Facility-Level Disparities in Radiation Use for Limited-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer.

IF 4.7 3区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY JCO oncology practice Pub Date : 2025-02-11 DOI:10.1200/OP-24-00898
Ian T Tsekouras, Whitney S Hotsinpiller, James A Bonner, Adam J Kole
{"title":"Facility-Level Disparities in Radiation Use for Limited-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer.","authors":"Ian T Tsekouras, Whitney S Hotsinpiller, James A Bonner, Adam J Kole","doi":"10.1200/OP-24-00898","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Treatment of limited-stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) with twice-a-day radiation therapy (RT) has remained the standard of care for many decades. Growing evidence suggests that outcomes with dose escalated twice-a-day RT may further improve outcomes. However, once-daily treatment remains common. The purpose of this study was to evaluate individual treatment facilities for utilization of twice-a-day RT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with LS-SCLC treated with definitive chemoradiation from 2004 to 2019 were identified in the National Cancer Database. RT was classified as twice-a-day (45 Gy in 30 fractions) or once-daily (59.4-70.2 Gy in 30-39 fractions). Patients were excluded if surgery was performed. All patients received doublet chemotherapy. Unique treatment facilities delivering at least one twice-a-day treatment course during the study period were classified as BID-treating. Facilities not delivering any twice-a-day RT were classified as QD-only. The proportion of QD-only facilities was identified. Facility-level characteristics associated with QD-only classification were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 22,362 patients with LS-SCLC were treated at 1,222 unique facilities. A slight majority of facilities (n = 644, 52.7%) were BID-treating, whereas fewer (n = 578, 47.3%) were QD-only. A total of 73.9% of academic facilities were BID-treating versus 48.3% of nonacademic facility types (<i>P</i> < .001). Only 20.7% of low volume treatment facilities (lowest quartile of patients with LS-SCLC treated) used twice-a-day fractionation versus 78.2% of the highest quartile volume facilities (<i>P</i> < .001). On multivariable analysis, academic and high-volume facilities were statistically significantly associated with BID-treating classification (adjusted odds ratio, 2.5 [<i>P</i> < .001] and 4.2 [<i>P</i> < .001], respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Nearly half of facilities treating LS-SCLC with definitive chemoradiation do not use twice-a-day fractionation schedules despite ongoing and growing evidence of superiority to once-daily fractionation. High-volume, academic facilities were more likely to offer twice-a-day fractionation.</p>","PeriodicalId":14612,"journal":{"name":"JCO oncology practice","volume":" ","pages":"OP2400898"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO oncology practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/OP-24-00898","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Treatment of limited-stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) with twice-a-day radiation therapy (RT) has remained the standard of care for many decades. Growing evidence suggests that outcomes with dose escalated twice-a-day RT may further improve outcomes. However, once-daily treatment remains common. The purpose of this study was to evaluate individual treatment facilities for utilization of twice-a-day RT.

Methods: Patients with LS-SCLC treated with definitive chemoradiation from 2004 to 2019 were identified in the National Cancer Database. RT was classified as twice-a-day (45 Gy in 30 fractions) or once-daily (59.4-70.2 Gy in 30-39 fractions). Patients were excluded if surgery was performed. All patients received doublet chemotherapy. Unique treatment facilities delivering at least one twice-a-day treatment course during the study period were classified as BID-treating. Facilities not delivering any twice-a-day RT were classified as QD-only. The proportion of QD-only facilities was identified. Facility-level characteristics associated with QD-only classification were analyzed.

Results: A total of 22,362 patients with LS-SCLC were treated at 1,222 unique facilities. A slight majority of facilities (n = 644, 52.7%) were BID-treating, whereas fewer (n = 578, 47.3%) were QD-only. A total of 73.9% of academic facilities were BID-treating versus 48.3% of nonacademic facility types (P < .001). Only 20.7% of low volume treatment facilities (lowest quartile of patients with LS-SCLC treated) used twice-a-day fractionation versus 78.2% of the highest quartile volume facilities (P < .001). On multivariable analysis, academic and high-volume facilities were statistically significantly associated with BID-treating classification (adjusted odds ratio, 2.5 [P < .001] and 4.2 [P < .001], respectively).

Conclusion: Nearly half of facilities treating LS-SCLC with definitive chemoradiation do not use twice-a-day fractionation schedules despite ongoing and growing evidence of superiority to once-daily fractionation. High-volume, academic facilities were more likely to offer twice-a-day fractionation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
7.50%
发文量
518
期刊最新文献
Real-World Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Implementation: Challenges and Successes of a Pan-Canadian Initiative to Improve the Future of Patient-Centered Cancer Care. Inpatient Immunotherapy Outcomes Study: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis. Facility-Level Disparities in Radiation Use for Limited-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer. Virtual Second-Opinion Delivery for Oncology Patients. If We Build It, Why They Do Not Come? An American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Collaborative to Understand Barriers to Completion of Cancer Treatment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1