Evaluating Quality Indicators of Glioblastoma Care: Audit Results From an Indian Tertiary Care Cancer Center.

PURPOSE: There are limited reports of quality metrics in glioblastoma. We audited our adherence to quality indicators as proposed in the PRIME Quality Improvement study. METHODS: This is a retrospective audit of patients treated between 2017 and 2020. After postsurgical integrated diagnosis, patients received radiotherapy (RT) with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ). Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging at predefined times guided management. Numbers with proportions for indices were calculated. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: One hundred six patients were consecutively treated. The median age was 55 years (interquartile range of 47-61 years) with a male preponderance (68%). Ninety-six (90.6%) patients underwent subtotal resection, and 10 (9.4%) biopsy alone. Isocitrate dehydrogenase was wild-type in 96 (91%), and O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase was unmethylated in 70 (66.0%) patients. Telomerase reverse transcriptase promoter was mutated in 64 (60.4%), and TP53 was mutated in 22 (20.8%). Concurrent radiation and TMZ were planned for 104 (98.1%), and radiation alone for 2 (1.9%). The median time to concurrent RT-TMZ was 36 days (interquartile range 30-44 days). All patients planned for RT-TMZ completed treatment, but only 81 (76%) completed adjuvant TMZ. Sixty-three (59%) completed six cycles, 18 (17%) received less than six cycles, and 25 (24%) did not receive adjuvant TMZ. At a median follow-up of 24 months (range 21-31 months), the median (95% CI) progression-free survival and overall survival were 11 (95% CI, 9.4 to 13.0) and 20.0 (95% CI, 15 to 26) months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our patients met quality indices in most domains; outcomes are comparable with global results. Metrics will be periodically evaluated to include new standards and assess continuous service appropriateness.

A Web-based Dose-volume Histogram Dashboard for Library-based Individualized Dose-constraints and Clinical Plan Evaluation.

Traditional methods of treatment planning and plan evaluation involve the use of generic dose-constraints. We aimed to build a web-based application to generate individualized dose-constraints and plan evaluation against a library of prior approved plan dose-volume histograms (DVH).A prototype was built for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans for prostate cancer. Using exported DVH files from the Varian and Accuray treatment planning systems, a library of plan DVHs was built by data extraction. Given structure volumes of a patient to be planned, a web based application was built to derive individual dose-constraints of the planning target volume (PTV) and organs-at-risk (OAR) based on achieved doses in a library of prior approved plans with similar anatomical volumes, selected using an interactive dashboard. A second web application was built to compare the achieved DVHs of the newly created plan against a library of plans of similar patients.These web application prototypes are a proof of principle that simple freely available tools can be built for library based planning and review.

Prioritizing Delivery of Cancer Treatment During a COVID-19 Lockdown: The Experience of a Clinical Oncology Service in India.

PURPOSE: A COVID-19 lockdown in India posed significant challenges to the continuation of radiotherapy (RT) and systemic therapy services. Although several COVID-19 service guidelines have been promulgated, implementation data are yet unavailable. We performed a comprehensive audit of the implementation of services in a clinical oncology department. METHODS: A departmental protocol of priority-based treatment guidance was developed, and a departmental staff rotation policy was implemented. Data were collected for the period of lockdown on outpatient visits, starting, and delivery of RT and systemic therapy. Adherence to protocol was audited, and factors affecting change from pre-COVID standards analyzed by multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Outpatient consults dropped by 58%. Planned RT starts were implemented in 90%, 100%, 92%, 90%, and 75% of priority level 1-5 patients. Although 17% had a deferred start, the median time to start of adjuvant RT and overall treatment times were maintained. Concurrent chemotherapy was administered in 89% of those eligible. Systemic therapy was administered to 84.5% of planned patients. However, 33% and 57% of curative and palliative patients had modifications in cycle duration or deferrals. The patient's inability to come was the most common reason for RT or ST deviation. Factors independently associated with a change from pre-COVID practice was priority-level allocation for RT and age and palliative intent for systemic therapy. CONCLUSION: Despite significant access limitations, a planned priority-based system of delivery of treatment could be implemented.