Clinical Pathways: A Catalyst for the Adoption of Hypofractionation for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE

Hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation (HF-WBI) remains underutilized in the United States despite support by multiple clinical trials. We evaluated the success of iterative modifications of our breast cancer clinical pathway on the adoption of HF-WBI in a large, integrated radiation oncology network.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The breast clinical pathway was modified in January 2011 (Amendment 1) to recommend HF-WBI as the first option for women ≥70 of age with stages 0 to IIA, while maintaining conventional fractionation (CF) as a pathway-concordant secondary option. In January 2013 (Amendment 2), the pathway's HF-WBI recommendation was extended to women ≥50 years of age. In January 2014 (Amendment 3), the pathway mandated HF-WBI as the only pathway-concordant option in women ≥50 years of age, and all pathway-discordant plans were subject to peer review and justification. Women ≥50 years of age with ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive breast cancer who underwent breast conserving surgery and adjuvant WBI were included in this analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 5112 patients from 2009 to 2014 who met inclusion criteria. From 2009 to 2012, the overall HF-WBI use rate was 8.3%. Following Amendments 2 and 3 (2013 and 2014, respectively), HF-WBI use significantly increased to 21.8% (17.3% in the community, 39.7% at academic sites) and 76.7% (75.5% in the community, 81.4% at academic sites), respectively (P<.001). Compared to 2009 to 2012, the relative risk of using HF-WBI was 7.9 (95% confidence interval: 7.1-8.6, P<.001) and 10.7 (95% CI: 10.3-11.0, P<.001), respectively, after Amendments 2 and 3, respectively. Age ≥70 and treatment at an academic site increased the likelihood of receiving HF-WBI in 2009 to 2012 and following Amendment 2 (P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the transformative effect of a clinical pathway on patterns of care for breast radiation therapy. Although our initial HF-WBI use rate was low (8%-22%) and consistent with national rates, the clinical pathway approach dramatically increased adoption rate to >75%. In contrast to passive guidelines, clinical pathways serve as active tools to promote current best practices.