Clinical Pathways: A Catalyst for the Adoption of Hypofractionation for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

Purpose: Hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation (HF-WBI) remains underutilized in the United States despite support by multiple clinical trials. We evaluated the success of iterative modifications of our breast cancer clinical pathway on the adoption of HF-WBI in a large, integrated radiation oncology network.

Methods And Materials: The breast clinical pathway was modified in January 2011 (Amendment 1) to recommend HF-WBI as the first option for women ≥70 of age with stages 0 to IIA, while maintaining conventional fractionation (CF) as a pathway-concordant secondary option. In January 2013 (Amendment 2), the pathway's HF-WBI recommendation was extended to women ≥50 years of age. In January 2014 (Amendment 3), the pathway mandated HF-WBI as the only pathway-concordant option in women ≥50 years of age, and all pathway-discordant plans were subject to peer review and justification. Women ≥50 years of age with ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive breast cancer who underwent breast conserving surgery and adjuvant WBI were included in this analysis.

Results: We identified 5112 patients from 2009 to 2014 who met inclusion criteria. From 2009 to 2012, the overall HF-WBI use rate was 8.3%. Following Amendments 2 and 3 (2013 and 2014, respectively), HF-WBI use significantly increased to 21.8% (17.3% in the community, 39.7% at academic sites) and 76.7% (75.5% in the community, 81.4% at academic sites), respectively (P<.001). Compared to 2009 to 2012, the relative risk of using HF-WBI was 7.9 (95% confidence interval: 7.1-8.6, P<.001) and 10.7 (95% CI: 10.3-11.0, P<.001), respectively, after Amendments 2 and 3, respectively. Age ≥70 and treatment at an academic site increased the likelihood of receiving HF-WBI in 2009 to 2012 and following Amendment 2 (P<.001).

Conclusions: This study demonstrates the transformative effect of a clinical pathway on patterns of care for breast radiation therapy. Although our initial HF-WBI use rate was low (8%-22%) and consistent with national rates, the clinical pathway approach dramatically increased adoption rate to >75%. In contrast to passive guidelines, clinical pathways serve as active tools to promote current best practices.