Michael B Barton1, Susannah Jacob2, Jesmin Shafiq1, Karen Wong1, Stephen R Thompson3, Timothy P Hanna1, Geoff P Delaney1. 1. Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Sydney, Australia; Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Sydney, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, University of NSW, Sydney, Australia. 2. Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Sydney, Australia; Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Sydney, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, University of NSW, Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: Susannah.Jacob@sswahs.nsw.gov.au. 3. Faculty of Medicine, University of NSW, Sydney, Australia; Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In 2003 we estimated that 52.3% of new cases of cancer in Australia had an indication for external beam radiotherapy at least once at some time during the course of their illness. This update reviews the contemporary evidence to define the optimal proportion of new cancers that would benefit from radiotherapy as part of their treatment and estimates the changes to the optimal radiotherapy utilisation rate from 2003 to 2012. MATERIALS AND METHODS: National and international guidelines were reviewed for external beam radiotherapy indications in the management of cancers. Epidemiological data on the proportion of new cases of cancer with each indication for radiotherapy were identified. Indications and epidemiological data were merged to develop an optimal radiotherapy utilisation tree. Univariate and Monte Carlo simulations were used in sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The overall optimal radiotherapy utilisation rate (external beam radiotherapy) for all registered cancers in Australia changed from 52.3% in 2003 to 48.3% in 2012. Overall 8.9% of all cancer patients in Australia have at least one indication for concurrent chemo-radiotherapy during the course of their illness. CONCLUSIONS: The reduction in the radiotherapy utilisation rate was due to changes in epidemiological data, changes to radiotherapy indications and refinements of the model structure.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In 2003 we estimated that 52.3% of new cases of cancer in Australia had an indication for external beam radiotherapy at least once at some time during the course of their illness. This update reviews the contemporary evidence to define the optimal proportion of new cancers that would benefit from radiotherapy as part of their treatment and estimates the changes to the optimal radiotherapy utilisation rate from 2003 to 2012. MATERIALS AND METHODS: National and international guidelines were reviewed for external beam radiotherapy indications in the management of cancers. Epidemiological data on the proportion of new cases of cancer with each indication for radiotherapy were identified. Indications and epidemiological data were merged to develop an optimal radiotherapy utilisation tree. Univariate and Monte Carlo simulations were used in sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The overall optimal radiotherapy utilisation rate (external beam radiotherapy) for all registered cancers in Australia changed from 52.3% in 2003 to 48.3% in 2012. Overall 8.9% of all cancerpatients in Australia have at least one indication for concurrent chemo-radiotherapy during the course of their illness. CONCLUSIONS: The reduction in the radiotherapy utilisation rate was due to changes in epidemiological data, changes to radiotherapy indications and refinements of the model structure.
Authors: A Rodríguez; M Algara; D Monge; J López-Torrecilla; F Caballero; R Morera; R Escó; H Pérez-Montero; C Ferrer; P C Lara Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2017-08-03 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Keith T Griffin; Matthew M Mille; Christopher Pelletier; Mahesh Gopalakrishnan; Jae Won Jung; Choonik Lee; John Kalapurakal; Anil Pyakuryal; Choonsik Lee Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2019-07-05 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: T Sebastian Haupt; Todd Dow; Mike Smyth; J Thomas Toguri; Alysha Roberts; K L Raju; David Bowes Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Bin Cai; Eric Laugeman; Thomas R Mazur; Justin C Park; Lauren E Henke; Hyun Kim; Geoffrey D Hugo; Sasa Mutic; Hua Li Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-02-13 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: A Rodríguez; J M Borrás; J López-Torrecilla; M Algara; A Palacios-Eito; A Gómez-Caamaño; L Olay; P C Lara Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2016-08-04 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Domen Močnik; Bulat Ibragimov; Lei Xing; Primož Strojan; Boštjan Likar; Franjo Pernuš; Tomaž Vrtovec Journal: Phys Med Date: 2018-06-19 Impact factor: 2.685
Authors: Vincenzo L Malavasi; Giuseppina De Marco; Jacopo F Imberti; Filippo Placentino; Marco Vitolo; Ercole Mazzeo; Gianfranco Cicoria; Edoardo Casali; Vincenzo Turco; Frank Lohr; Giuseppe Boriani Journal: Intern Emerg Med Date: 2019-12-02 Impact factor: 3.397