Elyn H Wang1, Sarah S Mougalian2, Pamela R Soulos3, Charles E Rutter4, Suzanne B Evans4, Bruce G Haffty5, Cary P Gross6, James B Yu7. 1. Yale School of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. 2. Yale School of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Medical Oncology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Cancer Outcomes, Public Policy, and Effectiveness Research Center at Yale, New Haven, Connecticut. 3. Yale School of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Cancer Outcomes, Public Policy, and Effectiveness Research Center at Yale, New Haven, Connecticut. 4. Yale School of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Cancer Outcomes, Public Policy, and Effectiveness Research Center at Yale, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey. 6. Yale School of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey; Department of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. 7. Yale School of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Cancer Outcomes, Public Policy, and Effectiveness Research Center at Yale, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. Electronic address: james.b.yu@yale.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the relationship of patient, hospital, and cancer characteristics with the adoption of hypofractionation in a national sample of patients diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We performed a retrospective study of breast cancer patients in the National Cancer Data Base from 2004-2011 who were treated with radiation therapy and met eligibility criteria for hypofractionation. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with receipt of hypofractionation (vs conventional fractionation). RESULTS: We identified 13,271 women (11.7%) and 99,996 women (88.3%) with early-stage breast cancer who were treated with hypofractionation and conventional fractionation, respectively. The use of hypofractionation increased significantly, with 5.4% of patients receiving it in 2004 compared with 22.8% in 2011 (P<.001 for trend). Patients living ≥50 miles from the cancer reporting facility had increased odds of receiving hypofractionation (odds ratio 1.57 [95% confidence interval 1.44-1.72], P<.001). Adoption of hypofractionation was associated with treatment at an academic center (P<.001) and living in an area with high median income (P<.001). Hypofractionation was less likely to be used in patients with high-risk disease, such as increased tumor size (P<.001) or poorly differentiated histologic grade (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of hypofractionation is rising and is associated with increased travel distance and treatment at an academic center. Further adoption of hypofractionation may be tempered by both clinical and nonclinical concerns.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the relationship of patient, hospital, and cancer characteristics with the adoption of hypofractionation in a national sample of patients diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We performed a retrospective study of breast cancerpatients in the National Cancer Data Base from 2004-2011 who were treated with radiation therapy and met eligibility criteria for hypofractionation. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with receipt of hypofractionation (vs conventional fractionation). RESULTS: We identified 13,271 women (11.7%) and 99,996 women (88.3%) with early-stage breast cancer who were treated with hypofractionation and conventional fractionation, respectively. The use of hypofractionation increased significantly, with 5.4% of patients receiving it in 2004 compared with 22.8% in 2011 (P<.001 for trend). Patients living ≥50 miles from the cancer reporting facility had increased odds of receiving hypofractionation (odds ratio 1.57 [95% confidence interval 1.44-1.72], P<.001). Adoption of hypofractionation was associated with treatment at an academic center (P<.001) and living in an area with high median income (P<.001). Hypofractionation was less likely to be used in patients with high-risk disease, such as increased tumor size (P<.001) or poorly differentiated histologic grade (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of hypofractionation is rising and is associated with increased travel distance and treatment at an academic center. Further adoption of hypofractionation may be tempered by both clinical and nonclinical concerns.
Authors: Grace L Smith; Patricia A Ganz; Justin E Bekelman; Steven J Chmura; James J Dignam; Jason A Efstathiou; Reshma Jagsi; Peter A Johnstone; Michael L Steinberg; Stephen B Williams; James B Yu; Anthony L Zietman; Ralph R Weichselbaum; Ya-Chen Tina Shih Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2016-11-08 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Yasmin Hasan; Joseph Waller; Katharine Yao; Steven J Chmura; Dezheng Huo Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-01-24 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: William A Stokes; Diana Abbott; Andy Phan; David Raben; Ryan M Lanning; Sana D Karam Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-04-06 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Sriram Venigalla; David M Guttmann; Varsha Jain; Sonam Sharma; Gary M Freedman; Jacob E Shabason Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Chun Chieh Lin; Suanna S Bruinooge; M Kelsey Kirkwood; Dawn L Hershman; Ahmedin Jemal; B Ashleigh Guadagnolo; James B Yu; Shane Hopkins; Michael Goldstein; Dean Bajorin; Sharon H Giordano; Michael Kosty; Anna Arnone; Amy Hanley; Stephanie Stevens; Christine Olsen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Chun Chieh Lin; Suanna S Bruinooge; M Kelsey Kirkwood; Christine Olsen; Ahmedin Jemal; Dean Bajorin; Sharon H Giordano; Michael Goldstein; B Ashleigh Guadagnolo; Michael Kosty; Shane Hopkins; James B Yu; Anna Arnone; Amy Hanley; Stephanie Stevens; Dawn L Hershman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-08-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Simona F Shaitelman; Pamela J Schlembach; Isidora Arzu; Matthew Ballo; Elizabeth S Bloom; Daniel Buchholz; Gregory M Chronowski; Tomas Dvorak; Emily Grade; Karen E Hoffman; Patrick Kelly; Michelle Ludwig; George H Perkins; Valerie Reed; Shalin Shah; Michael C Stauder; Eric A Strom; Welela Tereffe; Wendy A Woodward; Joe Ensor; Donald Baumann; Alastair M Thompson; Diana Amaya; Tanisha Davis; William Guerra; Lois Hamblin; Gabriel Hortobagyi; Kelly K Hunt; Thomas A Buchholz; Benjamin D Smith Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 31.777