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.

[1]  James A. Purdy,et al.  SU‐FF‐T‐267: Implementation of ATC Method 1 for Clinical Trials Data Review at the Quality Assurance Review Center , 2006 .

[2]  Kenneth Ulin,et al.  Results of a multi-institutional benchmark test for cranial CT/MR image registration. , 2010, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[3]  Fran Laurie,et al.  Current calibration, treatment, and treatment planning techniques among institutions participating in the Children's Oncology Group. , 2003, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  Fran Laurie,et al.  The Impact of Central Quality Assurance Review Prior to Radiation Therapy on Protocol Compliance: POG 9426, a Trial in Pediatric Hodgkin’s Disease. , 2005 .

[5]  Marcia Urie,et al.  SU‐FF‐J‐120: Results of a Multi‐Institutional Benchmark Test for Cranial CT/MR Image Registration , 2006 .

[6]  P. Gieser,et al.  Interobserver variability in the detection of cervical-thoracic Hodgkin's disease by computed tomography. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  J. Meza,et al.  Failure pattern and factors predictive of local failure in rhabdomyosarcoma: a report of group III patients on the third Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  J. Grill,et al.  Conformal radiotherapy, reduced boost volume, hyperfractionated radiotherapy, and online quality control in standard-risk medulloblastoma without chemotherapy: results of the French M-SFOP 98 protocol. , 2003, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  F. Behm,et al.  Randomized study of intensive MOPP-ABVD with or without low-dose total-nodal radiation therapy in the treatment of stages IIB, IIIA2, IIIB, and IV Hodgkin's disease in pediatric patients: a Pediatric Oncology Group study. , 1997, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[10]  T. Fitzgerald,et al.  An evaluation of the relationship between the quality of prophylactic cranial radiotherapy in childhood acute leukemia and institutional experience: a Quality Assurance Review Center-Pediatric Oncology Group study. , 2002, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[11]  J. Habrand,et al.  Impact of targeting deviations on outcome in medulloblastoma: study of the French Society of Pediatric Oncology (SFOP). , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[12]  Fran Laurie,et al.  Radiotherapy in pediatric medulloblastoma: quality assessment of Pediatric Oncology Group Trial 9031. , 2006, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.