ESTRO 2020 Abstract book

S35 ESTRO 2020

and smoking statistics (all at CCG level) were used. We estimated the number of LCs in each CCG that would be eligible for screening and then applied a shift in stage at diagnosis from the current level to a new MLHC CCG- equivalent level. This cohort of LC patients, with new stage data, were then re-introduced to the rest of the LC patients not in the screening program. Finally, an estimate is made for the additional number of patients surviving for at least 1 and 5 years 4 . To show the impact upon health services for both the no- NSP and NSP scenarios, stage1 LC treatment rates (SABR, RT, Surgery and no treatment) were applied at CCG level using English treatment rates (12%) 3 . This was repeated using Dutch rates(41%) 3 . Results Stage1 patient numbers could increase by 115% if a NSP was successfully implemented. This is an increase of ≈450 RT, ≈950 SABR and ≈4,000 surgical patients (Table 1a). 1 year survival would increase from 41% to 53%. 5 year survival would increase from 16% to 26% (Table 1b&c). If England treated with the same rates as the Dutch then SABR patient numbers could increase by ≈2,000 patients (Figure 1) with RT and surgical numbers decreasing. If both a NSP and improvements to access occurred then it could result in an extra ≈5,200 SABR patients, ≈130 RT patients and ≈2,400 surgical patients per year.

Conclusion Survival rates for LC in England are lower than some parts of Europe. This could be addressed by increasing access to the latest treatments and by improving early diagnosis. However, a health service has to be prepared for both situations before successful implementation. Here we have calculated the potential increase in stage1 patient numbers and the service consequences. References 1. Crosbie PA, et al. Thorax 2019. Doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl- 2017-211377 2. Distefano G, et al. BJR|Open 2019. Doi:10.1259/bjro.20190022. 3. Damhuis R, et al. Ann Oncol 2019. Doi:10.1093/annonc/mdz064.005 4. ONS Cancer survival in England bit.ly/2o4sUFn [21/10/2019] OC-0075 The Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology 2019 workforce and technology utilization study S. Loewen 1 , C. Doll 1 , R. Halperin 2 , J. Archambault 3 , T. Stuckless 4 , M. Brundage 5 1 Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Division of Radiation Oncology, Calgary, Canada ; 2 BC Cancer, Division of Radiation Oncology, Kelowna, Canada ; 3 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec, Department of Radiation Oncology, Quebec City, Canada ; 4 Cancer Care Program of Eastern Health, Department of Radiation Oncology, St. John’s, Canada ; 5 Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Department of Radiation Oncology, Kingston, Canada Purpose or Objective To identify and report radiation oncologist (RO) workforce characteristics (demographics, clinical workload, and employment details), equipment inventory and technology The Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology (CARO) distributed an online survey to RO administrative leaders at 47 Canadian cancer centres providing radiotherapy services from May to September 2019 to capture workforce characteristics, including RO demographics, clinical workload, and employment/compensation models in 2017 and 2018, as well as equipment inventory and technology utilization in 2018. The questionnaire was modelled after the published 2017 workforce/equipment survey of 2016 data (Loewen et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2019;105(1):42-51), re-analyzed here for all centres in common, to permit trend analysis. utilization in Canada. Material and Methods