The Importance of Quality Assurance in Radiation Oncology Clinical Trials.

Clinical trials have been the center of progress in modern medicine. In oncology, we are fortunate to have a structure in place through the National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN). The NCTN provides the infrastructure and a forum for scientific discussion to develop clinical concepts for trial design. The NCTN also provides a network group structure to administer trials for successful trial management and outcome analyses. There are many important aspects to trial design and conduct. Modern trials need to ensure appropriate trial conduct and secure data management processes. Of equal importance is the quality assurance of a clinical trial. If progress is to be made in oncology clinical medicine, investigators and patient care providers of service need to feel secure that trial data is complete, accurate, and well-controlled in order to be confident in trial analysis and move trial outcome results into daily practice. As our technology has matured, so has our need to apply technology in a uniform manner for appropriate interpretation of trial outcomes. In this article, we review the importance of quality assurance in clinical trials involving radiation therapy. We will include important aspects of institution and investigator credentialing for participation as well as ongoing processes to ensure that each trial is being managed in a compliant manner. We will provide examples of the importance of complete datasets to ensure study interpretation. We will describe how successful strategies for quality assurance in the past will support new initiatives moving forward.

Quality improvements in radiation oncology clinical trials.

Clinical trials have become the primary mechanism to validate process improvements in oncology clinical practice. Over the past two decades there have been considerable process improvements in the practice of radiation oncology within the structure of a modern department using advanced technology for patient care. Treatment planning is accomplished with volume definition including fusion of multiple series of diagnostic images into volumetric planning studies to optimize the definition of tumor and define the relationship of tumor to normal tissue. Daily treatment is validated by multiple tools of image guidance. Computer planning has been optimized and supported by the increasing use of artificial intelligence in treatment planning. Informatics technology has improved, and departments have become geographically transparent integrated through informatics bridges creating an economy of scale for the planning and execution of advanced technology radiation therapy. This serves to provide consistency in department habits and improve quality of patient care. Improvements in normal tissue sparing have further improved tolerance of treatment and allowed radiation oncologists to increase both daily and total dose to target. Radiation oncologists need to define a priori dose volume constraints to normal tissue as well as define how image guidance will be applied to each radiation treatment. These process improvements have enhanced the utility of radiation therapy in patient care and have made radiation therapy an attractive option for care in multiple primary disease settings. In this chapter we review how these changes have been applied to clinical practice and incorporated into clinical trials. We will discuss how the changes in clinical practice have improved the quality of clinical trials in radiation therapy. We will also identify what gaps remain and need to be addressed to offer further improvements in radiation oncology clinical trials and patient care.

Radiation Oncology: Future Vision for Quality Assurance and Data Management in Clinical Trials and Translational Science.

The future of radiation oncology is exceptionally strong as we are increasingly involved in nearly all oncology disease sites due to extraordinary advances in radiation oncology treatment management platforms and improvements in treatment execution. Due to our technology and consistent accuracy, compressed radiation oncology treatment strategies are becoming more commonplace secondary to our ability to successfully treat tumor targets with increased normal tissue avoidance. In many disease sites including the central nervous system, pulmonary parenchyma, liver, and other areas, our service is redefining the standards of care. Targeting of disease has improved due to advances in tumor imaging and application of integrated imaging datasets into sophisticated planning systems which can optimize volume driven plans created by talented personnel. Treatment times have significantly decreased due to volume driven arc therapy and positioning is secured by real time imaging and optical tracking. Normal tissue exclusion has permitted compressed treatment schedules making treatment more convenient for the patient. These changes require additional study to further optimize care. Because data exchange worldwide have evolved through digital platforms and prisms, images and radiation datasets worldwide can be shared/reviewed on a same day basis using established de-identification and anonymization methods. Data storage post-trial completion can co-exist with digital pathomic and radiomic information in a single database coupled with patient specific outcome information and serve to move our translational science forward with nimble query elements and artificial intelligence to ask better questions of the data we collect and collate. This will be important moving forward to validate our process improvements at an enterprise level and support our science. We have to be thorough and complete in our data acquisition processes, however if we remain disciplined in our data management plan, our field can grow further and become more successful generating new standards of care from validated datasets.

Quality assurance in radiation oncology.

The Children's Oncology Group (COG) has a strong quality assurance (QA) program managed by the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC). This program consists of credentialing centers and providing real-time management of each case for protocol compliant target definition and radiation delivery. In the International Society of Pediatric Oncology (SIOP), the lack of an available, reliable online data platform has been a challenge and the European Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOPE) quality and excellence in radiotherapy and imaging for children and adolescents with cancer across Europe in clinical trials (QUARTET) program currently provides QA review for prospective clinical trials. The COG and SIOP are fully committed to a QA program that ensures uniform execution of protocol treatments and provides validity of the clinical data used for analysis.

Treatment Toxicity: Radiation.

Intentional and unintentional radiation exposures have a powerful impact on normal tissue function and can induce short-term and long-term injury to all cell systems. Radiation effects can lead to lifetime-defining health issues for a patient and can produce complications to all organ systems. Providers need to understand acute and late effects of radiation treatment and how the fingerprints of therapy can have an impact on health care in later life. This article reviews current knowledge concerning normal tissue tolerance with therapy.

The Importance of Imaging in Radiation Oncology for National Clinical Trials Network Protocols.

Imaging is essential in successfully executing radiation therapy (RT) in oncology clinical trials. As technically sophisticated diagnostic imaging and RT were incorporated into trials, quality assurance in the National Clinical Trials Network groups entered a new era promoting image acquisition and review. Most trials involving RT require pre- and post-therapy imaging for target validation and outcome assessment. The increasing real-time (before and during therapy) imaging and RT object reviews are to ensure compliance with trial objectives. Objects easily transmit digitally for review from anywhere in the world. Physician interpretation of imaging and image application to RT treatment plans is essential for optimal trial execution. Imaging and RT data sets are used to credential RT sites to confirm investigator and institutional ability to meet trial target volume delineation and delivery requirements. Real-time imaging and RT object reviews can be performed multiple times during a trial to assess response to therapy and application of RT objects. This process has matured into an effective data management mechanism. When necessary, site and study investigators review objects together through web media technologies to ensure the patient is enrolled on the appropriate trial and the intended RT is planned and executed in a trial-compliant manner. Real-time imaging review makes sure: (1) the patient is entered and eligible for the trial, (2) the patient meets trial-specific adaptive therapy requirements, if applicable, and (3) the intended RT is according to trial guidelines. This review ensures the study population is uniform and the results are believable and can be applied to clinical practice.

Hodgkin Lymphoma: Differences in Treatment Between Europe and the United States/North America: Evolving Trends in Protocol Therapy.

With continued progress and success in clinical care, the management of patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) has undergone continuous revision to improve patient care outcomes and limit acute and late treatment effects on normal tissue imposed by therapy. Hodgkin lymphoma is a disease that affects children, adolescents, and adults. Clinical management strategies are influenced by the patient's age at diagnosis, tumor burden, response to induction therapy, and potential expectation of treatment impact on normal tissue. The approach to patient management varies in many parts of the world and is influenced by treatment availability, physician training, and medical culture. Differences in approach are important to understand for accurately comparing and contrasting outcome studies. In this article, we will identify current areas of common ground and points of separation in patient care management for HL. Opportunities for clinical trial strategies will be defined for future clinical trials.

Imaging and Data Acquisition in Clinical Trials for Radiation Therapy.

Cancer treatment evolves through oncology clinical trials. Cancer trials are multimodal and complex. Assuring high-quality data are available to answer not only study objectives but also questions not anticipated at study initiation is the role of quality assurance. The National Cancer Institute reorganized its cancer clinical trials program in 2014. The National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) was formed and within it was established a Diagnostic Imaging and Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance Organization. This organization is Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core, the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core Group, consisting of 6 quality assurance centers that provide imaging and radiation therapy quality assurance for the NCTN. Sophisticated imaging is used for cancer diagnosis, treatment, and management as well as for image-driven technologies to plan and execute radiation treatment. Integration of imaging and radiation oncology data acquisition, review, management, and archive strategies are essential for trial compliance and future research. Lessons learned from previous trials are and provide evidence to support diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy data acquisition in NCTN trials.

The impact of protocol assignment for older adolescents with hodgkin lymphoma.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) treatment has evolved to reduce or avoid radiotherapy (RT) dose and volume and minimize the potential for late effects. Some older adolescents are treated on adult protocols. The purpose of this study is to examine the protocol assignment of older adolescents and its impact on radiation dose to relevant thoracic structures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cooperative group data were reviewed and 12 adolescents were randomly selected from a pediatric HL protocol. Treatment plans were generated per one pediatric and two adult protocols. Dose volume histograms for heart, lung, and breast allowed comparison of radiation dose to these sites across these three protocols. RESULTS: A total of 15.2% of adolescents were treated on adult HL protocols and received significantly higher radiation dosage to heart and lung compared to pediatric HL protocols. Adolescents treated on either pediatric or adult protocols received similar RT dose to breast. CONCLUSION: Older adolescents treated on adult HL protocols received higher RT dose to thoracic structures except breast. Level of nodal involvement may impact overall RT dose to breast. The impact of varying field design and RT dose on survival, local, and late effects needs further study for this vulnerable age group. Adolescents, young adults, Hodgkin lymphoma, RT, clinical trials.

Future vision for the quality assurance of oncology clinical trials.

The National Cancer Institute clinical cooperative groups have been instrumental over the past 50 years in developing clinical trials and evidence-based process improvements for clinical oncology patient care. The cooperative groups are undergoing a transformation process as we further integrate molecular biology into personalized patient care and move to incorporate international partners in clinical trials. To support this vision, data acquisition and data management informatics tools must become both nimble and robust to support transformational research at an enterprise level. Information, including imaging, pathology, molecular biology, radiation oncology, surgery, systemic therapy, and patient outcome data needs to be integrated into the clinical trial charter using adaptive clinical trial mechanisms for design of the trial. This information needs to be made available to investigators using digital processes for real-time data analysis. Future clinical trials will need to be designed and completed in a timely manner facilitated by nimble informatics processes for data management. This paper discusses both past experience and future vision for clinical trials as we move to develop data management and quality assurance processes to meet the needs of the modern trial.

Processes for quality improvements in radiation oncology clinical trials.

Quality assurance in radiotherapy (RT) has been an integral aspect of cooperative group clinical trials since 1970. In early clinical trials, data acquisition was nonuniform and inconsistent and computational models for radiation dose calculation varied significantly. Process improvements developed for data acquisition, credentialing, and data management have provided the necessary infrastructure for uniform data. With continued improvement in the technology and delivery of RT, evaluation processes for target definition, RT planning, and execution undergo constant review. As we move to multimodality image-based definitions of target volumes for protocols, future clinical trials will require near real-time image analysis and feedback to field investigators. The ability of quality assurance centers to meet these real-time challenges with robust electronic interaction platforms for imaging acquisition, review, archiving, and quantitative review of volumetric RT plans will be the primary challenge for future successful clinical trials.

Radiation therapy toxicity to the skin.

Radiation therapy has been integral to cancer patient care. The skin is an intentional and unintentional target of therapy, and is sensitive to the volume of normal tissue in the radiation therapy treatment field, daily treatment dose (fractionation), and total treatment dose. We must understand the relationship of these factors to patient outcome as we move toward hypofractionation treatment strategies (radiosurgery). Chemotherapy agents and prescription medications may influence therapy-associated sequelae. Understanding this may prevent significant injury and discomfort. This article reviews established platforms of radiation therapy and sequelae associated with skin therapy. Interactions with other agents and possible predisposition to sequelae are reviewed. Skin cancer resulting from treatment and disease processes associated with possible limited outcome are also reviewed.

Influence of radiation therapy parameters on outcome in children treated with radiation therapy for localized parameningeal rhabdomyosarcoma in Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group trials II through IV.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of radiation treatment parameters on cancer control outcomes for children with parameningeal rhabdomyosarcoma (PM-RMS) treated on Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group protocols II through IV (including IRS-IV pilot). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiation therapy (RT) treatment quality was assessed by contemporary review of portal radiographs, simulation films, treatment plans, and, in most cases, cross-sectional diagnostic imaging data for patients treated on Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group protocols II through IV. Five hundred ninety-five patients with PM-RMS were registered on these 4 studies between 1978 and 1997. Most of these patients (95%) had Group III disease. Radiation doses varied over the span of these trials with protocol doses ranging from 40 Gy to 50.4 Gy on IRS-II and IRS-III and 50.4 Gy to 59.4 Gy (hyperfractionated) on IRS-IV pilot and IRS-IV. Patients with high-risk signs of meningeal impingement, including cranial nerve palsy (CNP) or cranial base bone erosion (CBBE) with or without intracranial extension (ICE), were required to start radiotherapy at the time of study entry (Day 0). Among 595 patients reviewed, 385 (65%) had diagnostic images submitted to the Quality Assurance Review Center for assessment of target volume coverage. Only 123 (21%) patients, 49 (40%) of whom were treated on IRS-II, received whole brain RT. RESULTS: The estimated overall survival and failure-free survival rates were 73% and 69% at 5 years, respectively. The estimated 5-year local failure (LF) rate was 17%. The detection of ICE increased from 24% to 41% as more cross-sectional diagnostic images became available. For patients with any sign of meningeal impingement, starting RT <2 weeks after diagnosis (n = 315) had 18% LF compared to 33% LF if started >2 weeks after diagnosis (n = 43) (p = 0.03). For patients with ICE, starting RT <2 weeks after diagnosis (n = 177) resulted in LF in 16% compared to 37% among those who started >2 weeks after (n = 19) (p = 0.07). For patients with CNP and/or CBBE, starting RT <2 weeks after diagnosis (n = 138) resulted in 21% LF compared to 30% among those that started >2 weeks (n = 23) (p = 0.23). In none of these circumstances was the 5-year failure-free survival significantly impacted by this increase in LF. The estimated 3-year survival after local failure was 17% (95% CI, 10%-25%). For patients without signs of meningeal impingement, there was no difference in local control whether they started radiation therapy earlier or later than 10 weeks. Patients with large (> or =5 cm) Group III tumors had an LF rate of 35% if they received less than 47.5 Gy compared to an LF rate of 18% in patients who received less than 47.5 Gy with smaller tumors or a rate of 15% if they received more than 47.5 Gy, irrespective of tumor size (p = 0.14). There was no evidence that whole brain radiation therapy affected LF or reduced central nervous system (CNS) relapse. Multivariate analysis of RT parameters and clinical factors demonstrated that a radiation dose of >47.5 Gy was associated with lower LF. The presence of ICE, CNP, or CBBE and age >10 years at diagnosis were significantly associated with higher rates of local failure. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of cross-sectional diagnostic images (CT or MRI) has improved detection of ICE. Starting radiation therapy within 2 weeks of diagnosis for patients with signs of meningeal impingement was associated with lower rates of local failure. When no signs of meningeal impingement were present, delay of radiation therapy for more than 10 weeks did not impact local failure rates. Whole brain radiation therapy is unnecessary in PM-RMS. A dose of at least 47.5 Gy seems to be associated with lower rates of local failure, especially when tumor diameter is > or =5 cm.