Implementation and Efficacy of a Large-Scale Radiation Oncology Case-Based Peer-Review Quality Program across a Multinational Cancer Network.

PURPOSE: With expansion of academic cancer center networks across geographically-dispersed sites, ensuring high-quality delivery of care across all network affiliates is essential. We report on the characteristics and efficacy of a radiation oncology peer-review quality assurance (QA) system implemented across a large-scale multinational cancer network. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Since 2014, weekly case-based peer-review QA meetings have been standard for network radiation oncologists with radiation oncology faculty at a major academic center. This radiotherapy (RT) QA program involves pre-treatment peer-review of cases by disease site, with disease-site subspecialized main campus faculty members. This virtual QA platform involves direct review of the proposed RT plan as well as supporting data, including relevant pathology and imaging studies for each patient. Network RT plans were scored as being concordant or nonconcordant based on national guidelines, institutional recommendations, and/or expert judgment when considering individual patient-specific factors for a given case. Data from January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2019, were aggregated for analysis. RESULTS: Between 2014 and 2019, across 8 network centers, a total of 16,601 RT plans underwent peer-review. The network-based peer-review case volume increased over the study period, from 958 cases in 2014 to 4,487 in 2019. A combined global nonconcordance rate of 4.5% was noted, with the highest nonconcordance rates among head-and-neck cases (11.0%). For centers that joined the network during the study period, we observed a significant decrease in the nonconcordance rate over time (3.1% average annual decrease in nonconcordance, P = 0.01); among centers that joined the network prior to the study period, nonconcordance rates remained stable over time. CONCLUSIONS: Through a standardized QA platform, network-based multinational peer-review of RT plans can be achieved. Improved concordance rates among newly added network affiliates over time are noted, suggesting a positive impact of network membership on the quality of delivered cancer care.

Development and clinical implementation of a digital workflow utilizing 3D-printed oral stents for patients with head and neck cancer receiving radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: We describe the development of 3D-printed stents using our digital workflow and their effects on patients enrolled in the lead-in phase of a multi-center, randomized Phase-II trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Digital dental models were created for patients using intraoral scanning. Digital processes were implemented to develop the mouth-opening, tongue-depressing, and tongue-lateralizing stents using stereolithography. Time spent and material 3D-printing costs were measured. Physicians assessed mucositis using the Oral Mucositis Assessment Scale (OMAS) and collected MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) reports and adverse events (AEs) from patients at various time points (TPs). OMAS and MDASI results were evaluated using paired t-test analysis. RESULTS: 18 patients enrolled into the lead-in phase across 6 independent clinical sites in the USA. 15 patients received stents (average design and fabrication time, 8 h; average material 3D-printing cost, 11 USD). 10 eligible patients with complete OMAS and MDASI reports across all TPs were assessed. OMAS increased significantly from baseline to week 3 of treatment (mean difference = 0.34; 95 % CI, 0.09-0.60; p = 0.01). MDASI increased significantly from baseline to week 3 of treatment (mean difference = 1.02; 95 % CI, 0.40-1.70; p = 0.005), and week 3 of treatment to end of treatment (mean difference = 1.90; 95 % CI, 0.90-2.92; p = 0.002). AEs (grades 1-3) were reported by patients across TPs. Mucositis and radiation dermatitis were primarily attributed to chemoradiation. CONCLUSIONS: 3D-printed stents were successfully fabricated and well tolerated by patients. As patients enroll in the randomized phase of this trial, data herein will establish a baseline for comparative analysis.