Bismarck Odei1, Jonathan E Frandsen2, Dustin Boothe2, Ralph P Ermoian3, Matthew M Poppe4. 1. University of California Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Utah Huntsman Cancer Hospital, Salt Lake City, Utah. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, Washington. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Utah Huntsman Cancer Hospital, Salt Lake City, Utah. Electronic address: Matthew.poppe@hci.utah.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Proton beam therapy (PBT) potentially allows for improved sparing of normal tissues, hopefully leading to decreased late side effects in children. Using a national registry, we sought to perform a patterns-of-care analysis for children receiving PBT for primary malignancies of the central nervous system (CNS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using the National Cancer Data Base, we identified pediatric patients with primary CNS malignancies that were diagnosed between 2004 and 2012. We used a standard t test for comparison of means and χ2 testing to identify differences in demographic and clinical characteristics. Univariate and multivariate logistical regression was applied to identify predictors of PBT use. RESULTS: We identified 4637 pediatric patients receiving radiation therapy from 2004 to 2012, including a subset of 267 patients treated with PBT. We found that PBT use increased with time from <1% in 2004 to 15% in 2012. In multivariate logistical regression, we found the following to be predictors of receipt of PBT: private insurance, the highest income bracket, younger age, living in a metropolitan area, and residing >200 miles from a radiation treatment facility (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: We noted the proportion of children receiving PBT to be significantly increasing over time from <1% to 15% from 2004 to 2012. We also observed important disparities in receipt of PBT based on socioeconomic status. Children from higher-income households and with private insurance were more likely to use this expensive technology. As we continue to demonstrate the potential benefits of PBT in children, efforts are needed to expand the accessibility of PBT for children of all socioeconomic backgrounds and regions of the country.
PURPOSE: Proton beam therapy (PBT) potentially allows for improved sparing of normal tissues, hopefully leading to decreased late side effects in children. Using a national registry, we sought to perform a patterns-of-care analysis for children receiving PBT for primary malignancies of the central nervous system (CNS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using the National Cancer Data Base, we identified pediatric patients with primary CNS malignancies that were diagnosed between 2004 and 2012. We used a standard t test for comparison of means and χ2 testing to identify differences in demographic and clinical characteristics. Univariate and multivariate logistical regression was applied to identify predictors of PBT use. RESULTS: We identified 4637 pediatric patients receiving radiation therapy from 2004 to 2012, including a subset of 267 patients treated with PBT. We found that PBT use increased with time from <1% in 2004 to 15% in 2012. In multivariate logistical regression, we found the following to be predictors of receipt of PBT: private insurance, the highest income bracket, younger age, living in a metropolitan area, and residing >200 miles from a radiation treatment facility (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: We noted the proportion of children receiving PBT to be significantly increasing over time from <1% to 15% from 2004 to 2012. We also observed important disparities in receipt of PBT based on socioeconomic status. Children from higher-income households and with private insurance were more likely to use this expensive technology. As we continue to demonstrate the potential benefits of PBT in children, efforts are needed to expand the accessibility of PBT for children of all socioeconomic backgrounds and regions of the country.
Authors: Yolanda D Tseng; William Hartsell; Henry Tsai; Shahed Badiyan; Chiachien J Wang; Carl Rossi; Rupesh Kotecha; Sujay Vora; Carlos Vargas; Gary Larson; Lia M Halasz Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2018-10-09 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Sujith Baliga; Sara Gallotto; Benjamin Bajaj; Jacqueline Lewy; Elizabeth Weyman; Miranda P Lawell; Beow Y Yeap; David E Ebb; Mary Huang; Paul Caruso; Alisa Perry; Robin M Jones; Shannon M MacDonald; Nancy J Tarbell; Torunn I Yock Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 13.029
Authors: Anna Lee; Julie Kang; Yao Yu; Sean McBride; Nadeem Riaz; Marc Cohen; Eric Sherman; Loren Michel; Nancy Lee; C Jillian Tsai Journal: Int J Part Ther Date: 2019-04-22
Authors: Sean M Liu; Eric D Brooks; M Laura Rubin; David R Grosshans; Steven J Frank; Mary Frances McAleer; Susan L McGovern; Arnold C Paulino; Kristina D Woodhouse Journal: Int J Part Ther Date: 2020-12-31
Authors: Danielle S Bitterman; Kira Bona; Fran Laurie; Pei-Chi Kao; Stephanie A Terezakis; Wendy B London; Daphne A Haas-Kogan Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 33.006