Yasmin Hasan1, Joseph Waller1, Katharine Yao2, Steven J Chmura1, Dezheng Huo3. 1. Department of Radiation & Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, IL, USA. 3. Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, 5841 South Maryland Avenue, MC 2000, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA. dhuo@health.bsd.uchicago.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the adoption of hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation (HF-WBI) over time and factors related to its adoption for patients undergoing lumpectomy. We also examined whether HF-WBI can increase the overall use of radiotherapy. METHODS: Using data from the National Cancer Database between 2004 and 2013, we identified 528,051 invasive and 190,431 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patients who underwent lumpectomy. HF-WBI was defined as 2.5-3.33 Gy/fraction to the breast, whereas conventional therapy (CF-WBI) was defined as 1.8-2.0 Gy/fraction. RESULTS: The usage of HF-WBI among invasive cancer patients increased from 0.7% in 2004 to 15.6% in 2013, and among DCIS patients, HF-WBI increased from 0.4% in 2004 to 13.4% in 2013. However, these changes only lead to a slight increase in the overall use of radiotherapy. Interestingly, for DCIS patients who lived ≥50 miles from hospitals, the uptake of HF-WBI translated to a moderate increase in the overall use of radiotherapy (58% in 2004 to 63% in 2013). Multivariable logistic regression showed that older age, node-negative or smaller tumor, living in mountain states, rural area, or ≥50 miles from hospitals, and treated in large or academic cancer centers were associated with elevated HF-WBI use. The median duration of finishing radiotherapy for HF-WBI was 26 days, compared to 47 days for CF-WBI. CONCLUSIONS: Although HF-WBI can save 3 weeks of patient time, its adoption remained low in the US. There was only a slight increase in the overall use of radiotherapy among patients undergoing lumpectomy.
PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the adoption of hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation (HF-WBI) over time and factors related to its adoption for patients undergoing lumpectomy. We also examined whether HF-WBI can increase the overall use of radiotherapy. METHODS: Using data from the National Cancer Database between 2004 and 2013, we identified 528,051 invasive and 190,431 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patients who underwent lumpectomy. HF-WBI was defined as 2.5-3.33 Gy/fraction to the breast, whereas conventional therapy (CF-WBI) was defined as 1.8-2.0 Gy/fraction. RESULTS: The usage of HF-WBI among invasive cancerpatients increased from 0.7% in 2004 to 15.6% in 2013, and among DCIS patients, HF-WBI increased from 0.4% in 2004 to 13.4% in 2013. However, these changes only lead to a slight increase in the overall use of radiotherapy. Interestingly, for DCIS patients who lived ≥50 miles from hospitals, the uptake of HF-WBI translated to a moderate increase in the overall use of radiotherapy (58% in 2004 to 63% in 2013). Multivariable logistic regression showed that older age, node-negative or smaller tumor, living in mountain states, rural area, or ≥50 miles from hospitals, and treated in large or academic cancer centers were associated with elevated HF-WBI use. The median duration of finishing radiotherapy for HF-WBI was 26 days, compared to 47 days for CF-WBI. CONCLUSIONS: Although HF-WBI can save 3 weeks of patient time, its adoption remained low in the US. There was only a slight increase in the overall use of radiotherapy among patients undergoing lumpectomy.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Hypofractionated radiation therapy; Regimens; Trend
Authors: Reshma Jagsi; Paul Abrahamse; Sarah T Hawley; John J Graff; Ann S Hamilton; Steven J Katz Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-06-29 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Cameron W Swanick; Xiudong Lei; Simona F Shaitelman; Pamela J Schlembach; Elizabeth S Bloom; Michelle C Fingeret; Eric A Strom; Welela Tereffe; Wendy A Woodward; Michael C Stauder; Tomas Dvorak; Alastair M Thompson; Thomas A Buchholz; Benjamin D Smith Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-06-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Reshma Jagsi; Aaron D Falchook; Laura H Hendrix; Heather Curry; Ronald C Chen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2014-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jennifer L Malin; Katherine L Kahn; John Adams; Lorna Kwan; Marianne Laouri; Patricia A Ganz Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2002-06-05 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Benjamin D Smith; Soren M Bentzen; Candace R Correa; Carol A Hahn; Patricia H Hardenbergh; Geoffrey S Ibbott; Beryl McCormick; Julie R McQueen; Lori J Pierce; Simon N Powell; Abram Recht; Alphonse G Taghian; Frank A Vicini; Julia R White; Bruce G Haffty Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-07-16 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Karl Y Bilimoria; David J Bentrem; Andrew K Stewart; David P Winchester; Clifford Y Ko Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-07-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joanne S Haviland; J Roger Owen; John A Dewar; Rajiv K Agrawal; Jane Barrett; Peter J Barrett-Lee; H Jane Dobbs; Penelope Hopwood; Pat A Lawton; Brian J Magee; Judith Mills; Sandra Simmons; Mark A Sydenham; Karen Venables; Judith M Bliss; John R Yarnold Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-09-19 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Simona F Shaitelman; Xiudong Lei; Alastair Thompson; Pamela Schlembach; Elizabeth S Bloom; Isidora Y Arzu; Daniel Buchholz; Gregory Chronowski; Tomas Dvorak; Emily Grade; Karen Hoffman; George Perkins; Valerie K Reed; Shalin J Shah; Michael C Stauder; Eric A Strom; Welela Tereffe; Wendy A Woodward; Diana N Amaya; Yu Shen; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Kelly K Hunt; Thomas A Buchholz; Benjamin D Smith Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-10-31 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Xiao Xu; Pamela R Soulos; Jeph Herrin; Shi-Yi Wang; Craig Evan Pollack; Suzanne B Evans; James B Yu; Cary P Gross Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2020-10-18 Impact factor: 3.734