Multi-observer contouring of male pelvic anatomy: Highly variable agreement across conventional and emerging structures of interest.

INTRODUCTION: This study quantified inter-observer contouring variations for multiple male pelvic structures, many of which are of emerging relevance for prostate cancer radiotherapy progression and toxicity response studies. METHODS: Five prostate cancer patient datasets (CT and T2-weighted MR) were distributed to 13 observers for contouring. CT structures contoured included the clinical target volume (CTV), seminal vesicles, rectum, colon, bowel bag, bladder and peri-rectal space (PRS). MR contours included CTV, trigone, membranous urethra, penile bulb, neurovascular bundle and multiple pelvic floor muscles. Contouring variations were assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), and multiple additional metrics. RESULTS: Clinical target volume (CT and MR), bladder, rectum and PRS contours showed excellent inter-observer agreement (median ICC = 0.97; 0.99; 1.00; 0.95; 0.90, DSC = 0.83 ± 0.05; 0.88 ± 0.05; 0.93 ± 0.03; 0.81 ± 0.07; 0.80 ± 0.06, respectively). Seminal vesicle contours were more variable (ICC = 0.75, DSC = 0.73 ± 0.14), while colon and bowel bag contoured volumes were consistent (ICC = 0.97; 0.97), but displayed poor overlap (DSC = 0.58 ± 0.22; 0.67 ± 0.21). Smaller MR structures showed significant inter-observer variations, with poor overlap for trigone, membranous urethra, penile bulb, and left and right neurovascular bundles (DSC = 0.44 ± 0.22; 0.41 ± 0.21; 0.66 ± 0.21; 0.16 ± 0.17; 0.15 ± 0.15). Pelvic floor muscles recorded moderate to strong inter-observer agreement (ICC = 0.50-0.97), although large outlier variations were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Inter-observer contouring variation was significant for multiple pelvic structures contoured on MR.

Publication rates of abstracts presented at the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists annual scientific meetings: Any change since 2004?

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at annual Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) conferences. METHODS: The College's Annual Scientific Meetings (ASMs) from 2010 to 2013 were examined, with the goal of comparing these results to the findings of an earlier identical study that examined RANZCR ASMs from 1996 to 1999. RESULTS: Of the 1152 research abstracts presented, 468 (41%) had been published as full articles. The overall abstract to publication ratio (APR) for radiology was 34% and for radiation oncology was 57%. For oral presentations, these were 44% for radiology and 55% for radiation oncology. Papers were published in a wide variety of journals but 23% of articles appeared in the College's journal, the Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology. The mean time between presentation and publication was 16.5 months (median 17 months). CONCLUSION: Publication rates are comparable with international reports. The APR has increased since the previous study for both disciplines, but more so for Radiation Oncology.

Technical quality assurance during the TROG 03.04 RADAR prostate radiotherapy trial: are the results reflected in observed toxicity rates?

INTRODUCTION: Multicentre radiotherapy clinical trials can incorporate quality assurance (QA) procedures for ensuring consistent application of the trial protocol in the planning, delivery and reporting of participant treatments. Subsequently detected variations from trial protocol have previously been shown to reduce treatment efficacy, although little has been shown for toxicity rates. The purpose of this study was to investigate the association of QA measures and protocol variations on toxicity incidence in the context of a prostate radiotherapy trial. METHODS: Using QA records from the TROG 03.04 RADAR trial, the impact of variations on gastrointestinal (GI) and genito-urinary (GU) toxicities was investigated. RESULTS: Protocol variation rates were lower than reported in previous studies, and showed little correlation with GI toxicity outcomes. Variations classified as 'major' showed a non-significant trend for increased toxicity relative to those classified as 'minor'. Results from a Level III phantom-based dosimetry study showed some correlation with GI toxicity, whereas ranking on a set-up accuracy study did not impact on toxicity. Toxicity in general increased with the number of participants accrued per centre, at odds with previous reports relating to disease progression, with a potential link to increases in low-mid-range rectal doses in the cohort from higher-accruing centres. No QA-related variables correlated with GU toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Besides non-significant trends, minimal association was observed between QA variables and toxicity rates for the RADAR trial. The intention of the trial's QA programme was to reduce treatment variations and minimise toxicity in the context of a relevantly advanced treatment approach.

An international survey on liver metastases radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: An international survey of radiation therapy (RT) of liver metastases was undertaken by the Liver Cancer Workgroup of the Third International Consensus on Metastases Workshop at the 2010 American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) meeting. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Canadian, European, Australian, New Zealand and American centers participated in this online survey. The survey had four objectives: 1) to describe the practice patterns for RT of liver metastases; 2) to report on the use of low-dose RT for symptomatic liver metastases; 3) to report on the use of technology; and 4) to describe the regional differences in the management of liver metastases. RESULTS: A total of 69 individuals treating liver metastases with radiotherapy responded to the survey. Regional response rates ranged from 39% to 50%. The primary professional affiliation of all respondents was evenly distributed amongst ASTRO, CARO, ESTRO and TROG/RANZCR. A 36% increase in the average annual number of referrals over the past five years is reported. The majority of referrals were for radical RT. The most common technologies used were 4D-CT (61%), SBRT (55%), IGRT (50%), and/or IMRT (28%). A uniform treatment approach was not found. The most commonly employed radical regimens were 45 Gy in 3 fractions, 40-50 Gy in 5 fractions, and 45 Gy in 15 fractions. Palliative regimens included 20 Gy in 5 fractions, 30 Gy in 10 fractions, 8 Gy in 1 fraction, and 10 Gy in 2 fractions. CONCLUSIONS: This survey suggests radiation oncologists will be seeing more referrals for liver RT. The majority of experience in liver metastases RT is with radical SBRT for focal metastases rather than low-dose palliative RT for symptom control. There is significant variation in technology utilization and dose regimens. Prospective studies or registries may allow for comparison of regimens and identification of parameters to optimize patient selection.

Prostate cancer following testosterone replacement in Klinefelter syndrome.

Klinefelter syndrome is a common cause of hypogonadism. Testosterone replacement therapy has beneficial effects on bone, muscle and psychosexual function. However, it may remove the relative protection from adenocarcinoma of prostate, which is otherwise rare in uncomplicated Klinefelter syndrome. We report the case of a 55-year-old man with Klinefelter syndrome who developed prostate cancer after only 7 years of androgen supplementation. Androgen deprivation therapy was complicated by the presence of testosterone implants. The patient was treated with androgen blockade followed by radiation therapy. We recommend that serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal examinations be carried out during, as well as before androgen replacement.

Publication rates of abstracts presented at annual scientific meetings: how does the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists compare?

The abstract to publication ratio (APR) is a measure of the quality of scientific meetings. The aim of the present study was to determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at annual Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) conferences, and to identify the publishing journals. All free paper research abstracts (oral or poster) presented by RANZCR radiologists, radiation oncologists and trainees at the four consecutive meetings between 1996 and 1999 were identified retrospectively from conference programmes. The PubMed database (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/) was searched to determine whether or not the abstract had been published as a full paper. Of the 480 free paper research abstracts, 168 (35%) had been published as full articles. The overall abstract to publication ratio for radiology was 29% and for radiation oncology was 41%. Papers were published in a variety of journals but Australasian Radiology accounted for 27%. The mean time between presentation and publication was 16.5 months (median 17 months). These overall abstract to publication ratios are lower than those reported for overseas-based meetings in each respective area. Guidelines to scientific committees could increase the APR by more rigorous selection of abstracts. Future research should look at barriers to the publication of research findings, and identify ways to assist the publication process.