Daily online bony correction is required for prostate patients without fiducial markers or soft-tissue imaging.

AIM: To compare online position verification strategies with offline correction protocols for patients undergoing definitive prostate radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analysed 50 patients with implanted fiducial markers undergoing curative prostate radiation treatment, all of whom underwent daily kilovoltage imaging using an on-board imager. For each treatment, patients were set-up initially with skin tattoos and in-room lasers. Orthogonal on-board imager images were acquired and the couch shift to match both bony anatomy and the fiducial markers recorded. The set-up error using skin tattoos and offline bone correction was compared with online bone correction. The fiducial markers were used as the reference. RESULTS: Data from 1923 fractions were analysed. The systematic error was ≤1 mm for all protocols. The average random error was 2-3mm for online bony correction and 3-5mm for skin tattoos or offline-bone. Online-bone showed a significant improvement compared with offline-bone in the number of patients with >5mm set-up errors for >10% (P<0.001) and >20% (P<0.003) of their fractions. CONCLUSIONS: Online correction to bony anatomy reduces both systematic and random set-up error in patients undergoing prostate radiotherapy, and is superior to offline correction methods for those patients not suitable for fiducial markers or daily soft-tissue imaging.

Patients' preference for radiotherapy fractionation schedule in the palliation of symptomatic unresectable lung cancer.

The palliative radiotherapeutic management of unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer is controversial, with various fractionation (Fx) schedules available. We aimed to determine patient's choice of Fx schedule after involvement in a decision-making process using a decision board. A decision board outlining the various advantages and disadvantages apparent in the Medical Research Council study of Fx schedules (17 Gy in two fractions vs 39 Gy in 13 fractions) was discussed with patients who met Medical Research Council eligibility criteria. Patients were then asked to indicate their preferred Fx schedules, reasons and their level of satisfaction with being involved in the decision-making process. Radiation oncologists (RO) could prescribe radiotherapy schedules irrespective of patients' preferences. Of 92 patients enrolled, 55% chose the longer schedule. English-speaking patients were significantly more likely to choose the longer schedule (P = 0.02, 95% confidence interval: 1.2-7.6). Longer Fx was chosen because of longer survival (90%) and better local control (12%). Shorter Fx was chosen for shorter overall treatment duration (80%), cost (61%) and better symptom control (20%). In all, 56% of patients choosing the shorter schedule had their treatment altered by the treating RO, whereas only 4% of patients choosing longer Fx had their treatment altered (P < 0.001). Despite this, all (100%) patients were satisfied with being involved in the decision-making process. The decision board was useful in aiding decision-making, with both Fx schedules being acceptable to patients. Interestingly, despite the longer average survival associated with longer Fx, nearly half of the patients believed that this was not as important as a shorter duration of treatment and lower cost. Despite patients' preferences, there were significant alterations of preferred schedules because of RO's own biases.

RANZCR 2006 peer review audit instrument.

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College Radiologists (RANZCR) continuing professional development programme incorporates audit with feedback as one important activity. The 2004 audit tool improves radiation oncologist practice quality; however, the instrument is designed to be regularly refined. To refine the 2004 audit tool and present the new instrument we incorporated comments and suggestions from: (i) the auditor and radiation oncologist from the single machine unit trial; (ii) members of RANZCR Post-Fellowship Education Committee; (iii) New South Wales Department of Health mandatory prescription requirements; and (iv) the International Atomic Energy Agency audit tool. In July 2006, the revised instrument was designed then endorsed by Post-Fellowship Education Committee. Important changes include: (i) combining criteria which separately scored documentation and correctness for similar items; (ii) scoring treatment schedule more explicitly; (iii) separating target volume coverage and critical structure dose; (iv) altering performance criteria scoring to be sensitive to peer review when no consensus can be reached; and (v) strengthening instructions for use and notes to improve comprehension and acceptance. The refined 2006 instrument should be more user-friendly while increasing its usefulness.

Importance of daily electronic portal imaging in radiotherapy.

An audit was conducted on 20 randomly selected patients who had daily electronic portal imaging during the course of their radiotherapy treatment. The daily images were reviewed to determine whether they were within tolerance according to departmental protocol. If they were not, the actions that were taken were documented. Four treatment areas (spine, chest, breast and prostate) were compared among five patients belonging to each of these categories. The patients were also categorized according to their treatment intent (radical or palliative). A total of 889 electronic portal images of 475 fractions were audited and 33.5% of all fractions were outside tolerance. It was found that 95% of patients needed an action during their treatment and 80% of the patients needed a treatment centre move during the course of their treatment. We found that errors occurred throughout the treatment and it was not possible to predict patients who could have daily imaging omitted. Concordance between radiation therapists and radiation oncologists for identification of error was also investigated. Despite the use of familiar electronic portal imaging protocols, image reviewers (radiation therapists and radiation oncologists) disagreed in interpretation 10% of the time. Our results support the hypothesis that daily imaging may be a useful tool for patients undergoing radiotherapy and that imaging may be ideally carried out before each fraction. Image assessments would be ideally carried out by a team approach, with all images reviewed by both radiation therapists and radiation oncologists. This approach has significant resource implications and may require review of current Medicare and Health Program Grant reimbursements.

Is rural radiation oncology practice quality as good as the big smoke? Results of the Australian radiotherapy single machine unit trial.

Radiotherapy utilization rates in rural Australia are suboptimal, with one solution being the building of single machine units (SMUs). One concern raised with such an approach is the quality of care delivered in SMUs. The Australian and Victorian governments have established two SMUs in the state of Victoria, with each SMU operated as a satellite service of a major 'hub' site. We report on the planned evaluation of practice quality. Radiation oncologist (RO) clinical practice was externally audited using the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists Peer Review Audit instrument. This tool splits RO clinical practice into documentation/quality assurance (QA) criteria and decision-making criteria. Over the four sites, 130 patients were randomly selected for audit. At hub sites, 79.6% of all criteria audited were adequate, compared with 84.4% of criteria audited at SMUs (P = 0.0002). This difference was largely because of better adherence to documentation/QA criteria at the SMU sites. RO decision-making and protocol adherence were routinely very high and consistent with other clinical practice audits. There were no significant differences between hubs and SMUs for adherence to decision-making criteria; however, the few potential deficiencies in patient care identified occurred only at the hub sites. In at least one of these cases, potential suboptimal management was as a direct result of inadequate documentation. This audit found that SMUs provide as high a standard of radiotherapeutic care as larger hub departments. The findings also emphasize the need for all departments to target clinical documentation.

Does the implementation of radiation oncology outpatient infection control measures adversely affect patient satisfaction with doctor-patient interaction?

INTRODUCTION: There are worldwide concerns of an impending avian influenza outbreak, with nations formulating infection control strategies to prepare for such an event. Little evidence exists for how infection control measures impact on the provision of cancer services, or how patient experience would be affected. Our aim was to compare patient satisfaction with doctor-patient interaction, during and following a period of infection control measures. METHODS: We measured patient satisfaction using a validated 29-question instrument for two weeks during the implementation of strict infection control measures as a result of the severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak (T1), and compared results with a two-week period after measures had been lifted (T2). RESULTS: A total of 296 patients were surveyed, 149 at T1 and 147 at T2. Most patients indicated overall satisfaction, with 92.3 percent and 86.9 percent satisfied at T1 and T2, respectively (p-value is not significant). Mean satisfaction index was 3.02 and 3.04 out of 4 at T1 and T2, respectively (p-value is not significant). However, the responses for several individual questions did differ significantly between time points. At T1 more patients indicated satisfaction for understanding the doctor's plans (p-value is 0.001), while at T2, more patients indicated satisfaction for being told how to care for their condition (p-value is 0.04). CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated high patient satisfaction at both time points. Similar levels of satisfaction despite infection control measures may be due to patients being more tolerant of problems in doctor-patient interactions during the outbreak due to media campaigns. This research may facilitate those healthcare services planning to minimise the impact of infection control measures on patient care.

Paclitaxel, 5-fluorouracil and hydroxyurea concurrent with radiation in locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is the standard treatment for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). We conducted a phase II trial using paclitaxel, 5-fluorouracil and hydroxyurea concurrent with radiation (TFHX). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-nine patients with locally advanced NPC were treated with CRT consisting of 4-day continuous infusions of paclitaxel (20 mg/m(2)/d) and 5-fluorouracil (600 mg/m(2)/d), and oral hydroxyurea 500 mg bid for nine doses, every 3 weeks concurrent with radiotherapy (RT). RT consisted of once daily 200cGy fractions 5 times per week to a total of 7000cGy. RESULTS: Complete response was seen in 86% and 71% of patients at 4 and 12 months after CRT. The median follow-up was 34 months. Twenty-three patients experienced relapse. Sixteen deaths occurred: 13 from progressive disease. Three-year overall survival and progression-free survival were 72% and 54% respectively, with locoregional and distant control rates of 83% and 64% at 3 years respectively. Grade 3 to 4 acute toxicities included oropharyngeal mucositis in 81% of patients treated, dermatitis in 63%, weight loss in 32%, and neutropenia in 22%. Neutropenic fever was seen in 14%. There were no treatment-related deaths from acute toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: TFHX is shown to be feasible in NPC. Non-cross resistant induction chemotherapy should be further studied with this regimen.

Phase II study of the American Brachytherapy Society guidelines for the use of high-dose rate brachytherapy in the treatment of cervical carcinoma: is 45-50.4 Gy radiochemotherapy plus 31.8 Gy in six fractions high-dose rate brachytherapy tolerable?

In 2000, the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) published incompletely evaluated guidelines for curative chemoradiation and high-dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy for cervical cancer: our aim was to assess guideline tolerability in an Asian population. From 2000, all stage I-IVA cervical carcinoma patients were treated following ABS guidelines. Early disease (FIGO stage I/II <4 cm) received 45 Gy whole-pelvis external-beam radiation (EBRT) at 1.8 Gy/fraction, while advanced-stage disease received 50.4 Gy: no central shielding was used. All patients were planned to receive chemotherapy during EBRT, cisplatin 40 mg/m(2) weekly. All patients received 31.8-Gy HDR brachytherapy (six fractions of 5.3 Gy/fraction) to point A via three-channel applicators. Radiotherapy was completed within 8 weeks. Toxicity scoring used Common Toxicity Criteria. Nineteen of 21 (90.4%) patients (8 early, 13 advanced stage) received planned radiation, and 85.7% received planned chemotherapy. Median follow-up was 24 months (range 9-50 months). Three-year overall survival (S) was 79.1% and disease-free survival (DFS) was 64.8%. S/DFS for early and advanced stage was 85.7%/85.7% and 73.3%/47.1%, respectively. Complete response (CR) was achieved by 85.7% of patients, partial response 14.3%. For those in CR, there were no local failures. Acute cystitis occurred in 23.8%, proctitis 4.8%, and gastroenteritis 47.6%. Late cystitis occurred in 9.5%, gastroenteritis 4.8%, and genitourinary fistula (in the presence of progressive disease) 4.8%. No grade 3/4 treatment-related toxicity occurred. The ABS guidelines were well tolerated and efficacious in our study, although longer follow-up is required. Further studies are warranted to validate safety and efficacy of the recommendations.

Patient satisfaction with doctor-patient interaction in a radiotherapy centre during the severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak.

An outpatient radiotherapy department assessed how precautions implemented during the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak affected patient satisfaction with doctor-patient interaction and explored variables potentially influencing satisfaction. The information obtained would help prepare us for future infectious disease outbreaks. Outpatients seen during the outbreak completed a validated questionnaire assessing satisfaction with doctor-patient interaction. Additional items assessed included patients' perception of SARS measures and patient demographics. Of 149 patients, 97% had heard of SARS, 92% believed SARS precautions necessary, and 54% believed contracting SARS was possible despite the precautions. Patients were satisfied with doctors wearing masks (97%), temperature checks (97%), and patients wearing masks (96%). Despite the high satisfaction levels with SARS precautions, 24% believed it had adversely affected doctor-patient interaction. With regards to doctor-patient interaction, 94% of patients were satisfied. Patients were most satisfied with the 'information exchange' domain (mean score 3.23 out of 4) compared to other domains (P < 0.0001, 100.00% confidence) and were less satisfied with the 'empathy' domain compared to other domains (P < 0.0001, 100.00% confidence). Patients were most satisfied with understanding their treatment plan (100%), doctor being honest (97%) and being understood (96%). Patients were least satisfied with information about caring for their illness (61%), that the visit could be better (59%), and the doctor showing more interest (58%). On multivariate analysis, patients who were less satisfied with SARS measures were significantly less satisfied with doctor-patient interaction (P = 0.0001). Dissatisfaction with SARS measures was associated with significant dissatisfaction for questions in all domains. Older age and non-breast cancer patients were also less satisfied with doctor-patient interaction. Most (94%) of patients were satisfied with doctor-patient interaction, despite implementation of infectious disease prevention measures. However, patients who were dissatisfied with the SARS precautions had poorer satisfaction. In particular, physician empathy appeared to be most adversely affected. The results have relevance to any radiotherapy department preparing contingency plans in the event of infectious disease outbreaks.

Introducing the Intergroup 0116 protocol of adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy in gastric cancer into clinical practice.

AIMS: The results of techniques from a well-conducted clinical trial are often difficult to reproduce when implemented in community oncology practice. The U.S. Intergroup 0116 protocol of adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy in gastric cancer presented in mid-2000 produced a survival advantage over surgery alone. The current study aims to determine the adherence with protocol design and delivery of radiation therapy (radiotherapy) in the initial 20 patients managed with the Intergroup 0116 protocol at The National University Hospital, Singapore. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A formal quality assurance audit was performed on clinical features, radiotherapy treatment charts and simulation films of the first 20 patients treated with the Intergroup 0116 protocol from July 2000 to September 2001. Specific details were audited for their consistency with described protocol in domains of eligibility criteria, radiotherapy prescription, target volume coverage and adherence to dose-limiting normal tissue tolerances. Compliance and toxicity with the protocol was assessed by audit of delivered radiotherapy dose, treatment interruptions, inpatient admissions and weight loss during radiotherapy. RESULTS: The 20 audited patients were appropriately selected on the basis of eligibility criteria of Intergroup 0116 protocol. There was only one minor variation of radiotherapy target volume coverage resulting from marginal coverage of the porta hepatis region. Adherence to the protocol was satisfactory, with 19 patients completing the radiotherapy protocol as planned and only one major variation in treatment delivery resulting from gastrointestinal toxicity. One major and one minor variation in normal tissue-dose constraints occurred on the heart and spinal cord, respectively. Compliance with treatment delivery was good, with only one patient failing to complete the prescribed radiotherapy dose owing to toxicity, although seven patients required treatment interruption. CONCLUSION: This audit showed good compliance with radiotherapy design and delivery. A formal medical quality assurance audit may provide a useful tool to assess complex new protocols introduced into routine departmental practice.

Hiding in the bunker: Challenges for a radiation oncology department operating in the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome outbreak.

In February 2003, one woman returned from Hong Kong to Singapore with a previously undescribed atypical pneumonia. Two months later, Singapore is facing its greatest ever threat to its population's health and the country's economy. The government has taken strong action to break the chain of infection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). As a radiation oncology department in Singapore, we have faced challenges in keeping staff and patients safe while continuing to provide a service to our patients. In this article, we outline the measures taken to curb SARS in Singapore and discuss the implications for Australasian radiation oncology departments.

Improving interpretation of clinical studies by use of confidence levels, clinical significance curves, and risk-benefit contours.

The process of interpreting the results of clinical studies and translating them into clinical practice is being debated. Here we examine the role of p values and confidence intervals in clinical decision-making, and draw attention to confusion in their interpretation. To improve result reporting, we propose the use of confidence levels and plotting of clinical significance curves and risk-benefit contours. These curves and contours provide degrees of probability of both the potential benefit of treatment and the detriment due to toxicity. Additionally, they provide clinicians with a mechanism of translating the results of studies into treatment for individual patients, thus improving the clinical decision-making process. We illustrate the application of these curves and contours by reference to published studies. Confidence levels, clinical significance curves, and risk-benefit contours can be easily calculated with a hand calculator or standard statistical packages. We advocate their incorporation into the published results of clinical studies.

Intracranial epithelioid hemangioendothelioma arising at site of previously excised atypical meningioma.

Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma is an uncommon vascular tumor which, in most cases, pursues a clinical course intermediate between hemangioma and angiosarcoma. Only four completely documented cases of central nervous system involvement by this tumor appear in the literature. We present an additional case, which is remarkable in its occurrence at the site of a previously excised atypical meningioma and in its unusually aggressive clinical course. To our knowledge this is the first report of intracranial epithelioid hemangioendothelioma with postmortem documentation. The patient initially presented with a 7 cm right post frontal tumor; an atypical meningioma was excised and removal appeared complete on immediate post-operative scans. Seven months later the patient re-presented with tumor recurrence at the previous operative site; a second craniotomy was performed and, on this occasion, the excised tumor had the histological features of an epithelioid hemangioendothelioma without evidence of meningioma: both morphologically and immunohistochemically the two tumors were quite distinctive. Further recurrence prompted radiotherapy but the patient continued to deteriorate and died five months later. Massive recurrence of intracranial tumor was found at postmortem examination.