Exploring Capabilities of Large Language Models such as ChatGPT in Radiation Oncology.

Purpose: Technological progress of machine learning and natural language processing has led to the development of large language models (LLMs), capable of producing well-formed text responses and providing natural language access to knowledge. Modern conversational LLMs such as ChatGPT have shown remarkable capabilities across a variety of fields, including medicine. These models may assess even highly specialized medical knowledge within specific disciplines, such as radiation therapy. We conducted an exploratory study to examine the capabilities of ChatGPT to answer questions in radiation therapy. Methods and Materials: A set of multiple-choice questions about clinical, physics, and biology general knowledge in radiation oncology as well as a set of open-ended questions were created. These were given as prompts to the LLM ChatGPT, and the answers were collected and analyzed. For the multiple-choice questions, it was checked how many of the answers of the model could be clearly assigned to one of the allowed multiple-choice-answers, and the proportion of correct answers was determined. For the open-ended questions, independent blinded radiation oncologists evaluated the quality of the answers regarding correctness and usefulness on a 5-point Likert scale. Furthermore, the evaluators were asked to provide suggestions for improving the quality of the answers. Results: For 70 multiple-choice questions, ChatGPT gave valid answers in 66 cases (94.3%). In 60.61% of the valid answers, the selected answer was correct (50.0% of clinical questions, 78.6% of physics questions, and 58.3% of biology questions). For 25 open-ended questions, 12 answers of ChatGPT were considered as "acceptable," "good," or "very good" regarding both correctness and helpfulness by all 6 participating radiation oncologists. Overall, the answers were considered "very good" in 29.3% and 28%, "good" in 28% and 29.3%, "acceptable" in 19.3% and 19.3%, "bad" in 9.3% and 9.3%, and "very bad" in 14% and 14% regarding correctness/helpfulness. Conclusions: Modern conversational LLMs such as ChatGPT can provide satisfying answers to many relevant questions in radiation therapy. As they still fall short of consistently providing correct information, it is problematic to use them for obtaining medical information. As LLMs will further improve in the future, they are expected to have an increasing impact not only on general society, but also on clinical practice, including radiation oncology.

Parameters of the Lyman Model for Calculation of Normal-Tissue Complication Probability: A Systematic Literature Review.

PURPOSE: The Lyman model is one of the most used radiobiological models for calculation of normal-tissue complication probability (NTCP). Since its introduction in 1985, many authors have published parameter values for the model based on clinical data of different radiotherapeutic situations. This study attempted to collect the entirety of radiobiological parameter sets published to date and provide an overview of the data basis for different variations of the model. Furthermore, it sought to compare the parameter values and calculated NTCPs for selected endpoints with sufficient data available. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A systematic literature analysis was performed, searching for publications that provided parameters for the different variations of the Lyman model in the Medline database using PubMed. Parameter sets were grouped into 13 toxicity-related endpoint groups. For 3 selected endpoint groups (≤25% reduction of saliva 12 months after irradiation of the parotid, symptomatic pneumonitis after irradiation of the lung, and bleeding of grade 2 or less after irradiation of the rectum), parameter values were compared and differences in calculated NTCP values were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 509 parameter sets from 130 publications were identified. Considerable heterogeneities were detected regarding the number of parameters available for different radio-oncological situations. Furthermore, for the 3 selected endpoints, large differences in published parameter values were found. These translated into great variations of calculated NTCPs, with maximum ranges of 35.2% to 93.4% for the saliva endpoint, of 39.4% to 90.4% for the pneumonitis endpoint, and of 5.4% to 99.3% for the rectal bleeding endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: The detected heterogeneity of the data as well as the large variations of published radiobiological parameters underline the necessity for careful interpretation when using such parameters for NTCP calculations. Appropriate selection of parameters and validation of values are essential when using the Lyman model.

Role of Brachytherapy in the Postoperative Management of Endometrial Cancer: Decision-Making Analysis among Experienced European Radiation Oncologists.

BACKGROUND: There are various society-specific guidelines addressing adjuvant brachytherapy (BT) after surgery for endometrial cancer (EC). However, these recommendations are not uniform. Against this background, clinicians need to make decisions despite gaps between best scientific evidence and clinical practice. We explored factors influencing decision-making for adjuvant BT in clinical routine among experienced European radiation oncologists in the field of gynaecological radiotherapy (RT). We also investigated the dose and technique of BT. METHODS: Nineteen European experts for gynaecological BT selected by the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie and the European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology provided their decision criteria and technique for postoperative RT in EC. The decision criteria were captured and converted into decision trees, and consensus and dissent were evaluated based on the objective consensus methodology. RESULTS: The decision criteria used by the experts were tumour extension, grading, nodal status, lymphovascular invasion, and cervical stroma/vaginal invasion (yes/no). No expert recommended adjuvant BT for pT1a G1-2 EC without substantial LVSI. Eighty-four percent of experts recommended BT for pT1a G3 EC without substantial LVSI. Up to 74% of experts used adjuvant BT for pT1b LVSI-negative and pT2 G1-2 LVSI-negative disease. For 74-84% of experts, EBRT + BT was the treatment of choice for nodal-positive pT2 disease and for pT3 EC with cervical/vaginal invasion. For all other tumour stages, there was no clear consensus for adjuvant treatment. Four experts already used molecular markers for decision-making. Sixty-five percent of experts recommended fractionation regimens of 3 × 7 Gy or 4 × 5 Gy for BT as monotherapy and 2 × 5 Gy for combination with EBRT. The most commonly used applicator for BT was a vaginal cylinder; 82% recommended image-guided BT. CONCLUSIONS: There was a clear trend towards adjuvant BT for stage IA G3, stage IB, and stage II G1-2 LVSI-negative EC. Likewise, there was a non-uniform pattern for BT dose prescription but a clear trend towards 3D image-based BT. Finally, molecular characteristics were already used in daily decision-making by some experts under the pretext that upcoming trials will bring more clarity to this topic.

Role of Postoperative Radiotherapy in the Management for Resected NSCLC - Decision Criteria in Clinical Routine Pre- and Post-LungART.

BACKGROUND: The role of postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) in stage III N2 NSCLC is controversial. We analyzed decision-making for PORT among European radiation oncology experts in lung cancer. METHODS: Twenty-two experts were asked before and after presentation of the results of the LungART trial to describe their decision criteria for PORT in the management of pN+ NSCLC patients. Treatment strategies were subsequently converted into decision trees and analyzed. RESULTS: Following decision criteria were identified: extracapsular nodal extension, incomplete lymph node resection, multistation lymph nodes, high nodal tumor load, poor response to induction chemotherapy, ineligibility to receive adjuvant chemotherapy, performance status, resection margin, lung function and cardiopulmonary comorbidities. The LungART results had impact on decision-making and reduced the number of recommendations for PORT. The only clear indication for PORT was a R1/2 resection. Six experts out of ten who initially recommended PORT for all R0 resected pN2 patients no longer used PORT routinely for these patients, while four still recommended PORT for all patients with pN2. Fourteen experts used PORT only for patients with risk factors, compared to eleven before the presentation of the LungART trial. Four experts stated that PORT was never recommended in R0 resected pN2 patients regardless of risk factors. CONCLUSION: After presentation of the LungART trial results at ESMO 2020, 82% of our experts still used PORT for stage III pN2 NSCLC patients with risk factors. The recommendation for PORT decreased, especially for patients without risk factors. Cardiopulmonary comorbidities became more relevant in the decision-making for PORT.

Radioimmunotherapy: future prospects from the perspective of brachytherapy.

In combination with radiotherapy, immunotherapy is becoming an increasingly used strategy in treating advanced, recurrent, or metastatic cancer. The evident impact of radiotherapy on local and systemic immune response is an indication of the synergistic effect of these two modalities. There is a strong rationale to combine radiotherapy and immunotherapy to enhance response rates and overcome resistances. Therefore, the combination of radio- and immunotherapy holds a variety of opportunities as well as challenges in treating primary cancer and is progressively tested in curative settings. Brachytherapy is also known as internal radiation therapy and only offers a local therapy option at first glance: due to tumor-specific antigens, released by a high local radiation dose, a systemic immune response could be plausible and eminent. Accordingly, brachytherapy could be an underestimated partner with immuno-therapeutic approaches in both curative and palliative settings, to generate local and systemic response. In this review, we summarized the potential benefit of a potential combination of brachytherapy and immuno-therapeutic approaches vs. the background of limited data.

Stage III N2 non-small cell lung cancer treatment: decision-making among surgeons and radiation oncologists.

BACKGROUND: Stage III N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a very heterogeneous disease associated with a poor prognosis. A number of therapeutic options are available for patients with Stage III N2 NSCLC, including surgery [with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy (CTx)/neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT)] or CRT potentially followed by adjuvant immunotherapy. We have no clear evidence demonstrating a significant survival benefit for either of these approaches, the selection between treatments is not always straightforward and can come down to physician and patient preference. The very heterogeneous definition of resectability of N2 disease makes the decision-making process even more complex. METHODS: We evaluated the treatment strategies for preoperatively diagnosed stage III cN2 NSCLC among Swiss thoracic surgeons and radiation oncologists. Treatment strategies were converted into decision trees and analysed for consensus and discrepancies. We analysed factors relevant to decision-making within these recommendations. RESULTS: For resectable "non-bulky" mediastinal lymph node involvement, there was a trend towards surgery. Numerous participants recommend a surgical approach outside existing guidelines as long as the disease was resectable, even in multilevel N2. With increasing extent of mediastinal nodal disease, multimodal treatment based on radiotherapy was more common. CONCLUSIONS: Both, surgery- or radiotherapy-based treatment regimens are feasible options in the management of Stage III N2 NSCLC. The different opinions reflected in the results of this manuscript reinforce the importance of a multidisciplinary setting and the importance of shared decision-making with the patient.

Radiotherapy for thymic epithelial tumours: a review.

Thymic epithelial tumours (TETs) represent a rare disease, yet they are the most common tumours of the anterior mediastinum. Due to the rare occurrence of TETs, evidence on optimal treatment is limited. Surgery is the treatment of choice in the management of TETs, while the role of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) remains unresolved. PORT remains debated for thymomas, especially in completely resected stage II tumours, for which PORT may be more likely to benefit in the presence of aggressive histology (WHO subtype B2, B3) or extensive transcapsular invasion (Masaoka-Koga stage IIB). For stage III thymoma, evidence suggests an overall survival (OS) benefit for PORT after complete resection. For incompletely resected thymomas stage II or higher PORT is recommended. Thymic carcinomas at any stage with positive resection margins should be offered PORT. Radiotherapy plays an important role in the management of unresectable locally advanced TETs. Induction therapy (chemotherapy or chemoradiation) followed by surgery may be useful for locally advanced thymic malignancies initially considered as unresectable. Chemotherapy only is offered in patients with unresectable, metastatic tumours in palliative intent, checkpoint inhibitors may be promising for refractory diseases. Due to the lack of high-level evidence and the importance of a multidisciplinary approach, TETs should be discussed within a multidisciplinary team and the final recommendation should reflect individual patient preferences.

Metastasis directed stereotactic radiotherapy in NSCLC patients progressing under targeted- or immunotherapy: efficacy and safety reporting from the 'TOaSTT' database.

BACKGROUND: Metastasis directed treatment (MDT) is increasingly performed with the attempt to improve outcome in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving targeted- or immunotherapy (TT/IT). This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of metastasis directed stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) concurrent to TT/IT in NSCLC patients. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter cohort of stage IV NSCLC patients treated with TT/IT and concurrent (≤ 30 days) MDT was established. 56% and 44% of patients were treated for oligoprogressive disease (OPD) or polyprogressive disease (PPD) under TT/IT, polyprogressive respectively. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and log rank testing. Toxicity was scored using CTCAE v4.03 criteria. Predictive factors for overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS) and time to therapy switch (TTS) were analyzed with uni- and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: MDT of 192 lesions in 108 patients was performed between 07/2009 and 05/2018. Concurrent TT/IT consisted of EGFR/ALK-inhibitors (60%), immune checkpoint inhibitors (31%), VEGF-antibodies (8%) and PARP-inhibitors (1%). 2y-OS was 51% for OPD and 25% for PPD. After 1 year, 58% of OPD and 39% of PPD patients remained on the same TT/IT. Second progression after MDT was oligometastatic (≤ 5 lesions) in 59% of patients. Severe acute and late toxicity was observed in 5.5% and 1.9% of patients. In multivariate analysis, OS was influenced by the clinical metastatic status (p = 0.002, HR 2.03, 95% CI 1.30-3.17). PFS was better in patients receiving their first line of systemic treatment (p = 0.033, HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.05-2.77) and with only one metastases-affected organ (p = 0.023, HR 2.04, 95% CI 1.10-3.79). TTS was 6 months longer in patients with one metastases-affected organ (p = 0.031, HR 2.53, 95% CI 1.09-5.89). Death was never therapy-related. CONCLUSIONS: Metastases-directed SRT in NSCLC patients can be safely performed concurrent to TT/IT with a low risk of severe toxicity. To find the ideal sequence of the available multidisciplinary treatment options for NSCLC and determine what patients will benefit most, a further evaluated in a broader context within prospective clinical trials is needed continuation of TT/IT beyond progression combined with MDT for progressive lesions appears promising but requires prospective evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: retrospectively registered.

Decision-Making Analysis for Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Ovarian Cancer: A Survey by the Executive Committee of the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI).

OBJECTIVES: To assess the individual treatment strategies among international experts in peritoneal carcinosis, specifically their decision-making in the process of patient selection for hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in women suffering from ovarian cancer, to identify relevant decision-making criteria, and to quantify the level of consensus for or against HIPEC. METHODS: The members of the executive committee of the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI) were asked to describe the clinical conditions under which they would recommend HIPEC in patients with ovarian cancer and to describe any disease or patient characteristics relevant to their decision. All answers were then merged and converted into decision trees. The decision trees were then analyzed by applying the objective consensus methodology. RESULTS: Nine experts in surgical oncology provided information on their multidisciplinary treatment strategy including HIPEC for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Three of the total of 12 experts did not perform HIPEC. Five criteria relevant to the decision on whether HIPEC is performed were applied. In patients with resectable disease, a peritoneal cancer index (PCI) <21, and epithelial ovarian cancer without distant metastasis, consent was received by 75% to perform HIPEC for women suffering from recurrent disease. Furthermore, in the primary disease setting, consent was received by 67% to perform HIPEC according to the same criteria. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Among surgical oncology experts in peritoneal surface malignancy and HIPEC, HIPEC plays an important role in primary and recurrent ovarian cancer, and the PCI is the most important criterion in this decision.

Role of radiotherapy in the management of brain metastases of NSCLC - Decision criteria in clinical routine.

BACKGROUND: Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is a common treatment option for brain metastases secondary to non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Data from the QUARTZ trial suggest that WBRT can be omitted in selected patients and treated with optimal supportive care alone. Nevertheless, WBRT is still widely used to treat brain metastases secondary to NSCLC. We analysed decision criteria influencing the selection for WBRT among European radiation oncology experts. METHODS: Twenty-two European radiation oncology experts in lung cancer as selected by the European Society for Therapeutic Radiation Oncology (ESTRO) for previous projects and by the Advisory Committee on Radiation Oncology Practice (ACROP) for lung cancer were asked to describe their strategies in the management of brain metastases of NSCLC. Treatment strategies were subsequently converted into decision trees and analysed for agreement and discrepancies. RESULTS: Eight decision criteria (suitability for SRS, performance status, symptoms, eligibility for targeted therapy, extra-cranial tumour control, age, prognostic scores and "Zugzwang" (the compulsion to treat)) were identified. WBRT was recommended by a majority of the European experts for symptomatic patients not suitable for radiosurgery or fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy. There was also a tendency to use WBRT in the ALK/EGFR/ROS1 negative NSCLC setting. CONCLUSION: Despite the results of the QUARTZ trial WBRT is still widely used among European radiation oncology experts.

Patient Selection for Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Patients With Colorectal Cancer: Consensus on Decision Making Among International Experts.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment for patients with peritoneal metastases is complex. The use of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has continued to be debated. The aim of the present study was to assess the consensus among international experts for decision-making regarding the use of CRS and HIPEC for patients with CRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 15 experts invited, 12 had provided their decision algorithms for CRS and HIPEC for patients with, or at high risk of, peritoneal metastases from CRC. Using the objective consensus method, the results were transformed into decision trees to provide information on the consensus and discordance. RESULTS: Only 1 scenario was found for which the consensus on performing HIPEC had reached 100%. The scenario was the treatment of young patients with complete cytoreduction and a peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) of < 16 in the presence of certain risk factors. Five major decision criteria were identified: age, PCI, completeness of cytoreduction, extent of extraperitoneal metastases (EoMs), and, in the case of unverified EoMs, additional risk factors. Consensus was found regarding refraining from using HIPEC for older patients with a high PCI. The consensus further increased when addressing incomplete cytoreduction and an extensive extent of EoMs. CONCLUSION: A definite consensus concerning the use of HIPEC was only determined for very selected scenarios. These findings can be used for general guidance; however, owing to the heterogeneity of each individual situation, the impracticality of presenting the information through decision trees, and the unclear future of the role of HIPEC in the adjuvant setting, a one-on-one transfer to daily clinical practice could not be achieved.

Adverse events reporting in stage III NSCLC trials investigating surgery and radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Current treatment options for stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) consist of different combinations of chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy and immunotherapy. Treatment choices are highly individual decisions, in which adverse events (AEs) are relevant for decision-making. This study aims to analyse reporting of AEs in prospective stage III NSCLC trials, focussing on trials including radiotherapy and/or surgery. METHODS: PubMed was searched for prospective studies dealing with stage III NSCLC from January 1987 to April 2019. Meta-analyses were screened as a positive control. Pearson's Chi-squared test and smooth kernel distribution were used to estimate distributions. Data was resampled using bootstrapping. RESULTS: Out of 1193 initially identified studies, 119 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 31 had a surgical procedure in any study arm. Grade 3 and 4 AEs were reported in 94.12% and 92.44% of the included studies, respectively. Reporting of grade 5 AEs was provided in 87.39% of cases. Grade 1 and 2 AEs were less commonly reported at 53.78% and 63.03%, respectively. One study did not mention any AEs. Of the 31 treatment arms including any form of surgery, AEs were not reported in 10. Overall, 231 different AE items were reported, only 18 of them were included in at least 20% of the analysed studies. CONCLUSION: Overall, AE reporting in stage III NSCLC was inconsistent and inhomogeneous. Studies including surgical study arms often reported only treatment-related deaths in regards of surgical AEs. Underreporting of AEs prohibits the extraction of patient-relevant information for decision-making and represents a suboptimal use of invested resources.

ERS/ESTS/EACTS/ESTRO guidelines for the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma.

The European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) task force brought together experts to update previous 2009 ERS/ESTS guidelines on management of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), a rare cancer with globally poor outcome, after a systematic review of the 2009-2018 literature. The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by this multidisciplinary group of experts. Diagnosis: pleural biopsies remain the gold standard to confirm the diagnosis, usually obtained by thoracoscopy but occasionally via image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy in cases of pleural symphysis or poor performance status. Pathology: standard staining procedures are insufficient in ∼10% of cases, justifying the use of specific markers, including BAP-1 and CDKN2A (p16) for the separation of atypical mesothelial proliferation from MPM. Staging: in the absence of a uniform, robust and validated staging system, we advise using the most recent 2016 8th TNM (tumour, node, metastasis) classification, with an algorithm for pre-therapeutic assessment. Monitoring: patient's performance status, histological subtype and tumour volume are the main prognostic factors of clinical importance in routine MPM management. Other potential parameters should be recorded at baseline and reported in clinical trials. Treatment: (chemo)therapy has limited efficacy in MPM patients and only selected patients are candidates for radical surgery. New promising targeted therapies, immunotherapies and strategies have been reviewed. Because of limited data on the best combination treatment, we emphasise that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach, including radical surgery, should be treated as part of clinical trials in MPM-dedicated centres.

Insular Decision Criteria in Clinical Practice: Analysis of Decision-Making in Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Medical decision-making is complex and involves a variety of decision criteria, many of which are universally recognised. However, decision-making analyses have demonstrated that certain decision criteria are not used uniformly among clinicians. AIM: We describe decision criteria, which for various contexts are only used by a minority of decision makers. For these, we introduce and define the term "insular criteria". METHODS: 19 studies analysing clinical decision-making based on decision trees were included in our study. All studies were screened for decision-making criteria that were mentioned by less than three local decision makers in studies involving 8-26 participants. RESULTS: 14 out of the 19 included studies reported insular criteria. We identified 42 individual insular criteria. They could be intuitively allocated to seven major groups, these were: comorbidities, treatment, patients' characteristics/preferences, caretaker, scores, laboratory and tumour properties/staging. CONCLUSION: Insular criteria are commonly used in clinical decision-making, yet, the individual decision makers may not be aware of them. With this analysis, we demonstrate the existence of insular criteria and their variety. In daily practice and clinical studies, awareness of insular criteria is important.

ERS/ESTS/EACTS/ESTRO guidelines for the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma.

The European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) task force brought together experts to update previous 2009 ERS/ESTS guidelines on management of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), a rare cancer with globally poor outcome, after a systematic review of the 2009-2018 literature. The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by this multidisciplinary group of experts. Diagnosis: pleural biopsies remain the gold standard to confirm the diagnosis, usually obtained by thoracoscopy but occasionally via image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy in cases of pleural symphysis or poor performance status. Pathology: standard staining procedures are insufficient in ∼10% of cases, justifying the use of specific markers, including BAP-1 and CDKN2A (p16) for the separation of atypical mesothelial proliferation from MPM. Staging: in the absence of a uniform, robust and validated staging system, we advise using the most recent 2016 8th TNM (tumour, node, metastasis) classification, with an algorithm for pretherapeutic assessment. Monitoring: patient's performance status, histological subtype and tumour volume are the main prognostic factors of clinical importance in routine MPM management. Other potential parameters should be recorded at baseline and reported in clinical trials. Treatment: (chemo)therapy has limited efficacy in MPM patients and only selected patients are candidates for radical surgery. New promising targeted therapies, immunotherapies and strategies have been reviewed. Because of limited data on the best combination treatment, we emphasize that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach, including radical surgery, should be treated as part of clinical trials in MPM-dedicated centres.

Once daily versus twice-daily radiotherapy in the management of limited disease small cell lung cancer - Decision criteria in routine practise.

BACKGROUND: In limited disease small cell lung cancer (LD-SCLC), the CONVERT trial has not demonstrated superiority of once-daily (QD) radiotherapy (66 Gy) over twice-daily (BID) radiotherapy (45 Gy). We explored the factors influencing the selection between QD and BID regimens. METHODS: Thirteen experienced European thoracic radiation oncologists as selected by the European Society for Therapeutic Radiation Oncology (ESTRO) were asked to describe their strategies in the management of LD-SCLC. Treatment strategies were subsequently converted into decision trees and analysed for agreement and discrepancies. RESULTS: Logistic reasons, patients' performance status and radiotherapy dose constraints were the three major decision criteria used by most experts in decision making. The use of QD and BID regimens was balanced among European experts, but there was a trend towards the BID regimen for fit patients able to travel twice a day to the radiotherapy site. CONCLUSION: BID and QD radiotherapy are both accepted regimens among experts and the decision is influenced by pragmatic factors such as availability of transportation.

The role of postoperative thoracic radiotherapy and prophylactic cranial irradiation in early stage small cell lung cancer: Patient selection among ESTRO experts.

BACKGROUND: The role of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) and thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) is unclear in resected small cell lung cancer (SCLC). METHODS: Thirteen European radiotherapy experts on SCLC were asked to describe their strategies on PCI and TRT for patients with resected SCLC. The treatment strategies were converted into decision trees and analyzed for consensus and discrepancies. RESULTS: For patients with resected SCLC and positive lymph nodes most experts recommend prophylactic cranial irradiation and thoracic radiotherapy. For elderly patients with resected node negative SCLC, most experts do not recommend thoracic radiotherapy or prophylactic cranial irradiation. CONCLUSION: PCI and TRT are considered in patients with resected SCLC and these treatments should be discussed with the patient in the context of shared decision-making.

Decision Making Criteria in Oncology.

Decision making is one of the most complex skills required of an oncologist and is affected by a broad range of parameters. For example, the wide variety of treatment options, with various outcomes, side-effects and costs present challenges in selecting the most appropriate treatment. Many treatment choices are affected by limited scientific evidence, availability of therapies or patient-specific factors. In the decision making process, standardized approaches can be useful, but a multitude of criteria are relevant to this process. Thus, the aim of this review is to summarize common types of decision criteria used in oncology by focusing on 3 main categories: criteria associated with the decision maker (both patient and doctor), decision specific criteria, and the often-overlooked contextual factors. Our review aims to highlight the broad range of decision criteria in use, as well as variations in their interpretation.