Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model (APM): An Introduction and Primer for the Proposed Rule for Practices and Providers

PurposeThe Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model (RO-APM) is an alternative payment model under which Medicare patients would be reimbursed using an episode-based payment schema rather than the current fee-for-service schema. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Innovation Center has published a proposed rule for the RO-APM. However, there is no accessible resource that summarizes information about the proposed rule in an easily understandable form.Methods and MaterialsInformation regarding the RO-APM was accessed through the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Innovation Center website and listening sessions and review of the proposed rule. We summarize the most important information regarding the background, mechanics, and timeline of the proposed rule to facilitate wider understanding in the radiation oncology community and answer commonly held questions.ResultsThe proposed rule for the RO-APM would cover 40% and have widespread effect on the future of radiation oncology. We provide a primer that summarizes important information regarding the rule for practices and providers.ConclusionThe proposed RO-APM will change the landscape of radiation oncology reimbursement. Understanding the implications of the model will be key to maintining a successful practice.     

A European comparison of reimbursement in breast reconstruction

Aims

Case payment mechanisms have become the principal means of remunerating hospitals in most developed countries. The purpose of this study was to make an international comparison of reimbursement for breast reconstructive surgery.

Methods

We analysed remuneration for unilateral and bilateral female breast reconstruction (pedicled flaps, free flaps, alloplastic procedures) across five different European countries. National grouper software was used to identify Diagnosis Related Groups from which the proceeds were derived.

Results

The mean reimbursement was € 5593 for pedicled flaps, € 9149 for free flaps and € 4037 for implant-based reconstructions. The highest payments were in Sweden and the lowest in Italy. When adjusting payments by purchasing power parities, the relation among the countries did not change. The Austrian system makes a clear distinction between one-stage and two-stage delayed reconstructive interventions whereas reimbursement in other countries favoured a two-stage approach. Only one of five national reimbursement systems distinguishes between unilateral and bilateral reconstructions.

Conclusions

Across a spectrum of European countries, reimbursement for breast reconstruction was based on similar procedure-specific systems, although there was a wide variation in tariffs and consideration of other factors such as underlying diagnosis. As delivery of healthcare becomes more rationalised, there is a need for individualised reimbursement which correlates directly with activity. Drawing on the experience of different healthcare systems may lead to development of a more robust and fair system of reimbursement.     

Japanese structure survey of radiation oncology in 2009 with special reference to designated cancer care hospitals

Background

The structure of radiation oncology in designated cancer care hospitals in Japan was surveyed in terms of equipment, personnel, patient load, and geographic distribution, and compared with the structure in other radiotherapy facilities and the previous survey.

Methods

The Japanese Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology surveyed the national structure of radiation oncology in 2009. The structures of 365 designated cancer care hospitals and 335 other radiotherapy facilities were compared.

Results

Designated cancer care hospitals accounted for 50.0 % of all the radiotherapy facilities in Japan. The patterns of equipment and personnel in designated cancer care hospitals and the other radiotherapy facilities were, respectively, as follows: linear accelerators per facility: 1.4 and 1.0; dual-energy function: 78.6 and 61.3 %; three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy function: 88.5 and 70.0 %; intensity-modulated radiotherapy function: 51.6 and 25.3 %; annual number of patients per linear accelerator: 301.3 and 185.2; Ir-192 remote-controlled after-loading systems: 31.8 and 4.2 %; and average number of full-time equivalent radiation oncologists per facility: 1.8 and 0.8. Compared with the previous survey, the ownership ratio of equipment and personnel improved in both designated cancer care hospitals and the other radiotherapy facilities. Annual patient loads per full-time equivalent radiation oncologist in the designated cancer care hospitals and the other radiotherapy facilities were 225.5 and 247.6, respectively. These values exceeded the standard guidelines level of 200.

Conclusions

The structure of radiation oncology in designated Japanese cancer care hospitals was more mature than that in the other radiotherapy facilities. There is still a shortage of personnel. The serious understaffing problem in radiation oncology should be corrected in the future.     

Barriers to accessing palliative care for pediatric patients with cancer: A review of the literature

Although many of the 16,000 children in the United States diagnosed who are with cancer each year could benefit from pediatric palliative care, these services remain underused. Evidence regarding the barriers impeding access to comprehensive palliative care is dispersed in the literature, and evidence specific to pediatric oncology remains particularly sparse. The purpose of the current review was to synthesize the existing literature regarding these barriers and the strategies offered to address them. The authors completed a literature search using the PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Web of Science databases. In total, 71 articles were reviewed. Barriers to accessing pediatric palliative care were categorized according to the 4 levels of a modified socioecological model (ie, barriers related to policy/payment, health systems, organizations, and individuals). Major themes identified at each level included: 1) the lack of consistent and adequate funding mechanisms at the policy/payment level, 2) the lack of pediatric palliative care programs and workforce at the health systems level, 3) difficulties integrating palliative care into existing pediatric oncology care models at the organizational level, and 4) the lack of knowledge about pediatric palliative care, discomfort with talking about death, and cultural differences between providers and patients and their families at the individual level. Recommendations to address each of the barriers identified in the literature are included. Cancer 2018;124:2278‐88 . © 2018 American Cancer Society.     

Radiotherapy Demand and Activity in England 2006–2020

AimsThis paper compares the predictions of radiotherapy demand for England from the Malthus model with those from the earlier National Radiotherapy Advisory Group (NRAG) model, from the international literature and also with observed radiotherapy usage in England as a whole as recorded in the English radiotherapy dataset (RTDS).Materials and methodsWe reviewed the evidence base for radiotherapy for each type and stage of cancer using national and international guidelines, meta-analyses, systematic reviews and key clinical trials. Twenty-two decision trees were constructed and radiotherapy demand was calculated using English cancer incidence data for 2007, 2008 and 2009, accurate to the Primary Care Trust (PCT) level (population 91 500–1 282 384). The stage at presentation was obtained from English cancer registry data. In predictive mode, the model can take account of changes in cancer incidence as the population grows and ages.ResultsThe Malthus model indicates reduced indications for radiotherapy, principally for lung cancer and rarer tumours. Our estimate of the proportion of patients who should receive radiotherapy at some stage of their illness is 40.6%. This is lower than previous estimates of about 50%. Nevertheless, the overall estimate of demand in terms of attendances is similar for the NRAG and Malthus models. The latter models that 48 827 attendances should have been delivered per million population in 2011. National data from RTDS show 32 071 attendances per million in 2011. A 50% increase in activity would be required to match estimated demand. This underprovision extends across all cancers and represents reduced access and the use of dose fractionation at odds with international norms of evidence-based practice. By 2016, demand is predicted to grow to about 55 206 attendances per million and by 2020 to 60 057.DiscussionServices have increased their activity by 14% between 2006 and 2011, but estimated demand has increased by 11%. Access remains low and English radiotherapy dose fractionation still does not comply with international evidence-based practice.     

Public health oncology: a framework for progress in low- and middle-income countries

BackgroundThe problems of cancer are increasing in low- and middle-income countries (LMCs), which now have significant majorities of the global case and mortality burdens. The professional oncology community is being increasingly called upon to define pragmatic and realistic approaches to these problems.Patients and methodsFocusing on mortality and case burden outcomes defines public health oncology or population-affecting cancer medicine. We use this focus to consider practical approaches.ResultsThe greatest cancer burdens are in Asia. A public health oncology perspective mandates: first, addressing the major and social challenges of cancer medicine for populations: human rights, health systems, corruption, and our limited knowledge base for value-conscious interventions. Second, adoption of evolving concepts and models for sustainable development in LMCs. Third, clear and realistic statements of action and inaction affecting populations, grounded in our best cancer science, and attention to these. Finally, framing the goals and challenges for population-affecting cancer medicine requires a change in paradigm from historical top-down models of technology transfer, to one which is community-grounded and local-evidence based.ConclusionPublic health oncology perspectives define clear focus for much needed research on country-specific practical approaches to cancer control.     

Diagnosis-related groups as an instrument to develop suitable case-based lump sums in hematology and oncology

In 2003 a new reimbursement system was established for German hospitals. The approximately 17 million inpatient cases per year are now reimbursed based on a per-case payment regarding diagnoses and procedures, which was developed from an internationally approved system. The aim was a better conformity of costs and efforts in in-patient cases. In the first 2 years after implementation, the German diagnosis-related group (DRG) system was not able to adequately represent the complex structures of treatment in hematological and oncological in-patients. By creating new diagnoses and procedures (International Classification of Diseases 10 (ICD-10) and Surgical Operations and Procedures Classification System (OPS) catalogues), generating new DRGs and better splitting of existing ones, the hematology and oncology field could be much better described in the following years. The implementation of about 70 'co-payment structures' for new and expensive drugs and procedures in oncology was also crucial. To reimburse innovations, an additional system of co-payments for innovations was established to bridge the time until innovations are represented within the DRG system itself. In summary, hematological and oncological in-patients, including cases with extraordinary costs, are meanwhile well mapped in the German reimbursement system. Any tendencies to rationing could thereby be avoided, as most of the established procedures and costly drugs are adequately represented in the DRG system.     

Developing a national radiation oncology registry: From acorns to oaks

PurposeThe National Radiation Oncology Registry (NROR) is a collaborative initiative of the Radiation Oncology Institute and the American Society of Radiation Oncology, with input and guidance from other major stakeholders in oncology. The overarching mission of the NROR is to improve the care of cancer patients by capturing reliable information on treatment delivery and health outcomes.MethodsThe NROR will collect patient-specific radiotherapy data electronically to allow for rapid comparison of the many competing treatment modalities and account for effectiveness, outcome, utilization, quality, safety, and cost. It will provide benchmark data and quality improvement tools for individual practitioners. The NROR steering committee has determined that prostate cancer provides an appropriate model to test the concept and the data capturing software in a limited number of sites. The NROR pilot project will begin with this disease-gathering treatment and outcomes data from a limited number of treatment sites across the range of practice; once feasibility is proven, it will scale up to more sites and diseases.ResultsWhen the NROR is fully implemented, all radiotherapy facilities, along with their radiation oncologists, will be solicited to participate in it. With the broader participation of the radiation oncology community, NROR has the potential to serve as a resource for determining national patterns of care, gaps in treatment quality, comparative effectiveness, and hypothesis generation to identify new linkages between therapeutic processes and outcomes.ConclusionsThe NROR will benefit radiation oncologists and other care providers, payors, vendors, policy-makers, and, most importantly, cancer patients by capturing reliable information on population-based radiation treatment delivery.     

Radiotherapy access in Belgium: How far are we from evidence-based utilisation?

IntroductionUnderutilisation of radiotherapy has been observed worldwide. To evaluate the current situation in Belgium, optimal utilisation proportions (OUPs) adopted from the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology – Health Economics in Radiation Oncology (ESTRO-HERO) project were compared to actual utilisation proportions (AUPs) and with radiotherapy advised during the multidisciplinary cancer team (MDT) meetings. In addition, the impact of independent variables was analysed.Materials and methodsAUPs and advised radiotherapy were calculated overall and by cancer type for 110,810 unique cancer diagnoses in 2009–2010. Radiotherapy utilisation was derived from reimbursement data and distinguished between palliative and curative intent external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and/or brachytherapy (BT). Sensitivity analyses regarding the influence of the follow-up period, the survival length and patient's age were performed. Advised radiotherapy was calculated based on broad treatment categories as reported at MDT meetings.ResultsThe overall AUP of 37% (39% including BT) was lower than the OUP of 53%, but in line with advised radiotherapy (35%). Large variations by tumour type were observed: in some tumours (e.g. lung and prostate cancer) AUP was considerably lower than OUP, whereas in others there was reasonable concordance (e.g. breast and rectal cancer). Overall, 84% of treatments started within 9 months following diagnosis. Survival time influenced AUP in a cancer type-dependent way. Elderly patients received less radiotherapy.ConclusionAlthough the actually delivered radiotherapy in Belgium aligns well to MDT advices, it is lower than the evidence-based optimum. Further analysis of potential barriers is needed for radiotherapy forecasting and planning, and in order to promote adequate access to radiotherapy.     

Selection of oncology medicines in low- and middle-income countries

BackgroundHigh cancer mortality rates in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have raised concerns regarding access to oncology medicines. Essential medicines are those which satisfy the primary health care needs and provide a basis for public procurement or reimbursement decisions in LMICs. We explored selection of oncology medicines in LMICs through investigating national essential medicines lists (NEMLs) for cancer treatments.MethodsRecently updated NEMLs were retrieved for 76 countries. Oncology medicines were classified based on therapeutic categories. Countries were clustered based on geographic regions, income levels and burden of cancer (mortality and morbidity). Indicators of frequency (number of medicines), diversity (number of therapeutic (sub)categories) and more importantly absence were measured and compared across countries using parametric and nonparametric tests.ResultsThe overall median number of oncology medicines on NEMLs was 16 (interquartile range = 23) chosen predominantly from subcategories of ‘antineoplastic agents’, with substantial variation across regions and income groups. Five countries did not select any oncology medicine and 68% did not have any ‘hormones and related agents’ on their NEMLs. Newer technologies like targeted therapies were infrequently incorporated. The cluster of countries suffering most from the burden of cancer selected more essential oncology medicines and diversified further.ConclusionThe observed selection of oncology essential medicines can reflect insufficiencies and inequalities in access to cancer treatments at least in the public sector of LMICs. Further resources need to be allocated from governments and international organizations to tackle the problem of access to oncology medicines in these countries.     

Proton beam therapy in rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroductionLocally advanced rectal cancer is often treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery. Radiotherapy carries significant risk of toxicity to organs at risk (OAR). Proton beam therapy (PBT) has demonstrated to be effective in other cancers, delivering equivalent dosimetric radiation but with the benefit of improved sparing of OAR. This review compares dosimetric irradiation of OAR and oncological outcomes for PBT versus conventional photon-based radiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer.MethodsAn electronic literature search was performed for studies with comparative cohorts receiving proton beam therapy and photon-based radiotherapy for rectal cancer.ResultsEight articles with a total of 127 patients met the inclusion criteria. There was significantly less irradiated small bowel with PBT compared to three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) (MD -17.01, CI [-24.06, −9.96], p < 0.00001 and MD -6.96, CI [-12.99, −0.94], p = 0.02, respectively). Similar dosimetric results were observed for bladder and pelvic bone marrow. Three studies reported clinical and oncological results for PBT in recurrent rectal cancer with overall survival reported as 43 %, 68 % and 77.2 %, and one study in primary rectal cancer with 100 % disease free survival.ConclusionPBT treatment plans revealed significantly less irradiation of OAR for rectal cancer compared to conventional photon-based radiotherapy. Trials for recurrent rectal cancer and PBT have shown promising results. There are currently no ongoing clinical trials for primary rectal cancer and PBT. More research is required to validate its potential role in dose escalation, higher complete response rate and organ preservation without increasing toxicity.     

Defining the Need for Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy in the General Population: a Criterion-based Benchmarking Approach

AimsDetermining the appropriate rate of radiotherapy is important for ensuring optimal radiotherapy utilisation and accessibility. A criterion-based benchmark (CBB) approach was developed as an alternative to evidence-based methods of determining the need for radiotherapy in prostate cancer. Our primary objective was to determine the initial/lifetime CBB radiotherapy rates in prostate cancer and to compare results with evidence-based estimates. Secondary objectives were to compare observed radiotherapy rates in Ontario, Canada and the USA with the estimated rates.Materials and methodsBenchmarks were defined in Ontario as communities in proximity to cancer centres and without long waiting lists. Surgical and radiotherapy data, encompassing both external beam radiation and brachytherapy, for 1997–2001 were collected for Ontario cancer patients. The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) public use file described treatment in the USA.ResultsIn total, 35 379 cases of prostate cancer were diagnosed in Ontario and 93 275 in SEER. CBB estimates of the initial/lifetime need for radiotherapy were 37.2% (95% confidence interval: 35.8–38.7) and 59.1% (54.3–63.9). Our group’s evidence-based estimate (Ebest) rates were 32.3% (28.5–36.1) and 61.2% (55.6–66.8). Observed initial radiotherapy rates were 28.0% (27.5–28.4) in Ontario and 37.0% (36.7–37.3) in SEER. In Ontario, the estimated lifetime rate was 42.6% (41.2–44.0).ConclusionsCBB provides a reasonable estimate of the need for radiotherapy in prostate cancer. Observed initial radiotherapy rates in the USA were concordant with the CBB estimate. The CBB suggests a shortfall in radiotherapy utilisation for prostate cancer in Ontario.     

The development of a new basic treatment equivalent model to assess linear accelerator throughput

AimsThe basic treatment equivalent (BTE) model was developed in 1996 in an attempt to improve the measurement of linear accelerator throughput in radiotherapy. This study aimed to assess the effect of treatment set-up and patient characteristics on fraction duration, to update the BTE model and to determine the better throughput measure between fields per hour and BTE per hour.Materials and methodsStopwatch measurements of the duration of each radiotherapy treatment fraction delivered on each linear accelerator in participating New South Wales radiation oncology departments over a 5-day period in 2003 were undertaken. Patient, equipment and staff data were collected to assess the effect of these variables on fraction duration. A new BTE equation was derived, including the most significant variables. Statistical comparison of fields and BTE per unit time was made to assess the better predictor of fraction duration.ResultsData collected on 27 linear accelerators in 13 departments included a total of 135 days of linear accelerator operation, 4316 fractions and 12 892 treatment fields. Seventeen factors significantly influenced fraction duration (P < 0.01). These accounted for 46% of the total variance in the models. The eight most influential predictors of prolonged fraction duration were included in the BTE model. These were as follows: high number of fields, high number of port films/electronic portal imaging, absence of automatic field-sequencing and multi-leaf collimation, high number of junctions, use of bolus and first fraction of a treatment course. The BTE per hour was shown to be a better predictor of throughput than fields per hour.ConclusionsThe BTE model is a better measure of linear accelerator throughput. It incorporates weightings for treatment and patient factors that significantly influenced fraction duration. This measure could be routinely collected by the radiation oncology departments and included in the electronic radiotherapy information systems.     

An Evaluation of Current Services Available for People Diagnosed with Head and Neck Cancer in the UK (2009–2010)

AimsTo evaluate current care and service provision for people with head and neck cancer in the UK.Materials and MethodsSelf-report questionnaires for cancer networks, clinical leads of oncology units and leads for multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) were designed. These questionnaires were based on a previous survey. Questionnaires were sent out between 2009 and 2010.ResultsQuestionnaires were received from all networks (n = 37), most oncology units (48 of 53) and most MDTs (51 of 63). Care for people with head and neck cancer is increasingly being provided by a centralised MDT. The membership of these teams varies; facilities available for team meetings are fit for purpose in most cases. MDTs are meeting frequently (weekly meetings in 96%) and discussing on average 18 cases at each meeting (95% confidence interval 15–21 cases). Most oncologists have access to all common anti-cancer drugs and most have access to all forms of radiotherapy. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy is not yet available in some oncology units (28%). A small number of units have only one oncologist (13%). Despite audit and research being part of the rationale for MDT working, regular discussion of morbidity and mortality is unusual (40%) and use of a database to record decisions is not universal. Only seven centres record decisions into the Data for Head and Neck Oncology database. Reported recruitment to studies is generally low (<2% of cases enrolled in studies in 62%).ConclusionsHead and neck cancer care is increasingly provided through a centralised MDT. Increased resources and further changes in practice are required to implement current National Health Service cancer policy. Teams need to improve recording of their decision-making, discuss morbidity and mortality and support recruitment to clinical studies.     

Incorporating a Radiologist in a Radiation Oncology Department: A New Model of Care?

AimsIncreasingly complex imaging techniques, such as computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography scans are being used by radiation oncologists to improve the accuracy of their radiotherapy planning contours, despite limited formal training in diagnostic imaging. This study aimed to assess whether the availability of an ‘in-house’ radiologist would be beneficial in enhancing the interpretation of oncological imaging and accuracy of contouring.Materials and methodsA radiology/oncology fellow was based in the oncology department, providing radiological advice on diagnostic and planning images, for two sessions per week over a 9 month period. Oncology staff were able to book a time slot with the radiologist on a MOSAIQ cancer database and record the reason for the consultation and its outcome. The radiologist also reviewed the accuracy of the patient's contours for the weekly quality assurance audit meetings.ResultsThe radiologist reviewed 56 scans during the 49 consultation sessions. Advice over diagnostic images and target volume delineation were the main reasons for the consultations, which resulted in a change of practice in 45% of cases, ranging from changing target volumes (25%) to carrying out further imaging (20%). For the quality assurance audit meetings, the radiologist's review of 99 patients' planning contours resulted in a significant change in management in 6% of cases.ConclusionsThis is the first study to attempt to formally quantify the clinical benefit of having a dedicated ‘in-house’ radiologist within a radiation oncology department, clearly showing the valuable impact of such a role.     

Palliative radiotherapy practice within Western European countries: impact of the radiotherapy financing system?

PURPOSE: To analyze the reimbursement modalities for radiotherapy in the different Western European countries, as well as to investigate if these differences have an impact on the palliative radiotherapy practice for bone metastases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 565 radiotherapy centres included in the 1997 ESTRO directory. In this questionnaire the reimbursement strategy applied in the different centres was assessed, with respect to the use of a budget (departmental or hospital budget), case payment and/or fee-for-service reimbursement. The differences were analyzed according to country and to type and size of the radiotherapy centre. RESULTS: A total of 170 centres (86% of the responders) returned the questionnaire. Most frequent is budget reimbursement: some form of budget reimbursement is found in 69% of the centres, whereas 46% of the centres are partly reimbursed through fee-for-service and 35% through case payment. The larger the department, the more frequent the reimbursement through a budget or a case payment system and the less the importance of fee-for-service reimbursement (chi(2): P=0.0012; logit: P=0.0055). Whereas private centres are almost equally reimbursed by fee-for-service financing as by budget or case payment, radiotherapy departments in university hospitals receive the largest part of their financial resources through a budget or by case payment (83%) (chi(2): P=0.002; logit: P=0.0073). A correlation between the country and the radiotherapy reimbursement system was also demonstrated (P=0.002), radiotherapy centres in Spain, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom being almost entirely reimbursed through a budget and/or case payment and centres in Germany and Switzerland mostly through a fee-for-service system. In budget and case payment financing lower total number of fractions and lower total dose (chi(2): P=0.003; logit: P=0.0120) as well as less shielding blocks (chi(2): P=0.003; logit: P=0.0066) are used. A same tendency is found for the use of isodose calculations and field set-up, but without being statistically significant (P=0.264 and P=0.061 res.). The type of the centre and the reimbursement modality influence the fractionation regimen independently (P=0.0274). This is not the case for the centre size and the reimbursement, which were found to exert correlated effects on the fractionation schedule (P=0.1042). CONCLUSION: Reimbursement systems seem to influence radiotherapy practice. One should therefore aim to develop reimbursement criteria that pursue to deliver, not only the best qualitative, but also the most cost-effective treatments to the patients.     

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) for radiation therapy--head and neck cancer

In the treatment of head and neck cancer, radiotherapy has usually been given priority over surgery to preserve the organ involved in the cancer. Although many randomized trials have been reported in this field, there are few studies that can be useful to select the treatment methods for head and neck cancer. The treatment methods presented in the randomized trials performed in America and Europe are not always practiced in Japan. The fact is that the facilities in each hospital and the capability of doctors in surgery and radiation oncology influences the decision of the treatment policy. It is desirable for radiation oncologists in Japan to provide evidence good enough to convince surgeons and patients and to establish standard treatments for head and neck cancers suitable for this country.     

A Qualitative Assessment of Radiotherapy Training at a UK Regional Cancer Centre

AimsSpecialty trainees in clinical oncology must be competent in the coordination of both radiotherapy and systemic therapy at the completion of their training. Radiotherapy technology and postgraduate medical education have evolved significantly over the last two decades, but little is known of the educational impact of those changes within the dual training of the clinical oncology programme. A qualitative assessment of the radiotherapy component of training was undertaken at a single regional cancer centre in order to identify potential areas for improvement.Materials and methodsConsultants and trainees (n = 10) at a regional cancer centre underwent semi-structured interviews regarding their lived experience of learning radiotherapy skills and knowledge. As consultants and trainees can be considered equal co-investors in the process of radiotherapy learning, the same question stems were used for both groups. An interpretative phenomenological analysis was undertaken by the investigators to elicit the perception of both groups.ResultsConsultant and trainee assessments of current radiotherapy learning standards differ for several aspects of training, as do their expectations of the other in learning processes. A lack of time is a major barrier in modern practice, and both groups can propose novel measures to improve learning locally.ConclusionsArrangements for learning radiotherapy have not kept pace with the rate of change in the clinical oncology discipline. Trainees and consultants have contrasting views on the state of training, its strengths and weaknesses, and pathways to improvement, which should be reconciled by programme coordinators charged with upgrading the training system.     

Current and Future Challenges of Radiation Oncology in Iran: A Report from the Iranian Society of Clinical Oncology

AimsGrowth of the cancer incidence rate in Iran has been very high in recent years. Therefore, the Iranian health care system should be prepared for the treatment of a huge number of patients in the foreseeable future. One of the most important treatment options for cancer is radiation. However, there is no comprehensive information on infrastructure for radiation oncology in this country.Materials and methodsIn 2015, a questionnaire was designed by the Iranian Society of Clinical Oncology (ISCO) and all radiation oncology centres in the country were visited to determine four important components of radiation oncology services, including facilities, equipment, personnel and patients.ResultsIn 2015, 94 radiotherapy centres were identified in Iran. Sixty-one centres were fully operational, six centres were commissioning, 26 centres were under construction and one was inactive. Among the fully operational radiotherapy centres, 54 offered three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and two-dimensional radiotherapy, eight offered brachytherapy, two intensity-modulated radiotherapy, two intraoperative radiotherapy, ostereotactic radiosurgery, two hyperthermia and 59 chemotherapy. Moreover, the survey identified 110 linear accelerators, 25 cobalt-60, one gamma knife, 21 remote brachytherapy afterloaders and six orthovoltage units. Treatment planning equipment included 15 graphy simulators, 19 dedicated computed tomography simulators, 22 multileaf collimator and 12 electronic portal imaging devices. Moreover, in 2015, 243 clinical oncologists participated in the treatment of 42 350 cancer patients in need of radiotherapy, which is about one radiation oncologist for 175 patients. During 2010–2015, number of cobalt-60 reduced 70%, from 25 units to 8 units.ConclusionsThere is a significant gap between Iran's available facilities for radiation therapy and international standards. Moreover, during international economic sanctions against Iran this gap widened.     

Angiosarcoma associated with radiation therapy after treatment of breast cancer. Retrospective study on ten years

PurposeThe breast sarcoma induced by radiation therapy is rare but increasing, given the increased long-term survival of patients receiving radiation therapy. Fibrosarcoma, histiocytofibroma and angiosarcoma are the most common breast sarcoma. Angiosarcoma is the most common after breast cancer treated by radiation therapy, often diagnosed too late, with a severe prognosis and a high rate of recurrence. However, because of the low incidence of angiosarcoma associated with radiation therapy (AAR), the benefit of radiation therapy in breast cancer treatment outweighs the risk to develop angiosarcoma. The aim of this study is to evaluate these rare cases of AAR diagnosed in eastern Belgium in comparison to the data from the literature.Patients and methodsNine cases of AAR after radiation for breast ductal carcinoma were included in this retrospective study. AAR was diagnosed according to Cahan criteria between January 2007 and December 2016. Latency, incidence, management and prognosis are comparable to the literature.Results, conclusionThe median latency was 10 (4–24) years, the incidence of AAR in the East Belgian area was 0.09% of the patients irradiated on the same period. Patients were treated by surgery with wide local excision with or without reconstructive surgery, without radiotherapy and chemotherapy treatment. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed median overall survival of 61.8 months, patient survival of 55.6% at one year and 29.6% at five years. With the constant progress of medicine and its technologies, it would be possible to limit the occurrence of AAR or to diagnose it at an earlier stage.