Predictive value of health-related quality of life on radiotherapy-related toxicities in patients with head and neck cancer.

PURPOSE: Little is known about whether baseline health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores also could predict occurrence radiotherapy-related toxicities, which we aim to assess in this study. METHODS: This study analyzed data from 200 patients enrolled in randomized study investigating the utility of HRQoL. HRQOL was assessed at baseline and during follow up using QLQ-C30 questionnaire and major toxicity was considered as adverse event ≥ 3 according to NCI-CTCAE classification. Cox regressions adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic data were used to assess prognostic significance of HRQOL scores. RESULTS: In multivariable analyses adjusted on clinical and sociodemographic data, every 10-point improvement in physical (HR = 0.74), role (HR = 0.87) and social (HR = 0.88) functioning was associated with 24%, 13% and 12% lower hazard of occurrence of major toxicity respectively while every 10 point-increase in dyspnea (HR = and loss appetite was associated with 15% and 16% increased hazard of major toxicity. CONCLUSION: Certain baseline HRQoL scores were found to be significantly associated with the occurrence of major toxicity.

Randomized Trial Assessing the Impact of Routine Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer.

The impact of routine assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) on satisfaction with care and the HRQoL of patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) treated with radiotherapy was assessed. Patients with HNC were randomly assigned to two arms, with stratification on sex, cancer localization, and stage of the disease. In the intervention arm, the patients completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-H&N35 questionnaires first before randomization, then before each medical appointment during radiotherapy (7 weeks), and then every 3 months until 1 year and at 2 years thereafter. In the control arm, the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-H&N35 questionnaires were completed before randomization and at 1 year and 2 years thereafter. The primary endpoint was mean change in HRQoL at score at 2 years from baseline assessed by EQ VAS from the EuroQol questionnaire. The secondary endpoint was mean change in satisfaction with care at 2 years from baseline assessed by QLQ-SAT32. Two hundred patients with head and neck cancers were involved in this study (mean age, 58.83 years (range, 36.56-87.89)), of whom 100 were assigned to the intervention arm and 100 to the control arm. Patients in the intervention arm were reported to have a statistically significant increase in EQ VAS at 2 years (p < 0.0001) and exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (mean change at 2 years from baseline = 10.46). In the two arms, mean differences between arms were not statistically significant, but minimal clinically important differences in favor of the intervention arm were found for EQ VAS (mean change difference (MD) = 5.84), satisfaction with care, in particular waiting times (MD = 10.85) and satisfaction with accessibility (MD = 6.52). Routine assessment of HRQoL improves HRQoL and satisfaction with care for patients with HNC treated with radiotherapy.

Patient safety in external beam radiotherapy, results of the ACCIRAD project: Recommendations for radiotherapy institutions and national authorities on assessing risks and analysing adverse error-events and near misses.

The ACCIRAD project, commissioned by the European Commission (EC) to develop guidelines for risk analysis of accidental and unintended exposures in external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), was completed in the year 2014. In 2015, the "General guidelines on risk management in external beam radiotherapy" were published as EC report Radiation Protection (RP)-181. The present document is the third and final report of the findings from the ACCIRAD project. The main aim of this paper is to describe the key features of the risk management process and to provide general guidelines for radiotherapy departments and national authorities on risk assessment and analysis of adverse error-events and near misses. The recommendations provided here and in EC report RP-181 are aimed at promoting the harmonisation of risk management systems across Europe, improving patient safety, and enabling more reliable inter-country comparisons.

Patient safety in external beam radiotherapy, results of the ACCIRAD project: Current status of proactive risk assessment, reactive analysis of events, and reporting and learning systems in Europe.

PURPOSE: To describe the current status of implementation of European directives for risk management in radiotherapy and to assess variability in risk management in the following areas: 1) in-country regulatory framework; 2) proactive risk assessment; (3) reactive analysis of events; and (4) reporting and learning systems. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The original data were collected as part of the ACCIRAD project through two online surveys. RESULTS: Risk assessment criteria are closely associated with quality assurance programs. Only 9/32 responding countries (28%) with national regulations reported clear "requirements" for proactive risk assessment and/or reactive risk analysis, with wide variability in assessment methods. Reporting of adverse error events is mandatory in most (70%) but not all surveyed countries. CONCLUSIONS: Most European countries have taken steps to implement European directives designed to reduce the probability and magnitude of accidents in radiotherapy. Variability between countries is substantial in terms of legal frameworks, tools used to conduct proactive risk assessment and reactive analysis of events, and in the reporting and learning systems utilized. These findings underscore the need for greater harmonisation in common terminology, classification and reporting practices across Europe to improve patient safety and to enable more reliable inter-country comparisons.

Patient safety in external beam radiotherapy - guidelines on risk assessment and analysis of adverse error-events and near misses: introducing the ACCIRAD project.

In 2011 the European Commission launched a tender to develop guidelines for risk analysis of accidental and unintended exposures in external beam radiotherapy. This tender was awarded to a consortium of 6 institutions, including the ESTRO, in late 2011. The project, denominated "ACCIRAD", recently finished the data collection phase. Data were collected by surveys administered in 38 European countries. Results indicate non-uniform implementation of event registration and classification, as well as incomplete or zero implementation of risk assessment and events analysis. Based on the survey results and analysis thereof, project leaders are currently drafting proposed guidelines entitled "Guidelines for patient safety in external beam radiotherapy - Guidelines on risk assessment and analysis of adverse-error events and near misses". The present article describes the aims and current status of the project, including results of the surveys.

Outcome impact and cost-effectiveness of quality assurance for radiotherapy planned for the EORTC 22071-24071 prospective study for head and neck cancer.

INTRODUCTION: One of the goals of Quality Assurance in Radiotherapy (QART) is to reduce the variability and uncertainties related to treatment planning and beam delivery. The purpose of this study was to assess the outcome impact and cost-effectiveness (CE) of various QART levels for a head and neck (H&N) cancer study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: QART levels were defined as: basic QART with a dummy run (level 2), level 2 plus prospective Individual Case Reviews (ICRs) for 15% of patients (level 3) and level 2 plus prospective ICRs for all patients (level 4). The follow-up of patients was modeled using a multi-state model with parameters derived from EORTC, TROG and RTOG prospective studies. Individual patient data, linking QART results with outcome, were retrieved from the TROG database. Results for each QART level were expressed as percentage of mortality and local failure at 5 years. RESULTS: Quality-of-life-adjusted and recurrence-free survival increased with increasing QART levels. The increase of all these metrics was more sizeable with an increased QART level from 2 or 3 to 4. The estimated quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs) for an increase of QART levels of 3-4 and 2-4 were 0.09 and 0.15, respectively. The incremental CE ratio was €5525 and €3659 Euros per QALY for these QART levels. Compared to QART level 2 or 3, level 4 was cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing QART levels resulted in better patient outcome in this simulated study. The increased complexity of the QART program was also cost-effective.

The European Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology-European Institute of Radiotherapy (ESTRO-EIR) report on 3D CT-based in-room image guidance systems: a practical and technical review and guide.

The past decade has provided many technological advances in radiotherapy. The European Institute of Radiotherapy (EIR) was established by the European Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO) to provide current consensus statement with evidence-based and pragmatic guidelines on topics of practical relevance for radiation oncology. This report focuses primarily on 3D CT-based in-room image guidance (3DCT-IGRT) systems. It will provide an overview and current standing of 3DCT-IGRT systems addressing the rationale, objectives, principles, applications, and process pathways, both clinical and technical for treatment delivery and quality assurance. These are reviewed for four categories of solutions; kV CT and kV CBCT (cone-beam CT) as well as MV CT and MV CBCT. It will also provide a framework and checklist to consider the capability and functionality of these systems as well as the resources needed for implementation. Two different but typical clinical cases (tonsillar and prostate cancer) using 3DCT-IGRT are illustrated with workflow processes via feedback questionnaires from several large clinical centres currently utilizing these systems. The feedback from these clinical centres demonstrates a wide variability based on local practices. This report whilst comprehensive is not exhaustive as this area of development remains a very active field for research and development. However, it should serve as a practical guide and framework for all professional groups within the field, focussed on clinicians, physicists and radiation therapy technologists interested in IGRT.

Multidisciplinary Rectal Cancer Management: 2nd European Rectal Cancer Consensus Conference (EURECA-CC2).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: During the first decade of the 21st century a number of important European randomized studies were published. In order to help shape clinical practice based on best scientific evidence from the literature, the International Conference on 'Multidisciplinary Rectal Cancer Treatment: Looking for an European Consensus' (EURECA-CC2) was organized in Italy under the endorsement of European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), and European Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology (ESTRO). METHODS: Consensus was achieved using the Delphi method. The document was available to all Committee members as a web-based document customized for the consensus process. Eight chapters were identified: epidemiology, diagnostics, pathology, surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy, treatment toxicity and quality of life, follow-up, and research questions. Each chapter was subdivided by a topic, and a series of statements were developed. Each member commented and voted, sentence by sentence thrice. Sentences upon which an agreement was not reached after voting round # 2 were openly debated during a Consensus Conference in Perugia (Italy) from 11 December to 13 December 2008. A hand-held televoting system collected the opinions of both the Committee members and the audience after each debate. The Executive Committee scored percentage consensus based on three categories: "large consensus", "moderate consensus", and "minimum consensus". RESULTS: The total number of the voted sentences was 207. Of the 207, 86% achieved large consensus, 13% achieved moderate consensus, and only 3 (1%) resulted in minimum consensus. No statement was disagreed by more than 50% of the members. All chapters were voted on by at least 75% of the members, and the majority was voted on by >85%. CONCLUSIONS: This Consensus Conference represents an expertise opinion process that may help shape future programs, investigational protocols, and guidelines for staging and treatment of rectal cancer throughout Europe.

Impact of intensity-modulated radiotherapy on health-related quality of life for head and neck cancer patients: matched-pair comparison with conventional radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: To assess the benefit of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) compared with conventional RT for the quality of life (QOL) of head and neck cancer survivors. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Cross-sectional QOL measures (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL questionnaire C30 and head and neck cancer module) were used with a French multicenter cohort of patients cured of head and neck cancer (follow-up > or = 1 year) who had received bilateral neck RT (> or = 45 Gy) as a part of their initial treatment. We compared the QOL mean scores regarding RT modality (conventional RT vs. IMRT). The patients of the two groups were matched (one to one) according to the delay between the end of RT and the timing of the QOL evaluation and the T stage. Each QOL item was divided into two relevant levels of severity: "not severe" (responses, "not at all" and "a little") vs. "severe" (responses "quite a bit" and "very much"). The association between the type of RT and the prevalence of severe symptoms was approximated, through multivariate analysis using the prevalence odds ratio. RESULTS: Two comparable groups (67 pairs) were available. Better scores were observed on the head and neck cancer module QOL questionnaire for the IMRT group, especially for dry mouth and sticky saliva (p < 0.0001). Severe symptoms were more frequent with conventional RT concerning saliva modifications and oral discomfort. The adjusted prevalence odds ratios were 3.17 (p = 0.04) for dry mouth, 3.16 (p = 0.02) for sticky saliva, 3.58 (p = 0.02) for pain in the mouth, 3.35 (p = 0.04) for pain in the jaw, 2.60 (p = 0.02) for difficulties opening the mouth, 2.76 (p = 0.02) for difficulties with swallowing, and 2.68 (p = 0.03) for trouble with eating. CONCLUSION: The QOL assessment of head and neck cancer survivors demonstrated the benefit of IMRT, particularly in the areas of salivary dysfunction and oral discomfort.

Clinical assessment of the use of the Sonarray system for daily prostate localization.

The Sonarray ultrasound system is a non-invasive technique allowing real-time prostate localization. Since 2003, it has been used in our department before intensity modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer. We reported both setup errors and organ motion detected by Sonarray system and the accuracy of this ultrasound imaging dedicated to radiotherapy.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: an adaptation of 2-dimensional concepts or a reconsideration of current clinical practice.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for head and neck (HN) tumors refers to a new approach to the whole treatment procedure from patient immobilization to beam delivery. Implementation of IMRT thus requires knowledge of setup uncertainties, adequate selection, and delineation of target volumes based on optimal imaging modalities, appropriate specification, and dose prescription regarding dose-volume constraints and ad hoc quality control of both the clinical and physical aspects of the whole procedure. A large number of issues still need to be resolved and/or further refined, such as the optimal selection and delineation of the target volume, in particular, with the introduction of functional imaging, and a better integration of improved dose distribution into the fractionation strategy. IMRT is associated with a potentially increased incidence of carcinogenesis, although in the HN area this risk is relative to the intrinsic risk of comorbidity and secondary cancer associated with the patient's lifestyle. Currently, the implementation of IMRT into routine clinical practice for HN cancers may not be a straightforward matter and should probably be restricted to selected institutions with adequate resources and experience. This review emphasizes these aspects and provides some recommendations for the future use of IMRT in patients with HN tumors.