Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2021 Nov-Dec;11(6):e498-e505. doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2021.05.002. Epub 2021 May 26.
Radiation therapy effectively palliates bone metastases, although variability exists in practice patterns. National recommendations advocate against using extended fractionation (EF) with courses greater than 10 fractions. We previously reported EF use of 14.8%. We analyzed practice patterns within a statewide quality consortium to assess EF use in a larger patient population after implementation of a quality measure focused on reducing EF.
Patients treated for bone metastases within a statewide radiation oncology quality consortium were prospectively enrolled from March 2018 through October 2020. The EF quality metric was implemented March 1, 2018. Data on patient, physician, and facility characteristics; fractionation schedules; and treatment planning and delivery techniques were collected. Multivariable binary logistic regression was used to assess EF.
Twenty-eight facilities enrolled 1445 consecutive patients treated with 1934 plans. The median number of treatment plans per facility was 52 (range, 7-307). Sixty different fractionation schedules were used. EF was delivered in 3.4% of plans. Initially, EF use was lower than expected and remained low over time. Significant predictors for EF use included complicated metastasis (odds ratio [OR], 2.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-4.02; P = .04), lack of associated central nervous system or visceral disease (OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.2-4.2; P = .01), nonteaching versus teaching facilities (OR, 8.97; 95% CI, 2.1-38.5; P < .01), and treating physicians with more years in practice (OR, 12.82; 95% CI, 3.9-42.4; P < .01).
Within a large, prospective population-based data set, fractionation schedules for palliative radiation therapy of bone metastases remain highly variable. Resource-intensive treatments including EF persist, although EF use was low after implementation of a quality measure. Complicated metastases, lack of central nervous system or visceral disease, and treatment at nonteaching facilities or by physicians with more years in practice significantly predict use of EF. These results support ongoing efforts to more clearly understand and address barriers to high-value radiation approaches in the palliative setting.
放射治疗能有效地缓解骨转移,尽管实践模式存在差异。国家建议反对使用超过 10 个疗程的扩展分割(EF)。我们之前报告了 14.8%的 EF 使用情况。我们在全州范围内的质量联盟内分析了实践模式,以评估在实施专注于减少 EF 的质量措施后,在更大的患者群体中 EF 的使用情况。
2018 年 3 月至 2020 年 10 月,前瞻性地从全州放射肿瘤学质量联盟内接受骨转移治疗的患者中招募患者。EF 质量指标于 2018 年 3 月 1 日实施。收集患者、医生和医疗机构特征;分割计划;以及治疗计划和交付技术的数据。多变量二项逻辑回归用于评估 EF。
28 个医疗机构共入组了 1445 例连续患者,共治疗了 1934 个计划。每个医疗机构的中位治疗计划数为 52(范围为 7-307)。使用了 60 种不同的分割计划。3.4%的计划中采用了 EF。最初,EF 的使用率低于预期,且随着时间的推移一直保持较低水平。EF 使用的显著预测因素包括复杂的转移(优势比 [OR],2.04;95%置信区间 [CI],1.04-4.02;P=.04)、无相关中枢神经系统或内脏疾病(OR,2.27;95% CI,1.2-4.2;P=.01)、非教学与教学机构(OR,8.97;95% CI,2.1-38.5;P<.01)和从业年限较长的治疗医生(OR,12.82;95% CI,3.9-42.4;P<.01)。
在一个大型的、基于人群的前瞻性数据集中,骨转移姑息性放射治疗的分割方案仍然高度可变。包括 EF 在内的资源密集型治疗仍然存在,尽管在实施质量措施后,EF 的使用率较低。复杂的转移、无中枢神经系统或内脏疾病、非教学机构或从业年限较长的医生进行治疗,显著预测 EF 的使用。这些结果支持持续努力,以更清楚地了解和解决姑息治疗中高价值放射方法的障碍。