use of hypofractionation from 32% in 2014 to 56% in 2016. Older patients were more likely to receive a hypofractionated treatment schedule - 75% for patients 80 years and over. Multivariate modelling revealed older age, year of treatment, higher T stage and grade, chemotherapy and the individual radiation oncologist (and state) as independent predictors of the use of hypofractionation. There was no difference in hypofractionation based on laterality. CONCLUSIONS: Guidelines from Cancer Australia may impact clinician behaviour. The influence of the individual radiation oncologist remains paramount, and their practice is affected by their immediate colleagues. Subsequent analysis of hypofractionation rates after presentation of these data has resulted in a significant increase in its use.

Compliance with multidisciplinary team meeting management recommendations.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate patient compliance with management recommendations given by a breast cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT), assess for reasons for noncompliance, and perform an exploratory assessment on breast cancer outcomes in noncompliant patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was undertaken for patients selected by their primary clinician to be discussed at the MDT of Breast Cancer Research Centre-WA in Perth between 1st March 2011 and the 28th February 2016. The primary objective was the rate of compliance with MDT management recommendations. Secondary objectives included factors associated with noncompliance, rate of clinical trial uptake, and impact of treatment noncompliance on breast cancer events in a subgroup of early breast cancer (EBC) patients. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: A total of 2614 MDT management recommendations were made for 925 patients. Overall, 92% were compliant with all recommendations given. Clinical trial recruitment was successful in 84.1%. The reasons given for treatment noncompliance were fear of toxicity, choosing an alternative treatment, and treatment inconvenience. In a subset of 337 EBC patients, there was a significantly higher rate of contralateral breast cancer, distant recurrence, and breast cancer-specific death, P = .0016, in those who were noncompliant. Our study demonstrates a high rate of MDT treatment recommendation compliance and clinical trial recruitment. In a subgroup of EBC patients, noncompliance was associated with significantly worse outcomes. Attention to educating patients to minimize their fear of treatment toxicity and ensuring their understanding of evidence-based treatment may lead to lower rates of noncompliance.