Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:With high survival rates for pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), attention has turned to minimizing treatment-related morbidity and mortality. Chemotherapy and dose of radiation to organs at risk (OARs) contribute to elevated risks of secondary malignancy and cardiopulmonary disease. We sought to characterize the radiation dose to OARs, toxicities, and outcomes for pediatric HL patients treated with proton therapy (PT). MATERIALS AND METHODS:Fifty patients aged 11-21 with HL consecutively treated with PT were evaluated 1-2 months following completion of PT and every 6 months thereafter. Acute and late toxicities were captured retrospectively using CTCAE v5. Patterns of relapse were characterized, and survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS:Most (47, 94%) patients received PT to the mediastinum. Median mean heart dose was 4.3 Gy (RBE) and median bilateral lung V20Gy was 5.8%. Median integral dose was 1.7 Gy. For the 27 female patients, a median mean dose of 0.4 and 0.3 Gy (RBE) was delivered to ipsilateral and contralateral breast tissue, respectively. No on-treatment grade 3-5 toxicities were seen. At a median follow-up of 5.3 years, no PT-related grade 3-5 toxicities or secondary malignancies developed. Five patients relapsed at a median time of 9.2 months after PT (range 2.5-24.9 months; 5-year recurrence free survival 90%). Recurrences were both in- and out-of-field in all 5 cases with no marginal failures. All relapsed patients were successfully salvaged (5-year overall survival 100%). CONCLUSION:For pediatric HL patients, proton treatment resulted in marked dose sparing of OARs with low rates of toxicity, no marginal failures, and excellent 5-year survival.

PURPOSE:Patient experience scores are increasingly important in measuring quality of care and determining reimbursement from payers, including the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program and the Radiation Oncology Model. However, the role of bias in patient experience scores in oncology is unknown, raising the possibility that such payment structures may inadvertently perpetuate bias in reimbursement. Therefore, the authors characterized patient-, physician-, and practice-level predictors of patient experience scores in patients undergoing radiation therapy. METHODS:The authors retrospectively reviewed patient experience surveys for radiation oncology patients treated at two large multisite academic cancer centers. The outcome was responses on four survey questions. Covariates included self-reported patient demographics, physician characteristics, practice setting characteristics, and wait-time rating linked to each survey. Multivariable ordinal regression models were fitted to identify predictors of receiving a higher score on each of the survey questions. RESULTS:In total, 2,868 patients completed surveys and were included in the analysis. Patient experience scores were generally high, with >90% of respondents answering 5 of 5 on the four survey items. Physician gender was not associated with any measured patient experience outcomes (P > 0.40 for all). Independent predictors of higher score included a wait-time experience classified as "good" compared with "not good" (q < .001 for all). CONCLUSIONS:Oncology practices aiming to improve patient experience scores may wish to focus their attention on improving wait times for patients. Although a difference in patient experience scores on the basis of physician gender was not observed, such bias is likely to be complex, and further research is needed to characterize its effects.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Although mentorship has been associated with promotion, job satisfaction and retention, data are limited on a) mentorship experience of clinical vs research track physicians and b) feasibility and relative priority of formal program components. METHODS AND MATERIALS/METHODS:Within a single institution multi-site academic network, we implemented a Radiation Oncology AcaDemic Mentorship Program (ROADMAP) for junior faculty. Validated surveys assessing mentee satisfaction were distributed at baseline and one year. Statistical analysis included Wilcoxon rank sum and signed tests. Mentees assessed the "likelihood to recommend" each program component (10-point Likert-type scale), and means with standard error (SE) are reported. RESULTS:Among 42 eligible junior faculty, 36 (86%) opted into the program. Median time since residency was 2.5 years (IQR 1.75, 5.25) on the clinical track (n=12) and 3 years (IQR 2.75, 5) on the research track (n=24). At baseline, research track physicians reported higher satisfaction with mentoring than physicians on the clinical track (2.92 vs 2.16, respectively, p=0.02). Among 32 physicians completing one-year, overall satisfaction with mentoring increased compared to baseline (2.72 vs 3.87, respectively, p<0.001), which persisted on subset analysis for both clinical (2.16 vs 4.03, p<0.001) and research track physicians (2.99 vs 3.77, p=0.005). At one year, 28 mentees (88%) opted to continue the program. Program components were rated 8.25 (SE 0.37) for mentor/mentee pairings, 7.22 (SE 0.39) for goal setting, 6.84 (SE 0.47) for administrative support, 6.69 (SE 0.44) for peer mentoring, and 6.53 (SE 0.45) for Steering Committee oversight. Ratings of peer mentoring were not associated with track (p=0.59) or years in practice (p=0.29). CONCLUSIONS:Clinical track physicians may be less satisfied with mentorship than research track faculty. But all junior faculty, regardless of track, appear to benefit from formalizing dyadic mentor-mentee relationships, goal setting, and peer mentoring. Further work is needed to determine the role of mentorship in addressing physician burnout.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Dosimetric and technical challenges often limit radiation therapy (RT) target coverage for patients with breast cancer who require bilateral breast/chest wall and regional nodal irradiation (RNI). We evaluated the feasibility of using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to administer bilateral comprehensive RNI including the internal mammary nodes. METHODS AND MATERIALS/METHODS:We analyzed all patients treated at our institution with bilateral RNI using VMAT between 2017 and 2020. Medical records were reviewed to ascertain clinicopathologic features, radiotherapeutic parameters, and treatment-related adverse events. RESULTS:) for the bilateral lungs was 96.1% (range, 84.5%-99.8%), and median volume of the lung receiving 20 Gy for each lung was 27.5% (range, 14.9%-38.1%). The cardiac mean dose was a median of 699 cGy (range, 527-1117 cGy). Five patients (41%) developed grade 1 cough/dyspnea, with one patient developing grade 3 dyspnea. Of note, 3 of these patients (60%) were current or former smokers. No patient received glucocorticoid therapy or required respiratory intervention, and none developed longer-term pulmonary complaints. A decline in ejection fraction occurred in one patient with a preexisting cardiac condition who also received anthracycline-based chemotherapy and trastuzumab. Only one patient experienced a locoregional recurrence with synchronous distant progression, and subsequently succumbed to the disease. No secondary cancers have been noted to date. CONCLUSIONS:is not predictive for complications.

PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:Community-academic partnerships have the potential to improve access to clinical trials for under-represented minority patients who more often receive cancer treatment in community settings. In 2017, the Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) Cancer Center began opening investigator-initiated clinical trials in radiation oncology in targeted community-based partner sites with a high potential to improve diverse population accrual. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a set of implementation strategies for increasing overall community-based enrollment and the resulting proportional enrollment of Hispanic patients on trials on the basis of availability in community-based partner sites. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:An interrupted time series analysis evaluating implementation strategies was conducted from April 2018 to September 2021. Descriptive analysis ofHispanic enrollment on investigator-initiated randomized therapeutic radiation trials open at community-based sites was compared with those open only at themain academic center. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Overall, 84 patients were enrolled in clinical trials in the MSK Alliance, of which 48 (56%) identified as Hispanic. The quarterly patient enrollment pre- vs postimplementation increased from 1.39 (95% CI, -3.67 to 6.46) to 9.42 (95% CI, 2.05 to 16.78; P5 .017). In the investigator-initiated randomized therapeutic radiation trials open in the MSK Alliance, Hispanic representation was 11.5% and 35.9% in twometastatic trials and 14.2% in a proton versus photon trial. Inmatched trials open only at the main academic center, Hispanic representation was 5.6%, 6.0%, and 4.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:A combination of practice-level and physician-level strategies implemented at community-based partner sites was associated with increased clinical trial enrollment, which translated to improved Hispanic representation. This supports the role Q:2 of strategic community-academic partnerships in addressing disparities in clinical trial enrollment.

PURPOSE:We aimed to develop and study the implementation of a remote system for toxicity assessment and management of acute side effects of breast radiation using electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs). METHODS AND MATERIALS:A response-adapted Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events-based assessment for breast radiation toxicity was administered weekly during and for 8 weeks after radiation from June 2019 to July 2020. The care team received alerts when "severe" symptoms were reported by patients, who were then contacted. Treatment, clinic, and sociodemographic characteristics were abstracted from patient records. A subsample of patients and care team members was qualitatively interviewed at follow-up. RESULTS:Overall, 5787 assessments were sent to 678 patients, of whom 489 (72%) completed 2607 assessments (45%). Moderate or greater toxicity was reported by 419 responders (86%; 95% CI, 82%-89%). Clinician alerts for severe toxicity were generated for 264 assessments among 139 unique patients, of which 83% occurred posttreatment. The proportion of surveys that prompted an alert was significantly higher after treatment (219 [13%]) than during treatment (45 [5%]) (P < .001). Survey completion rates in the posttreatment period were higher among patients undergoing partial breast irradiation than postmastectomy radiation (incidence rate ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.60-0.81) (P < .001) despite these patients experiencing less severe toxicity. Interviews (15) found that patients had a positive experience with ePROs, although many thought the primary purpose was for research rather than symptom management. CONCLUSIONS:With the majority of toxicity occurring after breast radiation has ended, remote symptom monitoring with ePROs appears to fill a gap in clinical practice, particularly for patients undergoing shorter courses of radiation. It is important to properly onboard patients and explain that the purpose of ePROs is to aid clinical care. Further research is needed to determine whether the costs associated with ePROs can be offset by reducing routine clinic visits and whether this approach is acceptable and appropriate.

PURPOSE:Breast cancer diagnosis at a very young age has been independently correlated with worse outcomes. Appropriately intensifying treatment in these patients is warranted, even as we acknowledge the risks of potentially mutagenic adjuvant therapies. We examined local control, distant control, overall survival, and secondary malignancy rates by age cohort and by initial surgical strategy. METHODS AND MATERIALS:Female patients less than or equal to 35 years of age diagnosed with invasive breast cancer from January 1, 1990, to December 31, 2010, were identified. Control groups of those aged 36 to 50 years (n = 6246) and 51 to 70 years (n = 7294) were delineated from an institutional registry. Clinicopathologic and follow-up information was collected. Chi-squared test was used to compare frequencies of categorical variables. Survival endpoints were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier methodology. RESULTS:A total of 529 patients ≤35 years of age met criteria for analysis. The median age of diagnosis was 32 years (range 20-35). Median follow-up was 10.3 years. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with overall survival (OS) were tumor size (hazard ratio [HR] 1.14, P = .02), presence of lymphovascular invasion (HR 2.2, P <.001), estrogen receptor positivity (HR 0.64, P = .015), receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.52, P = .035), and black race (HR 2.87, P <.001). The ultra-young were more likely to experience local failure compared with the aged 36 to 50 group (HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.8-2.6, P < .001) and aged 51 to 70 group (HR 3.1, 95% CI 2.45 - 3.9, P <.001). The cumulative incidence of secondary malignancies at 5 and 10 years was 2.2% and 4.4%, respectively. Receipt of radiation was not significantly associated with secondary malignancies or contralateral breast cancer. CONCLUSION:Survival and recurrence outcomes in breast cancer patients ≤35 years are worse compared with those aged 36 to 50 or 51 to 70 years. Based on our data, breast conservation therapy is appropriate for these patients, and the concern for second malignancies should not impinge on the known indications for postoperative radiation therapy.

Perineural invasion (PNI) is a pathologic finding observed across a spectrum of solid tumors, typically with adverse prognostic implications. Little is known about how the presence of PNI influences locoregional recurrence (LRR) among breast cancers. We evaluated the association between PNI and LRR among an unselected, broadly representative cohort of breast cancer patients, and among a propensity-score matched cohort. We ascertained breast cancer patients seen at our institution from 2008 to 2019 for whom PNI status and salient clinicopathologic features were available. Fine-Gray regression models were constructed to evaluate the association between PNI and LRR, accounting for age, tumor size, nodal involvement, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), HER2 status, histologic tumor grade, presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and receipt of chemotherapy and/or radiation. Analyses were then refined by comparing PNI-positive patients to a PNI-negative cohort defined by propensity score matching. Among 8864 invasive breast cancers, 1384 (15.6%) were noted to harbor PNI. At a median follow-up of 6.3 years, 428 locoregional recurrence events were observed yielding a 7-year LRR of 7.1% (95% CI 5.5-9.1) for those with PNI and 4.7% (95% CI 4.2-5.3; p = 0.01) for those without. On univariate analysis throughout the entire cohort, presence of PNI was significantly associated with an increased risk of LRR (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.08-1.78, p < 0.01). Accounting for differences in salient clinicopathologic and treatment parameters by multivariable Fine-Gray regression modeling, the association between PNI and LRR was potentiated (HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.2-2.07, p = 0.001). We further conducted propensity score matching to balance clinicopathologic parameters and treatments between the two groups (PNI vs not), again showing a similar significant association between PNI and LRR (HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.03-2.08, p = 0.034). PNI is significantly associated with LRR following the definitive treatment of invasive breast cancer. The excess risk conferred by PNI is similar in magnitude to that observed with LVI, or by ER/PR negativity. Breast cancer prognostication and therapeutic decision-making should consider the presence of PNI among other salient risk factors. Larger studies among more uniform breast cancer presentations may elucidate the extent to which these findings apply across breast cancer subtypes and stages.