No abstract

Guidance from the Department of Health, published in 2000, stated that, 'as a matter of right', communications between clinicians would be copied to patients. In further guidance, the department indicated that, from April 2004, patients would receive copies of correspondence exchanged between healthcare professionals. There has been little research on this issue, and the few existing publications have come from the hospital psychiatric clinic setting. We examined the attitudes of 100 patients attending an ENT clinic as well as those of 100 parents of children attending a paediatric ENT clinic in a general hospital out-patient setting. At the end of consultations, patients or parents were invited to take part in the survey by completing a short questionnaire. Forty-three per cent of the adult patients and 44 per cent of the parents requested a copy of the clinic letter. These people were followed up by a telephone survey, three weeks after the copy of the clinic letter to the general practitioner was posted to the patient or parent. Eighty-one per cent of the patients and 77 per cent of the parents were successfully contacted for the follow-up telephone survey. Sixty per cent of the adults and 77 per cent of the parents reported that the copy of the clinic letter was helpful. There were no differences in responses between the adult patient and paediatric patient groups. In this study, less than half of both groups requested a copy of the ENT clinic letter to their general practitioner. To follow Department of Health guidance and copy the letter without patient consent is arguably contradictory to best practice and also to the concept of patient choice. There are significant financial implications in adopting the departmental guidance. We propose patients should be offered a copy of their clinic letter on request.

Our results support pathologic assessment of N1 lymph nodes in patients with stage Inon-small cell lung cancer considered for stereotactic body radiotherapy, with the greatest benefit in patients with central and T2 tumors. Diagnostic evaluation with endoscopic bronchial ultrasound should be considered in the evaluation of stereotactic body radiotherapy candidates.

PurposeDose-volume histogram (DVH) toxicity relationships are poorly defined in men who receive radiation after radical prostatectomy (RP). We evaluated Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) study 0534 and institutional intact normal-tissue sparing guidelines, as well as dose to bladder trigone, for ability to minimize late toxicity.Methods and materials164 men received intensity modulated radiation therapy (RT) to a median prostate bed dose of 66.6 Gy at a median of 22 months after RP. 46% of men were prescribed androgen deprivation therapy and pelvic lymph node irradiation to a median dose of 50.4 Gy. DVH relationships for the rectum, bladder, trigone, and bladder excluding the clinical target volume (bladder-CTV) were analyzed against the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events late grade 2 + (G2+) gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity by log-rank test. RTOG 0534 (rectum V65, 40 Gy ≤35, 55%, and bladder-CTV V65, 40 ≤50, 70%) and intact prostate RT institutional guidelines (rectum V70, 65, 40 ≤20, 40, 80% and bladder V70, 65, 40 ≤30, 60, 80%, respectively) guidelines were evaluated.ResultsWith a median follow-up time of of 33 months, the 4-year freedom from G2 + GI and GU toxicity were both 91%. G2 + GI (n = 12) and GU (n = 15) toxicity included 4% diarrhea (n = 6), 4% hemorrhage (n = 6), 1% proctitis (n = 1), and 4% urinary frequency (n = 7), 1% obstructive (n = 2), 2% cystitis (n = 3), and 3% incontinence (n = 5), respectively. RTOG 0534 rectum and bladder goals were not achieved in 65% and 41% of cases, while the institutional intact prostate goals were not achieved in 21% and 25% of cases, respectively. Neither dose to the bladder trigone nor any of the proposed normal tissue goals were associated with late toxicity (P > .1). In the univariate analysis, age, pelvic RT, RT dose, anticoagulation use, androgen deprivation therapy, time from RP to RT, and tobacco history were not associated with toxicity.ConclusionsMore than 90% of men were free from late G2 + toxicity 4 years after post-RP intensity modulated RT. No tested parameters were associated with late toxicity. In the absence of established normal-tissue DVH guidelines in the postoperative setting, the use of intact guidelines is reasonable.

Oncologists must have a strong understanding of collaborating specialties in order to deliver optimal cancer care. The objective of this study was to quantify current interdisciplinary oncology education among oncology training programs across the USA, identify effective teaching modalities, and assess communication skills training. Web-based surveys were sent to oncology trainees and program directors (PDs) across the USA on April 1, 2013 and October 8, 2013, respectively. Question responses were Yes/No, five-point Likert scales (1 = not at all, 2 = somewhat, 3 = moderately, 4 = quite, 5 = extremely), or free response. Respondents included the following (trainees/PDs): 254/55 medical oncology, 160/42 surgical oncology, 102/24 radiation oncology, and 41/20 hospice and palliative medicine (HPM). Trainees consistently reported lower rates of interdisciplinary education for each specialty compared with PDs as follows: medical oncology 57 vs. 77% (p < 0.01), surgical oncology 30 vs. 44% (p < 0.01), radiation oncology 70 vs. 89% (p < 0.01), geriatric oncology 19 vs. 30% (p < 0.01), and HPM 55 vs. 74% (p < 0.01). The predominant teaching method used (lectures vs. rotations vs. tumor board attendance vs. workshop vs. other) varied according to which discipline was being taught. The usefulness of each teaching method was rated statistically different by trainees for learning about select disciplines. Furthermore, statistically significant differences were found between PDs and trainees for the perceived usefulness of several teaching modalities. This study highlights a deficiency of interdisciplinary education among oncology training programs in the USA. Efforts to increase interdisciplinary education opportunities during training may ultimately translate into improved collaboration and quality of cancer care.