Elizabeth A. Kidd , Santino S. Butler , Ulysses Gardner Jr , Akila N. Viswanathan
{"title":"Image guided cervical brachytherapy practice patterns: 2023/2024 survey of the American brachytherapy society","authors":"Elizabeth A. Kidd , Santino S. Butler , Ulysses Gardner Jr , Akila N. Viswanathan","doi":"10.1016/j.brachy.2024.10.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>BACKGROUND</h3><div>An update of the 2007 and 2014 surveys of the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) will elucidate current practice patterns of cervical cancer brachytherapy.</div></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><div>A 40-question survey was sent to all ABS members in June-July 2023 and February 2024; 167 responses were received, with 140 used for analysis. Results were compared to the 2014 survey using chi-squared testing. Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for outcomes of interest.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS</h3><div>Compared to 2014, MRI use for treatment planning of the first brachytherapy fraction increased from 34% to 63% (<em>p</em> < 0.001), prescription to the high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV) increased from 52% to 94% (<em>p</em> < 0.001), while Point A prescription decreased from 42% to 16% (<em>p</em> < 0.001). Additionally, procedural guidance with ultrasound significantly increased (79% vs. 32%, <em>p</em> < 0.001) along with the use of interstitial needles (always or nearly always, >80%) (29% vs. 4%, <em>p</em> < 0.001). MRI availability around the time of procedure was the largest challenge to incorporating MRI into brachytherapy treatment planning. Compared to those with MRI access reserved specifically for Radiation Oncology, respondents with shared-access or out-of-department MRI were less likely to obtain treatment planning MRIs for each brachytherapy fraction (22% vs. 75%; aOR 0.10 [95% CI, 0.03–0.30], <em>p</em> < 0.001).</div></div><div><h3>CONCLUSION</h3><div>For cervix cancer brachytherapy there has been significant increase in the use of MRI-based volumetric brachytherapy treatment planning, ultrasound guidance during procedures and the addition of interstitial needles. These advancements in practice patterns are congruent with published consensus guidelines and ongoing training initiatives. However, MRI access and lack of easy availability continue to be significant challenges for optimizing cervix brachytherapy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55334,"journal":{"name":"Brachytherapy","volume":"24 1","pages":"Pages 18-29"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brachytherapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S153847212400446X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
BACKGROUND
An update of the 2007 and 2014 surveys of the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) will elucidate current practice patterns of cervical cancer brachytherapy.
METHODS
A 40-question survey was sent to all ABS members in June-July 2023 and February 2024; 167 responses were received, with 140 used for analysis. Results were compared to the 2014 survey using chi-squared testing. Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for outcomes of interest.
RESULTS
Compared to 2014, MRI use for treatment planning of the first brachytherapy fraction increased from 34% to 63% (p < 0.001), prescription to the high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV) increased from 52% to 94% (p < 0.001), while Point A prescription decreased from 42% to 16% (p < 0.001). Additionally, procedural guidance with ultrasound significantly increased (79% vs. 32%, p < 0.001) along with the use of interstitial needles (always or nearly always, >80%) (29% vs. 4%, p < 0.001). MRI availability around the time of procedure was the largest challenge to incorporating MRI into brachytherapy treatment planning. Compared to those with MRI access reserved specifically for Radiation Oncology, respondents with shared-access or out-of-department MRI were less likely to obtain treatment planning MRIs for each brachytherapy fraction (22% vs. 75%; aOR 0.10 [95% CI, 0.03–0.30], p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
For cervix cancer brachytherapy there has been significant increase in the use of MRI-based volumetric brachytherapy treatment planning, ultrasound guidance during procedures and the addition of interstitial needles. These advancements in practice patterns are congruent with published consensus guidelines and ongoing training initiatives. However, MRI access and lack of easy availability continue to be significant challenges for optimizing cervix brachytherapy.
期刊介绍:
Brachytherapy is an international and multidisciplinary journal that publishes original peer-reviewed articles and selected reviews on the techniques and clinical applications of interstitial and intracavitary radiation in the management of cancers. Laboratory and experimental research relevant to clinical practice is also included. Related disciplines include medical physics, medical oncology, and radiation oncology and radiology. Brachytherapy publishes technical advances, original articles, reviews, and point/counterpoint on controversial issues. Original articles that address any aspect of brachytherapy are invited. Letters to the Editor-in-Chief are encouraged.