Simultaneous implementation of unrelated tumour sites on the MR Linac: A review of the commissioning process from a radiographer perspective and lessons learned.

INTRODUCTION: This work reports on a systematic approach to select MRI sequences, quantify inter-observer image registration variation and determine patient positioning for the clinical implementation of MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy (MRgRT) in patients with oropharyngeal (H&N) and lung cancer. METHODS: A total of 30 participants (N=10 H&N and N=10 lung cancer patients and N=10 healthy participants) were scanned on the Elekta Unity Magnetic Resonance Linear Accelerator (MRL). Participant experience questionnaires were used to determine the most appropriate positioning device for lung treatments and tolerability of H&N immobilization devices within the confined MR Linac environment. Visual guided assessments (VGAs) completed by three observers (one oncologist and two radiographers) were used to determine the most suitable tissue weighting (using vendor-provided 3D T1w and T2w sequences) for online image registration. Offline MRI to CT and MRI to MRI rigid registrations were undertaken by nine radiographers using bony and soft tissue matching. Single-factor ANOVA and paired t-tests were utilized to determine the interobserver variation. RESULTS: Based on oncologist and patient feedback, lung cancer patients would be treated in a vac-bag with their arms by their sides, while H&N cancer patients would be immobilized using a 5-point fixation device and 5-point personalized thermoplastic shell. There was no clear preference for T1w or T2w images in the H&N cohort. However, observers preferred T2w sequences for tumour and organ at risk (OAR) visualization in the lung images. When a bony match was conducted, single-factor ANOVA tests showed no statistically significant differences between all H&N image registration types (p=0.09). For the soft-tissue registrations, T1w-CT and T1w-T1w registrations showed a statistically significant (p=0.01) reduction in inter-observer variability over T2w-CT registrations. Paired t-tests showed no statistically significant differences for bony or soft tissue matches using T1w or T2w sequences to the planning CT in the lung cohorts (p=0.63 and p=0.52, respectively). CONCLUSION: We describe the systematic approach to the selection of strategies for imaging, immobilization, and online image registration we used for H&N and lung cancer treatments on the MRL. This has facilitated the selection of the most appropriate adaptive MRgRT strategies for treating these sites at our institution.

Evaluation of Prognostic and Predictive Models in the Oncology Clinic.

Predictive and prognostic models hold great potential to support clinical decision making in oncology and could ultimately facilitate a paradigm shift to a more personalised form of treatment. While a large number of models relevant to the field of oncology have been developed, few have been translated into clinical use and assessment of clinical utility is not currently considered a routine part of model development. In this narrative review of the clinical evaluation of prediction models in oncology, we propose a high-level process diagram for the life cycle of a clinical model, encompassing model commissioning, clinical implementation and ongoing quality assurance, which aims to bridge the gap between model development and clinical implementation.

The Impact of Colleague Peer Review on the Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Process in the Radical Treatment of Lung Cancer.

AIMS: Modern radiotherapy uses techniques to reliably identify tumour and reduce target volume margins. However, this can potentially lead to an increased risk of geographic miss. One source of error is the accuracy of target volume delineation (TVD). Colleague peer review (CPR) of all curative-intent lung cancer plans has been mandatory in our institution since May 2013. At least two clinical oncologists review plans, checking treatment paradigm, TVD, prescription dose tumour and critical organ tolerances. We report the impact of CPR in our institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiotherapy treatment plans of all patients receiving radical radiotherapy were presented at weekly CPR meetings after their target volumes were reviewed and signed off by the treating consultant. All cases and any resultant change to TVD (including organs at risk) or treatment intent were recorded in our prospective CPR database. The impact of CPR over a 13 month period from May 2013 to June 2014 is reported. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-two patients (63% non-small cell lung carcinoma, 17% small cell lung carcinoma and 20% 'clinical diagnosis') were analysed. On average, 3.2 cases were discussed per meeting (range 1-8). CPR resulted in a change in treatment paradigm in 3% (one patient proceeded to induction chemotherapy, two patients had high-dose palliative radiotherapy). Twenty-one (17%) had a change in TVD and one (1%) patient had a change in dose prescription. In total, 6% of patients had plan adjustment after review of dose volume histogram. CONCLUSION: The introduction of CPR in our centre has resulted in a change in a component of the treatment plan for 27% of patients receiving curative-intent lung radiotherapy. We recommend CPR as a mandatory quality assurance step in the planning process of all radical lung plans.

The use of sentinel node sampling in vulval cancer.

Between March 2007 and December 2009, 38 patients underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) sampling, along with vulvectomy, in their management of vulval cancer. A review has been conducted to establish the reliability and accuracy of the new procedure compared with the traditional total inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy. We also aimed to establish both the short- and long-term morbidities of both total inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy and SLNB and to assess the duration of hospital stay in both groups. Our data have shown a reduced short- and long-term morbidity and reduced length of hospital stay for the SLNB procedure. We conclude that it is a reliable and safe procedure, however it should only be conducted in cancer centres.