ESTRO-HERO survey: Radiotherapy equipment and departments in the European countries: Final results from the ESTRO-HERO survey

Background: Documenting the distribution of radiotherapy departments and the availability of radiotherapy equipment in the European countries is an important part of HERO the ESTRO Health Economics in Radiation Oncology project. HERO has the overall aim to develop a knowledge base of the provision of radiotherapy in Europe and build a model for health economic evaluation of radiation treatments at the European level. The aim of the current report is to describe the distribution of radiotherapy equipment in European countries. Methods: An 84-item questionnaire was sent out to European countries, principally through their national societies. The current report includes a detailed analysis of radiotherapy departments and equipment (questionnaire items 2629), analyzed in relation to the annual number of treatment courses and the socio-economic status of the countries. The analysis is based on validated responses from 28 of the 40 European countries defined by the European Cancer Observatory (ECO). Results: A large variation between countries was found for most parameters studied. There were 2192 linear accelerators, 96 dedicated stereotactic machines, and 77 cobalt machines reported in the 27 countries where this information was available. A total of 12 countries had at least one cobalt machine in use. There was a median of 0.5 simulator per MV unit (range 0.31.5) and 1.4 (range 0.44.4) simulators per department. Of the 874 simulators, a total of 654 (75%) were capable of 3D imaging (CT-scanner or CBCToption). The number of MV machines (cobalt, linear accelerators, and dedicated stereotactic machines) per million inhabitants ranged from 1.4 to 9.5 (median 5.3) and the average number of MV machines per department from 0.9 to 8.2 (median 2.6). The average number of treatment courses per year per MV machine varied from 262 to 1061 (median 419). While 69% of MV units were capable of IMRT only 49% were equipped for image guidance (IGRT). There was a clear relation between socio-economic status, as measured by GNI per capita, and availability of radiotherapy equipment in the countries. In many low income countries in Southern and Central-Eastern Europe there was very limited access to radiotherapy and especially to equipment for IMRT or IGRT. Conclusions: The European average number of MV machines per million inhabitants and per department is now better in line with QUARTS recommendations from 2005, but the survey also showed a significant heterogeneity in the access to modern radiotherapy equipment in Europe. High income countries especially in Northern-Western Europe are well-served with radiotherapy resources, other countries are facing important shortages of both equipment in general and especially machines capable of delivering high precision conformal treatments (IMRT, IGRT)

Polygenic determinants of white matter volume derived from GWAS lack reproducibility in a replicate sample

A recent publication reported an exciting polygenic effect of schizophrenia (SCZ) risk variants, identified by a large genome-wide association study (GWAS), on total brain and white matter volumes in schizophrenic patients and, even more prominently, in healthy subjects. The aim of the present work was to replicate and then potentially extend these findings. According to the original publication, polygenic risk scores using single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) information of SCZ GWAS (polygenic SCZ risk scores; PSS) were calculated in 122 healthy subjects, enrolled in a structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) study. These scores were computed based on P-values and odds ratios available through the Psychiatric GWAS Consortium. In addition, polygenic white matter scores (PWM) were calculated, using the respective SNP subset in the original publication. None of the polygenic scores, either PSS or PWM, were found to be associated with total brain, white matter or gray matter volume in our replicate sample. Minor differences between the original and the present study that might have contributed to lack of reproducibility (but unlikely explain it fully), are number of subjects, ethnicity, age distribution, array technology, SNP imputation quality and MRI scanner type. In contrast to the original publication, our results do not reveal the slightest signal of association of the described sets of GWAS-identified SCZ risk variants with brain volumes in adults. Caution is indicated in interpreting studies building on polygenic risk scores without replication sample.