Bauman, Glenn

41 Background: Provider experience and physician burnout has been recognized as a critical issue in medicine. Ontario, Canada has a single payer cancer system run by Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) with a mandate covering system level planning and delivery of cancer services, funding, and quality improvement. As part of a larger provincial initiative to address clinician burnout, we examined the prevalence and drivers of burnout in practicing physician oncologists in Ontario. Methods: In November-December 2019, surgical, medical, hematological, and radiation oncologists in Ontario were invited to complete an anonymous online survey to assess burnout and its drivers. Burnout prevalence was assessed through the Maslach Burnout Inventory – Human Services Survey for Medical Personnel (MBI-HSS MP). Data on demographic, workplace, engagement, and practice profiles were collected. Logistic regression modeling was conducted to assess key variables associated with “high” burnout using a common definition of high scores on the MBI subscales of emotional exhaustion (EE) (> 27) and/or depersonalization (DP) (>10). Results: Response rate to the survey was 44% (n=418) with 72% reporting high levels of burnout. Mean scores for EE (30.7, SD 12.1) and DP (9.9, SD 6.7) were consistent with high burnout. Participants endorsed known drivers of burnout including: 1) a poor culture of wellness at work (e.g., not comfortable talking to leadership (72%), 2) inefficiencies of practice (e.g. feeling insufficient documentation time (67%)) and 3) personal resilience (e.g. not feeling they are contributing professionally in ways they value (21%)). Age (<45yrs) (OR: 2.15), poor/marginal control over workload (OR: 4.42), feeling used/unappreciated (OR: 2.63), working atmosphere that feels hectic/chaotic (OR: 2.68), and insufficient time for documentation requirements (OR: 2.52) significantly impacted the odds of high burnout in the regression model (p<0.05). Conclusions: The high rate of burnout among oncology physicians in a single payer public cancer system in Ontario is concerning for the wellbeing of providers, patients and system sustainability. Drivers important for maintaining a culture of wellness and efficiency of practice will require local, regional and provincial health policy to improve. Next steps will include raising awareness with provincial initiatives/policy to address key burnout drivers, and examining the impact of working under pandemic conditions (Covid-19) on oncologist burnout.

PURPOSE Provide evidence- and expert-based recommendations for optimal use of imaging in advanced prostate cancer. Due to increases in research and utilization of novel imaging for advanced prostate cancer, this guideline is intended to outline techniques available and provide recommendations on appropriate use of imaging for specified patient subgroups. METHODS An Expert Panel was convened with members from ASCO and the Society of Abdominal Radiology, American College of Radiology, Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, American Urological Association, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Urologic Oncology to conduct a systematic review of the literature and develop an evidence-based guideline on the optimal use of imaging for advanced prostate cancer. Representative index cases of various prostate cancer disease states are presented, including suspected high-risk disease, newly diagnosed treatment-naïve metastatic disease, suspected recurrent disease after local treatment, and progressive disease while undergoing systemic treatment. A systematic review of the literature from 2013 to August 2018 identified fully published English-language systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses, reports of rigorously conducted phase III randomized controlled trials that compared ≥ 2 imaging modalities, and noncomparative studies that reported on the efficacy of a single imaging modality. RESULTS A total of 35 studies met inclusion criteria and form the evidence base, including 17 systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis and 18 primary research articles. RECOMMENDATIONS One or more of these imaging modalities should be used for patients with advanced prostate cancer: conventional imaging (defined as computed tomography [CT], bone scan, and/or prostate magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) and/or next-generation imaging (NGI), positron emission tomography [PET], PET/CT, PET/MRI, or whole-body MRI) according to the clinical scenario.

PurposeTo determine whether prolonged androgen suppression (AS) duration before radiotherapy improves survival and disease control in prostate cancer.Patients and MethodsOne thousand five hundred seventy-nine men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of AS followed by radiotherapy with an additional 8 weeks of concurrent AS (16 weeks total) or to 28 weeks of AS followed by radiotherapy with an additional 8 weeks of AS (36 weeks total). The trial sought primarily to detect a 33% reduction in the hazard of prostate cancer death in the 28-week assignment. Time-to-event end points are reported for up to 10 years of follow-up.ResultsThere were no between-group differences in baseline characteristics of 1,489 eligible patients with follow-up. For the 8- and 28-week assignments, 10-year disease-specific survival rates were 95% (95% CI, 93.3% to 97.0%) and 96% (95% CI, 94.6% to 98.0%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; P = .45), respectively, and 10-year overall survival rates were 66% (95% CI, 62.0% to 69.9%) and 67% (95% CI, 63.0% to 70.8%; HR, 0.95; P = .62), respectively. For the 8- and 28-week assignments, 10-year cumulative incidences of locoregional progression were 6% (95% CI, 4.3% to 8.0%) and 4% (95% CI, 2.5% to 5.7%; HR, 0.65; P = .07), respectively; 10-year distant metastasis cumulative incidences were 6% (95% CI, 4.0% to 7.7%) and 6% (95% CI, 4.0% to 7.6%; HR, 1.07; P = .80), respectively; and 10-year prostate-specific antigen–based recurrence cumulative incidences were 27% (95% CI, 23.1% to 29.8%) and 27% (95% CI, 23.4% to 30.3%; HR, 0.97; P = .77), respectively.ConclusionExtending AS duration from 8 weeks to 28 weeks before radiotherapy did not improve outcomes. A lower than expected prostate cancer death rate reduced ability to detect a between-group difference in disease-specific survival. The schedule of 8 weeks of AS before radiotherapy plus 8 weeks of AS during radiotherapy remains a standard of care in intermediate-risk prostate cancer.