The Use of Positron Emission Tomography The Use of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) for Cancer Care Across Canada: (PET) for Cancer Care Across Canada: (PET) for Cancer Care Across Canada: (PET) for Cancer Care Across Canada: Time for a National Strategy Time for a National Strategy Report Release Briefing p g February 27, 2012 1
The Use of Positron Emission Tomography The Use of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) for Cancer Care Across Canada: (PET) for Cancer Care Across Canada: (PET) for Cancer Care Across Canada: (PET) for Cancer Care Across Canada: Time for a National Strategy Time for a National Strategy Susan D. Martinuk Report Release Briefing February 27, 2012 2
CANCER in CANADA CANCER in CANADA Aff Affects 82% of Canadians t 82% f C di • One of every four will die from cancer • 40% of women and 40% of women and • 45% of men will develop cancer • Every HOUR, 8 Canadians die from cancer • Every HOUR, 20 are diagnosed with cancer E HOUR 20 di d ith 2011 Canadian Cancer Statistics 3
Ssss Saku Koivu returns to hockey following cancer treatments Saku Koivu returns to hockey following cancer treatments PET imaging played a crucial role in his speedy recovery 4
Saku Koivu cuts ribbon on PET scanner for M Montreal General Hospital t l G l H it l 5
PET (Positron Emission Tomography) PET (Positron Emission Tomography) • nuclear medicine imaging technology • used for diagnosis, not treatment • visualizes the body at the cellular level i li h b d h ll l l l • detects changes in the biological function of cells before they undergo anatomical changes to create a mass or tumour • detects cancer cells at an early stage • early detection prompts more timely treatment and improves probability early detection prompts more timely treatment and improves probability of successful outcome 6
Roles of PET in Oncology » Initial Diagnosis » Staging/Detecting Recurrence » Monitoring Response to Therapy » Patient Management i 7
CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESSS OF PET CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESSS OF PET Th Three Large Studies in the United States (NOPR) L St di i th U it d St t (NOPR) PET changed patient management strategy in: ‐ 36.5% ‐ 38% 38% ‐ 49% of cases Ch Changes shown to be similar across all cancer types. h b i il ll 8
CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESSS OF PET CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESSS OF PET A 2010 study from Vancouver General Hospital showed that PET changed intended treatment plans in 50% of cases. 9
CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESSS OF PET CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESSS OF PET After a PET scan, NOPR studies also showed: • Plans for surgical biopsy were eliminated in 70% of cases • Further diagnostic procedures were cancelled in ‐ 77% ‐ 90% of cases 90% of cases Suggests PET should be a first ‐ line diagnostic tool, not a last resort 10
Purpose of Study Purpose of Study » determine the current state of PET in Canada » examine the current barriers to expanding PET or i th t b i t di PET increasing the utilization of PET » consider the strategies required for Canada to move g q ahead into 21 st century cancer imaging 11
The Use of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) for Cancer Care Across Canada: Care Across Canada: Time for a National Strategy 12
FINDINGS FINDINGS Canada is far behind the United States and Europe Canada is far behind the United States and Europe in adopting PET technology: » Canada has 29 clinical PET scanners » Europe will have 742 PET scanners by 2013 » The United States currently has about 2,000 PET scanners WHO – recommends a ratio of 2.0 PET scanners per million Canada’s current ratio = 0 86 Canada s current ratio = 0.86 13
PET Scanners in Canada 14
15
QUEBEC QUEBEC » 12 scanners in 12 locations 12 i 12 l i » Lowest cost » Over 50% of all scans in Canada » Y2000 QC Government decision to make cancer care a priority » 2001 report recommended adoption of PET » Government deployed 12 scanners over the next 8 years » Will continue to add PET to all nuclear ‐ medicine departments 16
Ontario Ontario » 9 publicly ‐ funded, clinical scanners » Lowest number of PET scans » Lowest utilization of clinical scanners » Year 2001 report recommended no insured funding for PET » Clinical trials surrounded by controversy » 2 Ombudsmen investigations » In July 2009 Government announced that it would make PET » In July 2009, Government announced that it would make PET available to cancer patients – Ombudsman report unpublished » BUT in 2010, Ontario carried out fewer scans than 2009 » Ontario influences other provinces to take the cheap route » Ontario influences other provinces to take the cheap route 17
Factors to OVERCOME in Growing g PET in Canada 1. Costs • High operational ($2M/year) and capital costs ($3 ‐ 4M) • High costs of FDG – radioactive component of PET 18
Cyclotrons Producing FDG for PET 19
Factors CONSTRAINING PET Growth in Canada 1.Costs 2. Infrastructure and Policy Framework y • Canada’s unique geography and population density • Health Canada’s regulation of FDG • No national policies or indications for use of PET N ti l li i i di ti f f PET • Concerns about overuse of PET without proper indications 20
Factors CONSTRAINING PET Growth in Canada 1. Costs 2. Infrastructure and Policy Framework 3. Education and Training 3. Education and Training » Physicians » Cancer patients and general public g » Conflicting visions about spending scarce healthcare dollars » Shortage of trained & educated personnel 21
Canada’s Road to Success Canada’s Road to Success • Canada has a history of leadership in nuclear medicine • Canada has a history of leadership in nuclear medicine • Canada has the resources and the track record to deploy & standardize PET imaging at a national level & standardize PET imaging at a national level • Team Canada ― coordination among the provinces ― is the winning strategy the winning strategy • Education is KEY 22
Canada at the Crossroads Canada at the Crossroads Canada lags far behind the rest of the world in cancer imaging Canada has a duty to improve cancer care and investigate technologies that can be more clinically ‐ and cost ‐ effective 23
Canada’s CHOICE Move forward and adopt new technology OR Maintain the status quo Maintain the status quo The choice is OURS The choice is OURS 24
Susan D. Martinuk ‐‐ susanmartinuk@shaw.ca Susan D. Martinuk susanmartinuk@shaw.ca Tim Meyer ‐‐ tmeyer@triumf.ca 25
Recommend
More recommend
