Biomedical subjects

M Lunn

Publications and source records attributed to M Lunn.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed1997

Basic Treatment Equivalent (BTE): a new measure of linear accelerator workload.

The measurement of linear accelerator workload in radiation oncology departments is usually based on the number of fields treated per unit time. However, this approach ignores variations in treatment complexity. This prospective study, was designed to measure treatment workload directly, taking into account the variations in complexity of different treatment techniques. From this, a model was to be developed, which would be simple to apply and reproducible, both within and between radiation oncology departments in Australasia. It would provide a realistic basis for assessing treatment costs and enable the comparison of patient throughput between departments. This paper describes the derivation of the model. Over a 4-week period in the Radiation Oncology Department of Westmead Hospital, all fractions of radiotherapy were timed. The data collected included: tumour site; treatment intent; number of fields; number of wedges, compensators and shielding blocks; fraction number; patient age; performance status; and need for general anaesthesia. Multivariate modelling was performed to identify factors that significantly affected fraction duration, so that these could be used to develop a model of resource utilization. The durations of 2371 fractions were measured in 219 patients. Seventy-five per cent of fractions were given with radical intent. The factors found to influence fraction duration on multivariate modelling were: number of fields; number of shielding blocks; first treatment fraction; need for anaesthesia; and performance status. The number of wedges and compensators were also found to be significant but were not included in the model in order to maintain simplicity. This was felt to be necessary if the model is to be applied to the widest possible variety of machines. A model of resources utilization called 'Basic Treatment Equivalent' (BTE) was derived, which incorporated these factors. When tested at Westmead Hospital, this model accurately reflected the predicted BTE value over a further 1-week study period. This model of linear accelerator use, which incorporates complexity has been derived and evaluated in one radiation oncology department. This requires further prospective testing before its widespread use. The model appears to reflect linear accelerator workload better than previous measures. An Australasian study to validate the model further will be undertaken. If adopted, this model has implications for comparative workload reports, diagnostic-related groups, waiting list calculations, and patient scheduling.

Efficiency↗

PubMed1997

An assessment of the Basic Treatment Equivalent (BTE) model as measure of radiotherapy workload.

Current methods of linear accelerator workload analysis in radiation oncology use patients per hour or fields per hour as the basic unit of measurement but fail to take account of the variations in complexity of different treatment techniques. The Basic Treatment Equivalent (BTE) model of productivity assessment has been derived as a potentially better measure of workload because it includes a complexity factor. This model has now been tested prospectively in ten radiation oncology departments in New South Wales and compared with the numbers of fields and patients per hour. Over a 4-week period there were 50,115 fields administrated in 18,466 fractions in 441 hours of machine time in ten radiation oncology departments. The average productivity results for all departments were 4.18 patients, 11.25 fields and 5.66 BTE per hour. When compared with patients per hour and fields per hour, there was less variability of BTE per patient per hour in all departments, suggesting that most departments deliver radiation therapy in a consistent way, which is not appropriately reflected in the numbers of fields or patients per hour. Departments that were able to treat a high number of patients or fields per hour were able to do so because they used less complicated techniques or had a less complicated casemix of patients. The BTE model allows for variations in the complexity of treatment techniques, is simple to apply, and is reproducible under different conditions in different departments. Following revision of the model, an Australasian study is now proposed. The confirmation of our findings will have significant implications for resource utilization comparisons, patient time allocations, waiting list estimates and cost-benefit analysis.

Efficiency↗

PubMed1997

Medroxyprogesterone acetate addition or substitution for tamoxifen in advanced tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer: a phase III randomized trial. Australian-New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group.

PURPOSE: To determine whether a strategy of adding medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) to tamoxifen (TAM) is superior to the substitution of MPA for TAM among women with advanced breast cancer and disease progressing on TAM. To assess the patterns or response and subsequent progression in sites and tissues according to prior involvement and treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two-hundred-fifteen postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer progressing on TAM after receiving TAM for at least six months were randomized: 109 to add MPA 500 mg/day orally (TAM + MPA), and 106 to stop TAM and to substitute MPA. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to complete plus partial response rates: TAM + MPA 10%, MPA 9%, median time to progression TAM + MPA 3.0 months, MPA 4.5 months, or median overall survival, TAM + MPA 17.2 months, MPA 18.4 months. In a multivariate model, prognostic factors significant for a shorter time to disease progression were worse for performance status, involvement of more than one tissue, prior radiotherapy, and shorter time from recurrence after primary therapy to randomization. Adjusting for these factors, treatment with TAM + MPA was associated with a higher relative risk for disease progression, with a hazards ratio of 1.31, but this was not significant (95% confidence interval, 0.98 to 1.74; P = .067). However, in an exploratory analysis, the time to disease progression, among patients with progesterone receptor positive (PR+) tumors, was 6.3 months with MPA versus 2.9 months with TAM + MPA, with a hazards ratio of 1.92 (95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 3.32; P = .02). There was a significant interaction, P = .04, between PR status and treatment, indicating an advantage to treatment substitution for those who have PR+ tumors. Tumor response occurred in 14% of assessed metastatic sites. Subsequent progression occurred in a new tissue alone in 13% of patients, in both new and previously involved (old) tissues in 76%, and in old tissues only in 11%. In 23% of patients, progression occurred only at a new site, in 50% at both old and new sites, and in 27% only at old sites. No significant differences in the patterns of response or progression were seen in the different treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Among women with breast cancer whose disease is progressing after at least six months of treatment with TAM, there is no advantage to maintaining TAM when MPA is to be given. An overall effect of treatment on the pattern of failure at old sites or at new sites or tissues cannot be discerned.

Aged↗

PubMed1995

Applying Cox regression to competing risks.

Two methods are given for the joint estimation of parameters in models for competing risks in survival analysis. In both cases Cox's proportional hazards regression model is fitted using a data duplication method. In principle either method can be used for any number of different failure types, assuming independent risks. Advantages of the augmented data approach are that it limits over-parametrisation and it runs immediately on existing software. The methods are used to reanalyse data from two well-known published studies, providing new insights.

Analysis of Variance↗