Peer Review in Radiation Oncology: Where Does the Middle East, North Africa, and Türkiye Region Stand?

PURPOSE: This study aims to assess the status of radiation oncology peer review procedures across the Middle East, North Africa, and Türkiye (MENAT) region. METHODS: A cross-sectional electronic survey was conducted among radiotherapy centers in the MENAT region in March 2024. It assessed peer review practices, departmental demographics, perceived importance of peer review, and potential barriers. RESULTS: Data from 177 radiation oncology centers revealed varying peer review implementation across the MENAT region. Egypt had the highest participation (16.4%) among all responders. Most centers (31%) treated 500-1,000 cases annually. The majority (77.4%) implemented peer review, with varying levels between countries and across different centers. Advanced radiotherapy techniques significantly correlated with implementation of peer review (P < .05). Peer review meetings were mostly scheduled on a weekly basis (46%) and organized by radiation oncologists (84.7%). Target volume contouring (89%) and radiotherapy prescription (82%) were frequently peer-reviewed. Respondents with peer review at their institutions significantly valued peer review for education, adherence to guidelines, improving planning protocols, and reducing variation in practice institutions without peer review (P < .05). The most frequently reported barriers to peer review were having a high number of patients (56%) and shortage of time (54%). CONCLUSION: Peer review is essential for improving the quality of practice in radiation oncology. Despite some discrepancies, numerous obstacles, and challenges in implementation, it is instrumental in the improvement of patient care in most centers throughout the region. Raising awareness among radiation oncologists about the importance of peer review is paramount to lead to better outcomes.

The Evolving Role of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer: Where Do We Stand?

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a precise and conformal radiation therapy (RT) that aims to deliver a high dose of radiation to the tumor whilst sparing surrounding normal tissue, making it an attractive option for head and neck cancer (HNC) patients who are not suitable for the traditional long course of RT with comprehensive RT target volume. Definitive SBRT for HNC has been investigated in different settings, including early stage glottis cancer, and as an alternative to brachytherapy boost after external beam RT. It is also used as a primary treatment option for elderly or medically unfit patients. More recently, an SBRT combination with immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting for HNC showed promising results. Salvage or adjuvant SBRT for HNC can be used in appropriately selected cases. Future studies are warranted to determine the optimum dose and fractionation schedules in any of these indications.

Malignant anaplastic meningioma in neurofibromatosis type 1 patient: a rare case report.

Background: Meningiomas are usually associated with neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF-2), while gliomas are usually associated with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF-1). NF-1 is an autosomal dominant genetic disorder associated with skin manifestations, bone conditions, and different types of benign and malignant tumors. Grade 3 anaplastic meningiomas are rare tumors with a poor prognosis. Systemic treatments in grade 3 meningiomas are experimental, with some reports suggestive of minimal clinical benefits. They are used occasionally for recurrent cases with no surgical or radiotherapy roles. In our case, we will focus the discussion on grade 3 anaplastic meningioma in a patient with NF-1, using chemotherapy for this aggressive, recurrent tumor. To our knowledge, this is the first case of NF-1 associated with malignant anaplastic meningioma in English literature. Case Description: In this case report, we present a 25-year-old left-handed female patient who fits the diagnostic criteria for NF-1. She presented with focal seizure and was diagnosed with grade 3 anaplastic meningioma, a highly aggressive tumor. She experienced a rapid recurrence after her initial surgery and eventually received multiple lines of treatments, including radiation and chemotherapy [temozolomide (TMZ)]. Conclusions: Systemic therapy in grade 3 meningiomas is still experimental and may have a slight clinical benefit. As a result, further prospective, multicentric studies are needed to ascertain these outcomes. Patients should be included in prospective trials because of the poor prognosis and aggressive nature of grade 3 meningiomas. In addition, discovering specific molecular biomarkers will allow us to suggest an individualized treatment. This case suggests that the differential diagnosis of a mass in a patient with NF-1 should include tumors known to be associated with the syndrome as well as sporadic, unrelated neoplasms.

Scholarly Activity of Radiation Oncologists in High-Income Developing Countries: Saudi Arabia as an Example.

PURPOSE: To examine the trends and quality metrics of publications by radiation oncologists in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: PubMed was searched using names of all Saudi radiation oncologists to retrieve published articles between January 2010 and December 2019. International collaboration, journal impact factor and country of origin, and number of citations were collected. Each article was assessed for epidemiologic type and independently assigned a level of evidence (LOE) by two authors. The trend in publications was examined and compared in the first and second 5-year periods (2010-2014 and 2015-2019) using relevant parameters. RESULTS: A total of 186 publications were found and included. The most common type of research was cohort studies followed by case reports and case series in 24%, 14%, and 13% of all publications, respectively. Dosimetry, clinical, and preclinical studies formed 7%, 8.6%, and 7.5% of the total publications, respectively. The LOE was I, II, III, IV, and not applicable in 8.6%, 22%, 25.8%, 29%, and 14.5% of the included publications, respectively. Comparing the first and second 5-year periods, there was an increase in international collaboration (P < .001) in the second period. The number of citations (P < .001) and journal impact factor (P = .028) were lower in the second period. LOE and publications in international journals were not statistically different between the two periods. CONCLUSION: Although radiation oncology research activity in Saudi Arabia has gained momentum in terms of volume and international collaboration over time, the LOE has not improved. This calls for a national effort to make the contribution to the literature a priority, allocate adequate resources, and apply appropriate measures to enhance research productivity and quality.