RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To obtain reliable data on the extent of the brachytherapy practice in the United States by conducting a comprehensive survey of all facilities. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The Clinical Research Committee of the AES surveyed all 1321 radiation oncology facilities identified in the Patterns of Care Study (PCS) of the American College of Radiology (ACR). Multiple mailings and follow-up were made to obtain a high response rate. Survey responders and nonresponders were compared using chi-square tests. Summary statistics were reported. RESULTS: Of the 1321 facilities, 1054 responded (80%). Hospital-based and larger facilities had a statistically significant higher rate of response. Brachytherapy was being performed at 819 facilities (the median number of procedures = 21-50). Two hundred and two facilities did no brachytherapy. The common isotopes used were 137Cs (705 facilities), 192Ir (585 facilities), 125I (236 facilities), and 131I (194 facilities). The common brachytherapy techniques used were intracavitary (751 facilities), interstitial (536 facilities), intraluminal (310 facilities), and plaques (148 facilities). Remote afterloaded brachytherapy was used at 205 centers as follows: high dose rate (HDR) (164), medium dose rate (MDR) (5), and low dose rate (LDR) (36). Computerized dosimetry was most commonly used (790 facilities), followed by Patterson-Parker (104 facilities) and Quimby (72 facilities). The common sites treated were cervix (701 facilities), endometrium (565 facilities), head and neck (354 facilities), and lung (344 facilities). CONCLUSION: Data regarding brachytherapy practice has been obtained from a large percentage (80%) of all facilities in the United States. The majority (78-81%) of radiation oncology facilities perform brachytherapy; however, its use is restricted to gynecological implants in many of these centers. The results from this survey will be used to develop a pattern of care study and data registry in brachytherapy.
Asunto(s)
Braquiterapia/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias/radioterapia , Humanos , Radioisótopos/uso terapéutico , Servicio de Radiología en Hospital , Sociedades , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados Unidos , Recursos HumanosRESUMEN
For all randomized trials since 1978, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group has required the study chairman for radiation therapy to review the treatment given to each patient. The chairman scores the compliance of the treatment borders, total dose, fraction, and total elapsed time relative to the protocol prescription at the primary site, regional nodes, and any critical structure. The individual parameters are then considered together to derive an "overall" treatment score. For two RTOG head and neck studies in patients with moderately and very advanced carcinomas, the "overall" treatment was classified as unacceptable if the treatment at primary was scored unacceptable with respect to dose, fractionation, and field borders. However, prolonged elapsed treatment was not included. Analysis of these studies with 426 evaluable patients was performed to assess the relationship of unacceptable "overall" treatment compliance with outcome. Patients with prolonged treatment elapsed days (14 days beyond the protocol prescription) exhibited significantly poorer loco-regional control (13% vs. 27% at 3 years with p = .007) and absolute survival (13% vs. 26% at 3 years with p = .01). As a result, the criteria for unacceptable "overall" treatment were revised to include prolonged elapsed treatment days. Further multivariate analyses showed the revised criteria identified patients with significantly poorer loco-regional control and absolute survival even after adjusting for other prognostic factors.