Quality assurance in the EORTC 22033-26033/CE5 phase III randomized trial for low grade glioma: the digital individual case review.

Details

Serval ID
serval:BIB_1D10623CEEFD
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Quality assurance in the EORTC 22033-26033/CE5 phase III randomized trial for low grade glioma: the digital individual case review.
Journal
Radiotherapy and Oncology
Author(s)
Fairchild A., Weber D.C., Bar-Deroma R., Gulyban A., Fenton P.A., Stupp R., Baumert B.G.
ISSN
1879-0887 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0167-8140
Publication state
Published
Issued date
2012
Volume
103
Number
3
Pages
287-292
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Clinical Trial, Phase III ; Journal Article ; Multicenter Study ; Randomized Controlled Trial ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tPublication Status: ppublish. Quality assurance.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The phase III EORTC 22033-26033/NCIC CE5 intergroup trial compares 50.4 Gy radiotherapy with up-front temozolomide in previously untreated low-grade glioma. We describe the digital EORTC individual case review (ICR) performed to evaluate protocol radiotherapy (RT) compliance.
METHODS: Fifty-eight institutions were asked to submit 1-2 randomly selected cases. Digital ICR datasets were uploaded to the EORTC server and accessed by three central reviewers. Twenty-seven parameters were analysed including volume delineation, treatment planning, organ at risk (OAR) dosimetry and verification. Consensus reviews were collated and summary statistics calculated.
RESULTS: Fifty-seven of seventy-two requested datasets from forty-eight institutions were technically usable. 31/57 received a major deviation for at least one section. Relocation accuracy was according to protocol in 45. Just over 30% had acceptable target volumes. OAR contours were missing in an average of 25% of cases. Up to one-third of those present were incorrectly drawn while dosimetry was largely protocol compliant. Beam energy was acceptable in 97% and 48 patients had per protocol beam arrangements.
CONCLUSIONS: Digital RT plan submission and review within the EORTC 22033-26033 ICR provide a solid foundation for future quality assurance procedures. Strict evaluation resulted in overall grades of minor and major deviation for 37% and 32%, respectively.
Keywords
Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating/therapeutic use, Brain Neoplasms/drug therapy, Brain Neoplasms/radiotherapy, Combined Modality Therapy, Dacarbazine/analogs & derivatives, Dacarbazine/therapeutic use, Electronic Health Records/standards, Glioma/drug therapy, Glioma/radiotherapy, Humans, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Radiotherapy Dosage
Pubmed
Web of science
Create date
29/07/2012 14:23
Last modification date
20/08/2019 12:53
Usage data