Published June 2017 | Version v1
Journal article

Quality assurance of radiotherapy in the ongoing EORTC 1219-DAHANCA-29 trial for HPV/p16 negative squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: Results of the benchmark case procedure

  • 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leuven (Belgium)
  • 2. EORTC HQ, Brussels (Belgium)
  • 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital (Denmark)
  • 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Université Catholique de Louvain, St-Luc University Hospital, Brussels (Belgium)
  • 5. Radiation Oncology, Greater Poland Cancer Centre, Poznan (Poland)
  • 6. Radiation Oncology, CHU Charleroi (Belgium)
  • 7. Radiation Oncology, Hospital General Vall D'Hebron, Barcelona (Spain)
  • 8. Oncology Centre, Cheltenham General Hospital, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (United Kingdom)
  • 9. Radiation Oncology, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa (Israel)
  • 10. Department of Medical Physics, Ospedale Niguarda Ca' Granda, Milan (Italy)
  • 11. Radiation Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven (Netherlands)
  • 12. ROG RTQA Strategic Committee, EORTC, Brussels (Belgium)
  • 13. University of Zürich (Switzerland)
  • 14. Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen (Switzerland)

Description

Background and purpose: The phase III EORTC 1219-DAHANCA 29 intergroup trial evaluates the influence of nimorazole in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer when treated with accelerated radiotherapy (RT) in combination with chemotherapy. This article describes the results of the RT Benchmark Case (BC) performed before patient inclusion. Materials and methods: The participating centers were asked to perform a 2-step BC, consisting of (1) a delineation and (2) a planning exercise according to the protocol guidelines. Submissions were prospectively centrally reviewed and feedback was given to the submitting centers. Sørensen–Dice similarity index (DSI) and the 95th percentile Hausdorff distance (HD) were retrospectively used to evaluate the agreement between the centers and the expert contours. Results: Fifty-four submissions (34 delineation and 20 planning exercises) from 19 centers were reviewed. Nine (47%) centers needed to perform the delineation step twice and three (16%) centers 3 times before receiving an approval. An increase in DSI-value and a decrease in HD, in particular for the prophylactic Clinical Target Volume (pCTV), could be found for the resubmitted cases. No unacceptable variations could be found for the planning exercise. Conclusions: These BC-results highlight the need for effective and prospective RTQA in clinical trials. Even with clearly defined protocol guidelines, delineation and not planning remain the main reason for unacceptable protocol variations. The introduction of more objective quantitative analysis methods, such as the HD and DSI, in future trials might strengthen the evaluation by experts.

Availability note (English)

Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2017.04.019

Additional details

Identifiers

DOI
10.1016/j.radonc.2017.04.019;
PII
S0167-8140(17)30160-3;

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Radiotherapy and Oncology
Journal Volume
123
Journal Issue
3
Journal Page Range
p. 424-430
ISSN
0167-8140
CODEN
RAONDT

INIS

Country of Publication
Ireland
Country of Input or Organization
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
INIS RN
49072492
Subject category
S62: RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE;
Descriptors DEI
BENCHMARKS; CLINICAL TRIALS; EVALUATION; HEAD; NECK; NEOPLASMS; QUALITY ASSURANCE; RADIOTHERAPY
Descriptors DEC
BODY; DISEASES; MANAGEMENT; MEDICINE; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; QUALITY MANAGEMENT; RADIOLOGY; TESTING; THERAPY

Optional Information

Copyright
Copyright (c) 2017 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.