PURPOSE:A Patterns of Care Study examined the records of patients with esophageal cancer (EC) treated with radiation in 1992 through 1994 to determine the national practice processes of care and outcomes and to compare the results with those of clinical trials.PATIENTS AND METHODS:A national survey of 63 institutions was conducted using two-stage cluster sampling, and specific information was collected on 400 patients with squamous cell (62%) or adenocarcinoma (37%) of the thoracic esophagus who received radiation therapy (RT) as part of primary or adjuvant treatment. Patients were staged according to a modified 1983 American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system. Fifteen percent of patients had clinical stage (CS) I disease, 40% had CS II disease, and 30% had CS III disease. Twenty-six percent of patients underwent esophagectomy. Seventy-five percent of patients received chemotherapy; 84% of these received concurrent chemotherapy and radiation (CRT).RESULTS:Significant variables for overall survival in multivariate analysis include the use of esophagectomy (risk ratio [RR] = 0.62), the use of chemotherapy (RR = 0.63), Karnofsky performance status (KPS) greater than 80 (RR = 0.61), CS I or II disease (RR = 0.66), and facility type (RR = 0.72). Age, sex, and histology were not significant. Preoperative CRT resulted in a nonsignificantly higher 2-year survival rate compared with definitive CRT alone (63% v 39%; P =.11), whereas 2-year survival by planned treatment rather than treatment given was 47.7% for preoperative CRT and 35.4% for definitive CRT (P =.23). Definitive CRT compared with definitive RT alone resulted in significantly higher 2-year survival (39% v 20.6%; P =.027) and lower 2-year local regional failure (30% v 57.9%; P =. 0031).CONCLUSION:This study confirms the value of CRT in EC treatment. It indicates that the results obtained in practice settings nationwide are similar to those obtained in clinical trials and that KPS and the 1983 clinical staging system are useful prognostic indicators. The suggested value of esophagectomy and superiority of preoperative CRT over CRT alone in this study should be tested in a randomized trial.

Conclusion: MLC and recorded verify systems decrease shielding, wedged and machine set up deviations.New technology introduces new deviations such as data entry.Prospective data collection and monitoring by the Quality Assurance Program at our Centre has resulted in continuous improvement in quality of service, and evaluation of the impact of new technology.

PURPOSEThe Patterns of Care Study (PCS) of the American College of Radiology periodically develops a decision tree and current management guidelines for major malignancies where radiation has an important role. The decision tree is a framework which depicts the division of patients into treatment groups. The treatment guidelines are useful in management and also serve as a starting point for quality assessment. For the first time, PCS decided to develop consensus management guidelines for esophageal cancer.MATERIALS AND METHODSA consensus panel was convened to define the key issues and develop guidelines for esophageal cancer management. A modified Delphi process was used to achieve consensus.RESULTSThe consensus panel developed guidelines for the management of patients with adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus with a Karnofsky performance status of over 50. Patients with clinical stage I or II esophageal cancer can be treated with curative intent using either a primary surgical or primary chemoradiation approach. For patients with clinical stage III malignancy, where the most common approaches are palliative, surgical resection is generally not recommended and chemoradiation is the preferred treatment.CONCLUSIONThe PCS has developed treatment guidelines for esophageal cancer based on consensus committee deliberations. These guidelines can be useful for those who manage esophageal cancer.

Background. In Japan, the elderly population is growing rapidly, and therefore, so is the number of cancer patients who are not good candidates for aggressive surgery or chemotherapy. Radiation therapy offers excellent potential for the treatment of such patients, with minimal invasion and functional preservation. A Patterns of Care Study (PCS) examined the parameters of treatments used for patients with esophageal cancer to determine nationwide variations by age.

Between 1986 and 1990, 16 patients were enrolled in a prospective Phase I/II study of transanal local excision and combined preoperative and postoperative radiation therapy (RT). All patients had biopsy-proven adenocarcinoma extending to within 6 cm of the anal verge and involvement of at least one third of the rectal circumference with tumor. Five of 16 patients (32%) had T3 tumors, and only two patients had T1 tumors. Patients received a single 500 cGy fraction of RT to the pelvis within 24 hours before surgery and underwent transanal excision followed by postoperative RT (median dose, 5040 cGy). With a median follow-up of 33 months, overall 3-year actuarial survival was 94%. Two patients had isolated local recurrences (both successfully salvaged), and four had distant metastases but maintained local control. The 3-year actuarial rates of continuous freedom from any relapse, continuous local control, and no evidence of disease at last follow-up were 53%, 80%, and 71%, respectively. Only three of 16 patients required colostomy, resulting in a 3-year actuarial colostomy-free rate of 77%. There was a trend toward a higher rate of relapse (P = 0.066) in patients with T3 tumors than those with T1 and T2 tumors. Sphincter-preserving therapy for low-lying rectal carcinomas using local excision and combined preoperative and postoperative RT is feasible, although improved local and adjuvant therapy is needed for patients with T3 lesions.

A questionnaire was sent to 488 radiation oncologists in the United States and 268 replied. Each was given a brief account of three hypothetical patients (one with brain metastases, one with locally advanced lung cancer and one with bone metastases) and asked how they would approach the problems posed. Younger radiation oncologists (less than 46 years) treated patients with brain metastases with a smaller number of fractions and were more likely to view the case of locally advanced lung cancer as palliative. The aim of the radiation oncologist was related to the treatment pattern chosen, with the aim to extend life frequently related to higher total dose and number of fractions. When the amount of private funding was compared with dose, number of treatments, and whether the case was called palliative or not, no relationship was found.