Isabel J Boero1, Anthony J Paravati1, Beibei Xu1, Ezra E W Cohen1, Loren K Mell1, Quynh-Thu Le1, James D Murphy2. 1. Isabel J. Boero, Anthony J. Paravati, Ezra E.W. Cohen, Loren K. Mell, and James D. Murphy, University of California San Diego, La Jolla; Quynh-Thu Le, Stanford University, Stanford, CA; and Beibei Xu, Peking University, Beijing, People's Republic of China. 2. Isabel J. Boero, Anthony J. Paravati, Ezra E.W. Cohen, Loren K. Mell, and James D. Murphy, University of California San Diego, La Jolla; Quynh-Thu Le, Stanford University, Stanford, CA; and Beibei Xu, Peking University, Beijing, People's Republic of China. j2murphy@ucsd.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Over the past decade, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has replaced conventional radiation techniques in the management of head-and-neck cancers (HNCs). We conducted this population-based study to evaluate the influence of radiation oncologist experience on outcomes in patients with HNC treated with IMRT compared with patients with HNC treated with conventional radiation therapy. METHODS: We identified radiation providers from Medicare claims of 6,212 Medicare beneficiaries with HNC treated between 2000 and 2009. We analyzed the impact of provider volume on all-cause mortality, HNC mortality, and toxicity end points after treatment with either conventional radiation therapy or IMRT. All analyses were performed by using either multivariable Cox proportional hazards or Fine-Gray regression models controlling for potential confounding variables. RESULTS: Among patients treated with conventional radiation, we found no significant relationship between provider volume and patient survival or any toxicity end point. Among patients receiving IMRT, those treated by higher-volume radiation oncologists had improved survival compared with those treated by low-volume providers. The risk of all-cause mortality decreased by 21% for every additional five patients treated per provider per year (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.94). Patients treated with IMRT by higher-volume providers had decreased HNC-specific mortality (subdistribution HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.91) and decreased risk of aspiration pneumonia (subdistribution HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.99). CONCLUSION: Patients receiving IMRT for HNC had improved outcomes when treated by higher-volume providers. These findings will better inform patients and providers when making decisions about treatment, and emphasize the critical importance of high-quality radiation therapy for optimal treatment of HNC.
PURPOSE: Over the past decade, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has replaced conventional radiation techniques in the management of head-and-neck cancers (HNCs). We conducted this population-based study to evaluate the influence of radiation oncologist experience on outcomes in patients with HNC treated with IMRT compared with patients with HNC treated with conventional radiation therapy. METHODS: We identified radiation providers from Medicare claims of 6,212 Medicare beneficiaries with HNC treated between 2000 and 2009. We analyzed the impact of provider volume on all-cause mortality, HNC mortality, and toxicity end points after treatment with either conventional radiation therapy or IMRT. All analyses were performed by using either multivariable Cox proportional hazards or Fine-Gray regression models controlling for potential confounding variables. RESULTS: Among patients treated with conventional radiation, we found no significant relationship between provider volume and patient survival or any toxicity end point. Among patients receiving IMRT, those treated by higher-volume radiation oncologists had improved survival compared with those treated by low-volume providers. The risk of all-cause mortality decreased by 21% for every additional five patients treated per provider per year (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.94). Patients treated with IMRT by higher-volume providers had decreased HNC-specific mortality (subdistribution HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.91) and decreased risk of aspiration pneumonia (subdistribution HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.99). CONCLUSION:Patients receiving IMRT for HNC had improved outcomes when treated by higher-volume providers. These findings will better inform patients and providers when making decisions about treatment, and emphasize the critical importance of high-quality radiation therapy for optimal treatment of HNC.
Authors: Deborah Schrag; Katherine S Panageas; Elyn Riedel; Laura D Cramer; Jose G Guillem; Peter B Bach; Colin B Begg Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Deborah Schrag; Craig Earle; Feng Xu; Katherine S Panageas; K Robin Yabroff; Robert E Bristow; Edward L Trimble; Joan L Warren Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-02-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Colin B Begg; Elyn R Riedel; Peter B Bach; Michael W Kattan; Deborah Schrag; Joan L Warren; Peter T Scardino Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-04-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Evan J Wuthrick; Qiang Zhang; Mitchell Machtay; David I Rosenthal; Phuc Felix Nguyen-Tan; André Fortin; Craig L Silverman; Adam Raben; Harold E Kim; Eric M Horwitz; Nancy E Read; Jonathan Harris; Qian Wu; Quynh-Thu Le; Maura L Gillison Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-12-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Megan Dann Fesinmeyer; Vivek Mehta; Lauri Tock; David Blough; Cara McDermott; Scott D Ramsey Journal: Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2009-09
Authors: Loren K Mell; Hanjie Shen; Phuc Felix Nguyen-Tân; David I Rosenthal; Kaveh Zakeri; Lucas K Vitzthum; Steven J Frank; Peter B Schiff; Andy M Trotti; James A Bonner; Christopher U Jones; Sue S Yom; Wade L Thorstad; Stuart J Wong; George Shenouda; John A Ridge; Qiang E Zhang; Quynh-Thu Le Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2019-08-16 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Gregory T Wolf; Emily Bellile; Avraham Eisbruch; Susan Urba; Carol R Bradford; Lisa Peterson; Mark E Prince; Theodoros N Teknos; Douglas B Chepeha; Norman D Hogikyan; Scott A McLean; Jeffery Moyer; Jeremy M G Taylor; Francis P Worden Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 6.223
Authors: Nicholas C J Lee; Jacqueline R Kelly; Yi An; Henry S Park; Benjamin L Judson; Barbara A Burtness; Zain A Husain Journal: Cancer Date: 2019-02-12 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Michael K Rooney; Fan Zhu; Erin F Gillespie; Jillian R Gunther; Ryan P McKillip; Matthew Lineberry; Ara Tekian; Daniel W Golden Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2018-06-06 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Zachary S Zumsteg; Benjamin H Lok; Allen S Ho; Esther Drill; Zhigang Zhang; Nadeem Riaz; Stephen L Shiao; Jennifer Ma; Sean M McBride; C Jillian Tsai; Shrujal S Baxi; Eric J Sherman; Nancy Y Lee Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-12-16 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Arya Amini; William A Stokes; Bernard L Jones; Sagus Sampath; Robert S Kang; Thomas J Gernon; Ellie G Maghami; Erminia Massarelli; Cathy J Bradley; Sana D Karam Journal: Head Neck Date: 2019-02-09 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Wassim Kassouf; Armen Aprikian; Fred Saad; Rodney H Breau; Girish Kulkarni; David M Guttman; Ken Bagshaw; Jonathan Izawa; Libni Eapen; Adrian Fairey; Alan So; Scott North; Ricardo Rendon; Srikala S Sridhar; Fadi Brimo; Peter Chung; Darrel Drachenberg; Yves Fradet; Niels Jacobsen; Chris Morash; Bobby Shayegan; Geoffrey Gotto; Alex Zlotta; Neil Fleshner; D Robert Siemens; Peter C Black Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2018-03-19 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Matthew Koshy; David J Sher; Michael Spiotto; Zain Husain; Herb Engelhard; Konstantin Slavin; Martin K Nicholas; Ralph R Weichselbaum; Chad Rusthoven Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Katri Aro; Allen S Ho; Michael Luu; Sungjin Kim; Mourad Tighiouart; Jon Mallen-St Clair; Emi J Yoshida; Stephen L Shiao; Ilmo Leivo; Zachary S Zumsteg Journal: Cancer Date: 2018-05-09 Impact factor: 6.860