Latin American Consensus on the Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer.

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is well known as a serious health problem worldwide, especially in low-income countries or those with limited resources, such as most countries in Latin America. International guidelines cannot always be applied to a population from a large region with specific conditions. This study established a Latin American guideline for care of patients with head and neck cancer and presented evidence of HNSCC management considering availability and oncologic benefit. A panel composed of 41 head and neck cancer experts systematically worked according to a modified Delphi process on (1) document compilation of evidence-based answers to different questions contextualized by resource availability and oncologic benefit regarding Latin America (region of limited resources and/or without access to all necessary health care system infrastructure), (2) revision of the answers and the classification of levels of evidence and degrees of recommendations of all recommendations, (3) validation of the consensus through two rounds of online surveys, and (4) manuscript composition. The consensus consists of 12 sections: Head and neck cancer staging, Histopathologic evaluation of head and neck cancer, Head and neck surgery-oral cavity, Clinical oncology-oral cavity, Head and neck surgery-oropharynx, Clinical oncology-oropharynx, Head and neck surgery-larynx, Head and neck surgery-larynx/hypopharynx, Clinical oncology-larynx/hypopharynx, Clinical oncology-recurrent and metastatic head and neck cancer, Head and neck surgery-reconstruction and rehabilitation, and Radiation therapy. The present consensus established 48 recommendations on HNSCC patient care considering the availability of resources and focusing on oncologic benefit. These recommendations could also be used to formulate strategies in other regions like Latin America countries.

Common Sense (Radiation) Oncology: Redefining targets in radiotherapy.

In 2023, the Common Sense Oncology (CSO) movement was launched with the goal of recalibrating cancer care to focus on outcomes that matter to patients. We extend the three CSO pillars - evidence generation, interpretation and communication - to radiation oncology and advocate for better evidence demonstrating the value of our modality.

Optimizing Clinical Implementation of Hypofractionation: Comprehensive Evidence Synthesis and Practical Guidelines for Low- and Middle-Income Settings.

The global cancer burden, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), worsens existing disparities, amplified by the rising costs of advanced treatments. The shortage of radiation therapy (RT) services is a significant issue in LMICs. Extended conventional treatment regimens pose significant challenges, especially in resource-limited settings. Hypofractionated radiotherapy (HRT) and ultra-hypofractionated/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) offer promising alternatives by shortening treatment durations. This approach optimizes the utilization of radiotherapy machines, making them more effective in meeting the growing demand for cancer care. Adopting HRT/SBRT holds significant potential, especially in LMICs. This review provides the latest clinical evidence and guideline recommendations for the application of HRT/SBRT in the treatment of breast, prostate, and lung cancers. It emphasizes the critical importance of rigorous training, technology, stringent quality assurance, and safety protocols to ensure precise and secure treatments. Additionally, it addresses practical considerations for implementing these treatments in LMICs, highlighting the need for comprehensive support and collaboration to enhance patient access to advanced cancer care.

Meta-Analysis of STereotactic body radiothERapy in non-spine BONE metastaseS (MASTER-BONES).

PURPOSE: The efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiation (SBRT) for patients with non-spine bone metastases (NSBM) remains in question. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate SBRT treatment outcomes in NSBM. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eligible studies were retrieved from Medline, Embase, Scielo, the Cochrane Library, and annual meeting proceedings until July 6, 2023. We adhered to the PRISMA and MOOSE guideline recommendations. Quantitative synthesis was performed using a random effects model. RESULTS: Seven retrospective studies, with a total of 807 patients (1048 lesions) treated with stereotactic body radiation were included, with median follow-up ranging from 7.6-26.5 months. The most common stereotactic body radiation sites were pelvis (39.2%), ribs (25.8%), femur (16.7%), and humerus/shoulder region (8.7%). At 1-year, the LF and FR were 7% (95%CI 5.5-8.5%; I2=0, n= 75/1048), and 5.3% (95%CI 3-7.5%;I2=0, n= 65/1010). The 2-year cumulative LF incidence was 12.1% (95% CI: 10-15.5%). The OS and PFS at 1-year were 82% (95%CI 75-88%;I2=82%, n= 746/867), and 33.5%(95%CI 26-41%;I2=0%, n= 51/152), with a median of 20.2 months (95%CI: 10.9-49.1 months) and 8.3 months (95% CI: 6.3-10.3%) for OS and PFS, respectively. Meta-regression analysis revealed a significant relationship between planning target volume and fracture rate (p<0.05). Ribs 2.5% followed by the femur 1.9% (95%CI:0-6.1%) were the most common fracture sites. The occurrence of pain flare, fatigue and dermatitis were 7 %, 5.4 %, and 0.65 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Stereotactic body radiation proves both safety and efficacy for non-spine bone metastases and serious complications (grade 3) are infrequent. Careful consideration of target volume is crucial due to its link with a higher fracture risk.

Risk of COVID-19 death for people with a pre-existing cancer diagnosis prior to COVID-19-vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

While previous reviews found a positive association between pre-existing cancer diagnosis and COVID-19-related death, most early studies did not distinguish long-term cancer survivors from those recently diagnosed/treated, nor adjust for important confounders including age. We aimed to consolidate higher-quality evidence on risk of COVID-19-related death for people with recent/active cancer (compared to people without) in the pre-COVID-19-vaccination period. We searched the WHO COVID-19 Global Research Database (20 December 2021), and Medline and Embase (10 May 2023). We included studies adjusting for age and sex, and providing details of cancer status. Risk-of-bias assessment was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled adjusted odds or risk ratios (aORs, aRRs) or hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using generic inverse-variance random-effects models. Random-effects meta-regressions were used to assess associations between effect estimates and time since cancer diagnosis/treatment. Of 23 773 unique title/abstract records, 39 studies were eligible for inclusion (2 low, 17 moderate, 20 high risk of bias). Risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with active or recently diagnosed/treated cancer (general population: aOR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.36-1.61, I2 = 0; people with COVID-19: aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41-1.77, I2 = 0.58; inpatients with COVID-19: aOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.34-2.06, I2 = 0.98). Risks were more elevated for lung (general population: aOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4-4.7) and hematological cancers (general population: aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.68-2.68, I2 = 0.43), and for metastatic cancers. Meta-regression suggested risk of COVID-19-related death decreased with time since diagnosis/treatment, for example, for any/solid cancers, fitted aOR = 1.55 (95% CI: 1.37-1.75) at 1 year and aOR = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.80-1.20) at 5 years post-cancer diagnosis/treatment. In conclusion, before COVID-19-vaccination, risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with recent cancer, with risk depending on cancer type and time since diagnosis/treatment.

Real-World Evidence on the Use of Endocrine Therapy for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in Patients Treated With Breast-Conserving Surgery Followed by Postoperative Radiation Therapy: A Brazilian Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: This study aims to evaluate the reproducibility of findings from randomized controlled trials regarding adjuvant hormone therapy (HT) for breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in a real-life scenario. MATERIALS/METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used Fundação Oncocentro de São Paulo database. It included DCIS patients DCIS who received breast-conserving surgery and postoperative radiation therapy. The endpoints were local control (LC), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We analyzed 2192 patients treated between 2000 and 2020. The median FU was 48.99 months. Most patients (53.33%; n = 1169) received adjuvant HT. Patients not receiving adjuvant HT tend to be older (P = .021) and have a lower educational level (P < .001). At the end of FU, 1.5% of patients had local recurrence, and there was no significant difference between groups (P = .19). The 10-year OS and BCSS were 89.4% and 97.5% for adjuvant HT versus 91.5% and 98.5% for no adjuvant HT, respectively, and there were no significant differences between groups. The 10-year OS was 93.25% for medium/high education level versus 87.31% for low (HR for death 0.51; 95% CI, 0.32-0.83; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: The benefits of adjuvant HT for DCIS were not reproduced in a Brazilian cohort. Education significantly impacted survival and HT usage, reflecting the influence of socioeconomic factors. These findings can allow for more precise interventions.

Recommended first-line management of asymptomatic brain metastases from EGFR mutant and ALK positive non-small cell lung cancer varies significantly according to specialty: an international survey of clinical practice.

Background: The role for radiotherapy or surgery in the upfront management of brain metastases (BrM) in epidermal growth factor receptor mutant (EGFRm) or anaplastic lymphoma kinase translocation positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is uncertain because of a lack of prospective evidence supporting tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy. Further understanding of practice heterogeneity is necessary to guide collaborative efforts in establishing guideline recommendations. Methods: We conducted an international survey among medical (MO), clinical (CO), and radiation oncologists (RO), as well as neurosurgeons (NS), of treatment recommendations for asymptomatic BrM (in non-eloquent regions) EGFRm or ALK+ NSCLC patients according to specific clinical scenarios. We grouped and compared treatment recommendations according to specialty. Responses were summarized using counts and percentages and analyzed using the Fisher exact test. Results: A total of 449 surveys were included in the final analysis: 48 CO, 85 MO, 60 NS, and 256 RO. MO and CO were significantly more likely than RO and NS to recommend first-line TKI monotherapy, regardless of the number and/or size of asymptomatic BrM (in non-eloquent regions). Radiotherapy in addition to TKI as first-line management was preferred by all specialties for patients with ≥4 BrM. NS recommended surgical resection more often than other specialties for BrM measuring >2 cm. Conclusions: Recommendations for the management of BrM from EGFRm or ALK+ NSCLC vary significantly according to oncology sub-specialties. Development of multidisciplinary guidelines and further research on establishing optimal treatment strategies is warranted.

Real-world evidence for oncological outcomes after radiotherapy or surgery for T1a-T1b glottic squamous cell carcinoma: A population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Compare outcomes after surgery (S) or radiotherapy (RT) for T1a-T1b glottic squamous cell carcinoma (T1GSCC) in a population-based cohort study. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with T1GSCC from 1999 to 2020 were identified from a public database. Clinical, demographic, and social data were extracted. Treatment and patient groups and subgroups were compared with log-rank test, Cox proportional test, and propensity-score matched (PSM). RESULTS: Eight hundred and eighty-eight patients with T1GSCC were included in the study, with a median follow-up of 61 months. The 5- and 10-year overall survival (OS) S versus RT were 76% versus 71% and 60% versus 52% (p = 0.02), respectively. In the subgroup analysis, S was associated with better OS for T1b, male, and public service patients (p < 0.05). In the PSM cohort of S versus RT with 110 patients each, there was no significant difference in the OS, CSS, and LC. CONCLUSIONS: T1GSCC has favorable outcomes with S or RT.

Radiotherapy resources in Brazil (RT2030): a comprehensive analysis and projections for 2030.

BACKGROUND: The demand for radiotherapy in Brazil is unfulfilled, and the scarcity of data on the national network hampers the development of effective policies. We aimed to evaluate the current situation, estimate demands and requirements, and provide an action plan to ensure access to radiotherapy for those in need by 2030. METHODS: The Brazilian Society for Radiation Oncology created a task force (RT2030) including physicians, medical physicists, policy makers, patient advocates, and suppliers, all of whom were major stakeholders involved in Brazilian radiotherapy care. The group was further divided into seven working groups to address themes associated with radiotherapy care in Brazil. From March 1, 2019, to Aug 3, 2020, there were monthly meetings between the group's leaders and the Central Committee and six general meetings. First, a comprehensive search of all different national databases was done to identify all radiotherapy centres. Questionnaires evaluating radiotherapy infrastructure and human resources and assing the availability, distribution, capacity, and workload of resources were created and sent to the radioprotection supervisor of each centre. Results were analysed nationally and across the country's regions and health-care systems. A pre-planned review of available databases was done to gather data on active radiation oncology centres and the distribution of radiotherapy machines (linear accelerators [LINACs]) across Brazil. We used national population and cancer incidence projections, recommended radiotherapy usage from the medical literature, and national working patterns to project radiotherapy demands in 2030. An action plan was established with suggestions to address the gaps and meet the demands. FINDINGS: The database search yielded 279 centres with an active radiotherapy registry. After applying predefined exclusion criteria, 263 centres were identified that provided external beam radiotherapy machines with or without brachytherapy. All 263 operational centres answered the questionnaires sent on Dec 9, 2019, which were then returned between Jan 1 and June 30, 2020. There were 409 therapy machines, 646 radiation oncologists, 533 physicists, and 230 989 patients undergoing radiotherapy (150 628 [65·2%] in the public health-care system and 80 937 [35·0%] in private). The mean annual occupation rate was 566 patients per treatment machine (SD 250). The number of residents per treatment machine ranged from 258 333 to 1 800 000. Technology availability varied considerably among regions and systems. In 2030, 639 994 new cancer cases are expected, which will require 332 797 radiotherapy courses. Therefore, 530 LINACs, 1079 radiation oncologists, and 1060 medical physicists will be needed. INTERPRETATION: The expected increase in cancer incidence in the coming years will probably increase the disparities in cancer care and the burden for Brazilian patients. We provide a roadmap of the current situation and the particularities of the Brazilian radiotherapy network, which can serve as a starting point for cancer policy planning to improve this scenario. FUNDING: Accuray, BRAINLAB, Elekta, IBA, ONE medical solution, SUN NUCLEAR corporation, VARIAN, and ZIGMA.

Survival outcomes and predicting intracranial metastasis in stage III non-small cell lung cancer treated with definitive chemoradiation: Real-world data from a tertiary cancer center.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: Around 30% of patients with non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) are diagnosed with stage III disease at presentation, of which about 50% are treated with definitive chemoradiation (CRT). Around 65-80% of patients will eventually develop intracranial metastases (IM), though associated risk factors are not clearly described. We report survival outcomes and risk factors for development of IM in a cohort of patients with stage III NSCLC treated with CRT at a tertiary cancer center. MATERIALS/METHODS: We identified 195 patients with stage III NSCLC treated with CRT from January 2010 to May 2021. Multivariable logistic regression was used to generate odds ratios for covariates associated with development of IM. Kaplan-Meier analysis with the Log Rank test was used for unadjusted time-to-event analyses. P-value for statistical significance was set at < 0.05 with a two-sided test. RESULTS: Out of 195 patients, 108 (55.4%) had stage IIIA disease and 103 (52.8%) had adenocarcinoma histology. The median age and follow-up (in months) was 67 (IQR 60-74) and 21 (IQR 12-43), respectively. The dose of radiation was 60 Gy in 30 fractions for148 patients (75.9%). Of the 77 patients who received treatment since immunotherapy was available and standard at our cancer center, 45 (58.4%) received at least one cycle. During follow-up, 84 patients (43.1%) developed any metastasis, and 33 (16.9%) developed IM (either alone or with extracranial metastasis). 150 patients (76.9%) experienced a treatment delay (interval between diagnosis and treatment > 4 weeks). Factors associated with developing any metastasis included higher overall stage at diagnosis (p = 0.013) and higher prescribed dose (p = 0.022). Factors associated with developing IM included higher ratio of involved over sampled lymph nodes (p = 0.001) and receipt of pre-CRT systemic or radiotherapy for any reason (p = 0.034). On multivariate logistical regression, treatment delay (OR 3.9, p = 0.036) and overall stage at diagnosis (IIIA vs. IIIB/IIIC) (OR 2.8, p = 0.02) predicted development of IM. These findings were sustained on sensitivity analysis using different delay intervals. Median OS was not reached for the overall cohort, and was 43.1 months for patients with IM and 40.3 months in those with extracranial-only metastasis (p = 0.968). In patients with any metastasis, median OS was longer (p = 0.003) for those who experienced a treatment delay (48.4 months) compared to those that did not (12.2 months), likely due to expedited diagnosis and treatment in patients with a higher symptom burden secondary to more advanced disease. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stage III NSCLC treated with definitive CRT, the risk of IM appears to increase with overall stage at diagnosis and, importantly, may be associated with experiencing a treatment delay (> 4 weeks). Metastatic disease of any kind remains the primary life-limiting prognostic factor in these patients with advanced lung cancer. In patients with metastatic disease, treatment delay was associated with better survival. Patients who experience a treatment delay and those initially diagnosed at a more advanced overall stage may warrant more frequent surveillance for early diagnosis and treatment of IM. Healthcare system stakeholders should strive to mitigate treatment delay in patients with locally NSCLC to reduce the risk of IM. Further research is needed to better understand factors associated with survival, treatment delay, and the development of IM after CRT in the immunotherapy era.

Machine learning for malignant versus benign focal liver lesions on US and CEUS: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of learning (ML) algorithms (conventional and deep learning algorithms) for the classification of malignant versus benign focal liver lesions (FLLs) on US and CEUS. METHODS: Available databases were searched for relevant published studies through September 2022. Studies met eligibility criteria if they evaluate the diagnostic performance of ML for the classification of malignant and benign focal liver lesions on US and CEUS. The pooled per-lesion sensitivities and specificities for each modality with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 8 studies on US, 11 on CEUS, and 1 study evaluating both methods met the inclusion criteria with a total of 34,245 FLLs evaluated. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of ML for the malignancy classification of FLLs were 81.7% (95% CI, 77.2-85.4%) and 84.8% (95% CI, 76.0-90.8%) for US, compared to 87.1% (95% CI, 81.8-91.0%) and 87.0% (95% CI, 83.1-90.1%) for CEUS. In the subgroup analysis of studies that evaluated deep learning algorithms, the sensitivity and specificity of CEUS (n = 4) increased to 92.4% (95% CI, 88.5-95.0%) and 88.2% (95% CI, 81.1-92.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic performance of ML algorithms for the malignant classification of FLLs was high for both US and CEUS with overall similar sensitivity and specificity. The similar performance of US may be related to the higher prevalence of DL models in that group.

The Choosing Wisely Oncology Canada Cancer List: An Update.

BACKGROUND: Choosing Wisely (CW) Canada is a national campaign to identify unnecessary or harmful services that are frequently used in Canada. The original CW Oncology Canada Cancer list was developed in 2014. A CW Oncology Canada working group was established to review new evidence and guidelines and to update the current CW Oncology Canada Cancer List. METHODS: Between January and March 2022, we conducted a survey of members of the Canadian Association of Medical Oncology (CAMO), Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology (CARO) and the Canadian Society of Surgical Oncology (CSSO). We took the feedback from the survey, including potential new recommendations as well as those that were thought to be no longer relevant and up to date, and conducted a literature review with the assistance of the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health (CADTH). The final updated list of recommendations was made by the CW Oncology Canada working group based on a consensus process. RESULTS: We reviewed two potential recommendations to add and two potential recommendations to remove from the existing CW Oncology Canada Cancer List. The recommendation "Do not prescribe whole brain radiation over stereotactic radiosurgery for patient with limited brain metastases (≤4 lesions)" was supported by several evidence-based guidelines with the strength of recommendations ranging from strong to moderate and the quality of evidence ranging from level 1 to level 3. After reviewing the evidence, the working group felt that the other potential recommendation to add and the two potential recommendations to remove did not have sufficient strength and quality of evidence at this time to be added or removed from the list. CONCLUSION: The updated Choosing Wisely Oncology Canada Cancer List consists of 11 items that oncologists should question in the treatment of patients with cancer. This list can be used to design specific interventions to reduce low value care.

Are the Choosing Wisely Canada Cancer recommendations relevant and up to date with the current evidence?

INTRODUCTION: The Choosing Wisely (CW) Canada campaign was launched in 2012 to identify low-value, unnecessary and/or harmful services that are frequently used. The CW Canada Cancer list was developed in 2014 by a task force convened by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. The list outlines ten harmful or low-value practices that oncologists should avoid. We conducted a study of oncologists to understand the familiarity with the current recommendations and whether these continue to be relevant and up to date. METHODS: An electronic survey was developed by the members of the CW Oncology Working Group and distributed to practicing oncologists. The survey consisted of questions on 1) the familiarity of the existing CW Canada Cancer list 2) the relevance of the current list to current evidence and 3) any recommendation(s) that could be added or removed from the existing list. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze responses and narrative analysis was used to identify themes in open-ended questions. RESULTS: Between January 14 and May 3, 2022, 151 survey responses were received (overall response rate of 20 %) from 68 medical oncologists (45 % of study cohort, response rate 32 %), 54 radiation oncologists (36 % of study cohort, response rate 14 %) and 29 surgical oncologists (19 % of study cohort, response rate 18 %). Seventy-nine percent (120/151) of respondents were familiar with the current list and 65 % (78/119) said they implemented the recommendations "always" or "most of the time". Eight recommendations had > 80 % agreement that they were relevant and up to date with current evidence. There was interest in adding a new recommendation to avoid whole brain radiation and consider stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in patients with ≤ 4 brain metastases. CONCLUSIONS: There is excellent familiarity with the CW Canada Cancer list amongst the survey respondents and most recommendations continue to be relevant and up to date with current evidence. There is an opportunity to educate physicians about the intent of the campaign and to add a new recommendation on the use of SRS for patients with a limited number of brain metastases. There is also an opportunity to identify barriers at the patient, provider and institution level that are hindering adoption of the CW Canada Cancer list POLICY SUMMARY: This survey will impact implementation and publication of an updated CW Canada Cancer list.

A Precise Approach for Radiotherapy of Breast Cancer.

Radiotherapy is an integral part of the multidisciplinary management of breast cancer (BC). There have been multiple recent advances in the delivery of radiotherapy, reviewed with a critical discussion of the evidence from trials investigating adjuvant ultra-hypofractionation and partial breast irradiation for early-stage BC, and the locoregional management of lymph nodes in locally advanced BC. Multiple precision medicine-based approaches have been developed as prognostic and/or predictive for BC patients and identifying biomarkers of radioresistance could help identify patients that may benefit from dose-escalated radiotherapy or radiosensitizers. Radiotherapy after breast reconstruction is an area of current controversy in the field, and we evaluated the decision-making considerations in this situation. The oligometastatic state is an emerging field for many cancer sites based on recent trials investigating ablative radiotherapy for oligometastatic BC. This chapter is an overview of radiotherapy for BC, with a focus on recent advances in early-stage, locally advanced, and oligometastatic disease.

Neurocognitive Performance in Adults Treated With Radiation for a Primary Brain Tumor.

Purpose: The contributory effects of radiation dose to different brain regions on neurocognitive performance after radiation therapy (RT) for primary brain tumors is not well known. Methods and Materials: In this retrospective cohort study, 30 patients with brain tumors treated with photon RT were identified, and radiation dosimetric parameters across brain regions were calculated. All patients had longitudinal neurocognitive evaluations at baseline and after treatment. Generalized estimating equations were used to model each neurocognitive endpoint over time in a multivariable analysis, while adjusted for multiple comparisons of brain regions. Results: Median follow-up from RT to last assessment was 4.1 years. Fewer years of formal education and older age at the time of RT were associated with lower scores in language, verbal memory, and working memory, after adjustment for baseline scores in multivariable analyses. Higher radiation dose to specific brain regions was not associated with declines in any of the evaluated cognitive domains. On average, there was no clinically significant decline (magnitude of z score change >1) between first and last neurocognitive evaluation. Across each individual cognitive domain, fewer than 15% of patients were impaired at most recent follow-up. Conclusions: In this small study of 30 patients treated with RT for a primary brain tumor, brain region dosimetry was not associated with decline in cognitive performance. Older age at time of RT and fewer years of formal education were associated with declines in cognitive performance, suggesting that effects of nondosimetric factors on cognitive performance should be considered alongside treatment factors and dosimetry in neuro-oncology research.

System-Level Capacity of High-Dose Rate (HDR) Brachytherapy for Management of Cervical Cancer in an Upper-Middle Income Country: A Case Study From Brazil.

PURPOSE: Ensuring optimal access to radiation therapy (RT) facilities is challenging for many countries. External beam RT and brachytherapy (BCT) are required to treat advanced cervical cancer. In this analysis, we evaluated the system-level capacity of BCT in Brazil and its relationship with access to complete cervix cancer radiation treatment with both external beam RT and BCT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We used official government reports to compile data on BCT and linear accelerator (LINAC) numbers, geographic distribution and coverage, cervical cancer annual incidence, and prevalence in Brazil. We also evaluated changes in national BCT capacity between 2001 and 2021. The 2020 relationship between cervical cancer cases for RT per BCT unit, LINAC per BCT unit, and the LINAC supply for each Brazilian state and region were evaluated. For comparison, the LINAC per BCT unit ratio in Brazil was compared with Europe using International Atomic Energy Agency data. RESULTS: Eighty-five percent (23/27) of Brazilian states have at least 1 BCT unit; nationally, there are 117 cervical cancer cases for RT per BCT unit. Compared with the benchmark of 200 cervical cancer cases per BCT device per year, there are enough BCT units to fill capacity in Brazil nationally and regionally. The ratio of total cervix cancer cases per BCT unit decreased substantially over time from 142 in 2013 to 117 in 2021 (P < .0001). Nationally, there are 252 LINAC units in the public system with a ratio of 1985 new cancer cases/LINAC. Brazilian regions have a LINAC shortage ranging from 15 to 141 units. There were 2.55 LINACs per BCT unit in Brazil, compared with 3.25 in Europe (P = .012). CONCLUSIONS: Over 20 years, BCT capacity in Brazil has increased to meet the cervical cancer demand. However, the LINAC shortage has persisted over the decades, affecting access to complete treatment and possibly the oncological outcomes. These data can help organize the patient treatment flow, avoid treatment delays, and improve survival.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus surgery for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: an updated meta-analysis involving 29,511 patients included in comparative studies.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) versus surgery for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) by means of a meta-analysis of comparative studies. METHODS: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines, searches were performed on PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library for eligible studies. The meta-analysis compared the hazard ratios (HR) for overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and local control (LC). Subgroup and meta-regression analyses evaluated the association of extent of surgical resection, study publication year, tumor staging, propensity score matching, proportion of chemotherapy use, and proportion of pathological lymph node involvement with CSS and OS. RESULTS: Thirty studies involving 29,511 patients were included (surgery group: 17,146 patients and SBRT group: 12,365 patients). There was a significant difference in favor of surgery vs. SBRT in the 3-year OS (HR = 1.35; 95% CI: 1.22-1.44; I2 = 66%) and 3-year CSS (HR = 1.23; 95% CI: 1.09-1.37; I2 = 17%), but not in the 3-year LC (HR = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.93-1.08; I2 = 19%). In the subgroup analysis for OS, no significant difference between surgery and SBRT groups was observed in the T1N0M0 subgroup (HR = 1.26; 95% CI: 0.95-1.68; I2 = 0%). In subgroup analysis for CSS, no significant difference was detected between the sublobar resection subgroup and the SBRT group (HR = 1.21; 95% CI: 0.96-1.53; I2 = 16%). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery generally resulted in better 3-year OS and CSS than did SBRT; however, publication bias and heterogeneity may have influenced these findings. In contrast, SBRT produced LC results similar to those of surgery regardless of the extent of surgical resection. These findings may have important clinical implications for patients with comorbidities, advanced age, poor pulmonary reserve, and other factors that may contraindicate surgery.