R Banerjee1, G Dundas, C Doll. 1. Department of Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Imaging by fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography (pet) has emerged as a valuable tool in the management of locally advanced cervical cancer (lacc), both for assessment of lymph node status and determination of response to chemoradiotherapy. The aim of the present study was to survey Canadian radiation oncologists to determine access to pet imaging for lacc patients and to assess current patterns of practice. METHODS: Radiation oncology centres across Canada were contacted to identify radiation oncologists who treat patients with lacc. The focus of the survey was patients treated with radical chemoradiotherapy with curative intent. An anonymous online tool was used to distribute a 23-item questionnaire asking about access to pet imaging, opinions on indications for pet imaging, and practice patterns relating to the use of pet in this patient population. Questionnaire responses were tabulated and analyzed. RESULTS: The response rate was 65% (35 of 54 questionnaire recipients). Most respondents (80%) have access to pet for lacc patients, usually restricted to study protocols. Of the respondents,48% considered that access to pet was timely. Frequency of routine orders for pet before and after treatment (to assess response) was 63% and 15% respectively. With better access, 91% of respondents would routinely order pet before treatment, and 61% would routinely order it for posttreatment assessment. For initial staging, 85% of respondents considered pet to be a standard of care, and nearly half (45%) believed it should be a standard of care to assess treatment response. Because of access limitations, nearly 70% of respondents (23 of 34) do not order pet as often as they feel it is clinically indicated, and 74% agree that better access to pet would lead to improved care for lacc patients in Canada. CONCLUSIONS: Canadian radiation oncologists support the routine use of pet imaging in the initial workup of patients with lacc. Access to pet imaging limits routine use for these patients in clinically indicated situations. There is strong support for developing guidelines for pet use in this patient population.
PURPOSE: Imaging by fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography (pet) has emerged as a valuable tool in the management of locally advanced cervical cancer (lacc), both for assessment of lymph node status and determination of response to chemoradiotherapy. The aim of the present study was to survey Canadian radiation oncologists to determine access to pet imaging for lacc patients and to assess current patterns of practice. METHODS: Radiation oncology centres across Canada were contacted to identify radiation oncologists who treat patients with lacc. The focus of the survey was patients treated with radical chemoradiotherapy with curative intent. An anonymous online tool was used to distribute a 23-item questionnaire asking about access to pet imaging, opinions on indications for pet imaging, and practice patterns relating to the use of pet in this patient population. Questionnaire responses were tabulated and analyzed. RESULTS: The response rate was 65% (35 of 54 questionnaire recipients). Most respondents (80%) have access to pet for lacc patients, usually restricted to study protocols. Of the respondents,48% considered that access to pet was timely. Frequency of routine orders for pet before and after treatment (to assess response) was 63% and 15% respectively. With better access, 91% of respondents would routinely order pet before treatment, and 61% would routinely order it for posttreatment assessment. For initial staging, 85% of respondents considered pet to be a standard of care, and nearly half (45%) believed it should be a standard of care to assess treatment response. Because of access limitations, nearly 70% of respondents (23 of 34) do not order pet as often as they feel it is clinically indicated, and 74% agree that better access to pet would lead to improved care for lacc patients in Canada. CONCLUSIONS: Canadian radiation oncologists support the routine use of pet imaging in the initial workup of patients with lacc. Access to pet imaging limits routine use for these patients in clinically indicated situations. There is strong support for developing guidelines for pet use in this patient population.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cervical cancer; access; pet; practice patterns
Authors: Nora T Kizer; Israel Zighelboim; Ashley S Case; Summer B Dewdney; Premal H Thaker; L Stewart Massad Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2009-05-14 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Lilie L Lin; Sasa Mutic; Daniel A Low; Richard LaForest; Milos Vicic; Imran Zoberi; Tom R Miller; Perry W Grigsby Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-01-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Elizabeth A Kidd; Barry A Siegel; Farrokh Dehdashti; Janet S Rader; David G Mutch; Matthew A Powell; Perry W Grigsby Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-03-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Wui-Jin Koh; Benjamin E Greer; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Sachin M Apte; Susana M Campos; John Chan; Kathleen R Cho; David Cohn; Marta Ann Crispens; Nefertiti DuPont; Patricia J Eifel; David K Gaffney; Robert L Giuntoli; Ernest Han; Warner K Huh; John R Lurain; Lainie Martin; Mark A Morgan; David Mutch; Steven W Remmenga; R Kevin Reynolds; William Small; Nelson Teng; Todd Tillmanns; Fidel A Valea; Nicole R McMillian; Miranda Hughes Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2013-03-01 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Jacqueline Esthappan; Summer Chaudhari; Lakshmi Santanam; Sasa Mutic; Jeffrey Olsen; Dusten M Macdonald; Daniel A Low; Anurag K Singh; Perry W Grigsby Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-05-09 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Nicolas Magné; Cyrus Chargari; Lisa Vicenzi; Norman Gillion; Taha Messai; Jacques Magné; Gérald Bonardel; Christine Haie-Meder Journal: Cancer Treat Rev Date: 2008-10-11 Impact factor: 12.111
Authors: Rebecca A Brooks; Janet S Rader; Farrokh Dehdashti; David G Mutch; Matthew A Powell; Premal H Thaker; Barry A Siegel; Perry W Grigsby Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2008-10-16 Impact factor: 5.482