Executive summary of AAPM Report Task Group 113: Guidance for the physics aspects of clinical trials

A Quality Control Study on Involved Node Radiation Therapy in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Lymphoma Study Association/Fondazione Italiana Linfomi H10 Trial on Stages I and II Hodgkin Lymphoma: Lessons Learned

PURPOSE

Involved node radiation therapy (INRT) was introduced in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Lymphoma Study Association/Fondazione Italiana Linfomi H10 trial, a large multicenter trial in early-stage Hodgkin Lymphoma. The present study aimed to evaluate the quality of INRT in this trial.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A retrospective, descriptive study was initiated to evaluate INRT in a representative sample encompassing approximately 10% of all irradiated patients in the H10 trial. Sampling was stratified by academic group, year of treatment, size of the treatment center, and treatment arm, and it was done proportional to the size of the strata. The sample was completed for all patients with known recurrences to enable future research on relapse patterns. Radiation therapy principle, target volume delineation and coverage, and applied technique and dose were evaluated using the EORTC Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance platform. Each case was reviewed by 2 reviewers and, in case of disagreement also by an adjudicator for a consensus evaluation.

RESULTS

Data were retrieved for 66 of 1294 irradiated patients (5.1%). Data collection and analysis were hampered more than anticipated by changes in archiving of diagnostic imaging and treatment planning systems during the running period of the trial. A review could be performed on 61 patients. The INRT principle was applied in 86.6%. Overall, 88.5% of cases were treated according to protocol. Unacceptable variations were predominately due to geographic misses of the target volume delineations. The rate of unacceptable variations decreased during trial recruitment.

CONCLUSIONS

The principle of INRT was applied in most of the reviewed patients. Almost 90% of the evaluated patients were treated according to the protocol. The present results should, however, be interpreted with caution because the number of patients evaluated was limited. Individual case reviews should be done in a prospective fashion in future trials. Radiation therapy Quality Assurance tailored to the clinical trial objectives is strongly recommended.

[Clinical research in radiation oncology: how to move from the laboratory to the patient?]

Translational research in radiation oncology is undergoing intense development. An increasingly rapid transfer is taking place from the laboratory to the patients, both in the selection of patients who can benefit from radiotherapy and in the development of innovative irradiation strategies or the development of combinations with drugs. Accelerating the passage of discoveries from the laboratory to the clinic represents the ideal of any translational research program but requires taking into account the multiple obstacles that can slow this progress. The ambition of the RadioTransNet network, a project to structure preclinical research in radiation oncology in France, is precisely to promote scientific and clinical interactions at the interface of radiotherapy and radiobiology, in its preclinical positioning, in order to identify priorities for strategic research dedicated to innovation in radiotherapy. The multidisciplinary radiotherapy teams with experts in biology, medicine, medical physics, mathematics and engineering sciences are able to meet these new challenges which will allow these advances to be made available to patients as quickly as possible.

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy and Surgery for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Versus Definitive Chemoradiotherapy With Salvage Surgery as Needed: The Study Protocol for the Randomized Controlled NEEDS Trial

Background

The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC.

Methods

This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Clinical Trial Registration

www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04460352.

Machine learning for contour classification in TG-263 noncompliant databases

A large volume of medical data are labeled using nonstandardized nomenclature. Although efforts have been made by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) to standardize nomenclature through Task Group 263 (TG-263), there remain noncompliant databases. This work aims to create an algorithm that can analyze anatomical contours in patients with head and neck cancer and classify them into TG-263 compliant nomenclature. To create an accurate algorithm capable of such classification, a combined approaching using both binary images of individual slices of anatomical contours themselves, as well as center of mass coordinates of the structures are input into a neural network. The center of mass coordinates were scaled using two normalization schemes, a simple linear normalization scheme agnostic of the patient anatomy, and an anatomical normalization scheme dependent on patient anatomy. The results of all of the individual slice classifications are then aggregated into a single classification by means of a voting algorithm. The total classification accuracy of the final algorithms was 97.6% mean accuracy per class for nonanatomically normalization scheme, and 97.9% mean accuracy per class for anatomically normalization scheme. The total accuracy was 99.0% (13 errors in 1302 structures) for the nonanatomically normalization scheme, and 98.3% (22 errors in 1302 structures) for the anatomically normalization scheme.

A roadmap to clinical trials for FLASH

While FLASH radiation therapy is inspiring enthusiasm to transform the field, it is neither new nor well understood with respect to the radiobiological mechanisms. As FLASH clinical trials are designed, it will be important to ensure we can deliver dose consistently and safely to every patient. Much like hyperthermia and proton therapy, FLASH is a promising new technology that will be complex to implement in the clinic and similarly will require customized credentialing for multi‐institutional clinical trials. There is no doubt that FLASH seems promising, but many technologies that we take for granted in conventional radiation oncology, such as rigorous dosimetry, 3D treatment planning, volumetric image guidance, or motion management, may play a major role in defining how to use, or whether to use, FLASH radiotherapy. Given the extended time frame for patients to experience late effects, we recommend moving deliberately but cautiously forward toward clinical trials. In this paper, we review the state of quality assurance and safety systems in FLASH, identify critical pre‐clinical data points that need to be defined, and suggest how lessons learned from previous technological advancements will help us close the gaps and build a successful path to evidence‐driven FLASH implementation.

Survey of patient-specific quality assurance practice for IMRT and VMAT

A first‐time survey across 15 cancer centers in Ontario, Canada, on the current practice of patient‐specific quality assurance (PSQA) for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivery was conducted. The objectives were to assess the current state of PSQA practice, identify areas for potential improvement, and facilitate the continued improvement in standardization, consistency, efficacy, and efficiency of PSQA regionally. The survey asked 40 questions related to PSQA practice for IMRT/VMAT delivery. The questions addressed PSQA policy and procedure, delivery log evaluation, instrumentation, measurement setup and methodology, data analysis and interpretation, documentation, process, failure modes, and feedback. The focus of this survey was on PSQA activities related to routine IMRT/VMAT treatments on conventional linacs, including stereotactic body radiation therapy but excluding stereotactic radiosurgery. The participating centers were instructed to submit answers that reflected the collective view or opinion of their department and represented the most typical process practiced. The results of the survey provided a snapshot of the current state of PSQA practice in Ontario and demonstrated considerable variations in the practice. A large majority (80%) of centers performed PSQA measurements on all VMAT plans. Most employed pseudo‐3D array detectors with a true composite (TC) geometry. No standard approach was found for stopping or reducing frequency of measurements. The sole use of delivery log evaluation was not widely implemented, though most centers expressed interest in adopting this technology. All used the Gamma evaluation method for analyzing PSQA measurements; however, no universal approach was reported on how Gamma evaluation and pass determination criteria were determined. All or some PSQA results were reviewed regularly in two‐thirds of the centers. Planning related issues were considered the most frequent source for PSQA failures (40%), whereas the most frequent course of action for a failed PSQA was to review the result and decide whether to proceed to treatment.

Initial assessment of 3D magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF) towards quantitative brain imaging for radiation therapy

PURPOSE

Magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF) provides quantitative T1/T2 maps, enabling applications in clinical radiotherapy such as large-scale, multi-center clinical trials for longitudinal assessment of therapy response. We evaluated the feasibility of a quantitative three-dimensional-MRF (3D-MRF) towards its radiotherapy applications of primary brain tumors.

METHODS

A fast whole-brain 3D-MRF sequence initially developed for diagnostic radiology was optimized using flexible body coils, which is the typical MR imaging setup for radiotherapy treatment planning and for MR imaging (MRI)-guided treatment delivery. Optimization criteria included the accuracy and the precision of T1/T2 quantifications of polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) solutions, compared to those from the 3D-MRF using a 32-channel head coil. The accuracy of T1/T2 quantifications from the optimized MRF was first examined in healthy volunteers with two different coil setups. The intra- and inter-scanner variations of image intensity from the optimized sequence were quantified by longitudinal scans of the PVP solutions on two 3T scanners. Using a 3D-printed MRI geometry phantom, susceptibility-induced distortion with the optimized 3D-MRF was quantified as the Dice coefficient of phantom contours, compared to those from CT images. By introducing intentional head motion during 10% of the scan, the robustness of the optimized 3D-MRF towards motion was evaluated through visual inspection of motion artifacts and through quantitative analysis of image sharpness in brain MRF maps.

RESULTS

The optimized sequence acquired whole-brain T1, T2 and proton density maps and with a resolution of 1.2 × 1.2 × 3 mm³ in 10 min, similar to the total acquisition time of 3D T1- and T2-weighted images of the same resolution. In vivo T1 and T2 values of the white and gray matter were consistent with literature. The intra- and inter-scanner variability of the intensity-normalized MRF T1 was 1.0% ± 0.7% and 2.3% ± 1.0% respectively, in contrast to 5.3% ± 3.8% and 3.2% ± 1.6% from the normalized T1-weighted MRI. Repeatability and reproducibility of MRF T1 were independent of intensity normalization. Both phantom and human data demonstrated that the optimized 3D-MRF is more robust to subject motion and artifacts from subject-specific susceptibility difference. Compared to CT contours, the Dice coefficient of phantom contours from 3D-MRF was 0.93, improved from 0.87 from the T1-weighted MRI.

CONCLUSION

Compared to conventional MRI, the optimized 3D-MRF demonstrated improved repeatability across time points and reproducibility across scanners for better tissue quantification, as well as improved robustness to subject-specific susceptibility and motion artifacts under a typical MR imaging setup for radiotherapy. More importantly, quantitative MRF T1/T2 measurements lead to promising potentials towards longitudinal quantitative assessment of treatment response for better adaptive therapy and for large-scale, multi-center clinical trials.

Physics aspects of setting up a multicenter clinical trial involving internal dosimetry of radioiodine treatment of differentiated thyroid cancer

The field of molecular radiotherapy is expanding rapidly, with the advent of many new radiotherapeutics for the treatment of common as well as for rare cancers. Treatment outcome is dependent on the absorbed doses delivered to target volumes and to healthy organs-at-risk, which are shown to vary widely from fixed administrations of activity. There have been significant developments in quantitative imaging and internal dosimetry in recent years, although clinical implementation of these methods has been slow in comparison with external beam radiotherapy, partly due to there being relatively few patients treated at single centers. Multicenter clinical trials are therefore essential to acquire the data required to ensure best practice and to develop the personalized treatment planning that this area is well suited to, due to the unrivalled opportunity to image the therapeutic drug in vivo. Initial preparation for such trials requires a significant effort in terms of resources and trial design. Imaging systems in participating centers must be characterized and set up for quantitative imaging to allow for collation of data. Data transfer for centralized processing is usually necessary but is hindered in some cases by data protection regulations and local logistics. Recent multicenter clinical trials involving radioiodine therapy have begun to establish the procedures necessary for quantitative SPECT imaging in a multicenter setting using standard and anthropomorphic phantoms. The establishment of national and international multicenter imaging and dosimetry networks will provide frameworks to develop and harmonize best practice with existing therapeutic procedures and to ensure rapid and optimized clinical implementation of new radiotherapeutics across all centers of excellence that offer molecular radiotherapy. This will promote networks and collaborations that can provide a sound basis for further developments and will ensure that nuclear medicine maintains a key role in future developments.

Plan quality improvement by DVH sharing and planner's experience: Results of a SBRT multicentric planning study on prostate

PURPOSE

To evaluate, in a multi-institutional context, the role of Dose Volume Histogram (DVH) sharing in order to achieve higher plan quality, to harmonize prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) plans and to assess if the planner's experience in SBRT could lead to lower dose at organs at risk (OARs).

METHODS

During the first phase five patients enrolled for prostate SBRT were planned by multiple physicists according to common protocol. The prescription dose was 35 Gy in 5 fractions. Dosimetric parameters, modulation index (MIt), plan parameters, and planner experience level (EL) were statistically analyzed. During the second phase median DVHs from all centers were shared and physicists replanned one patient of the five, aiming at inter-planner harmonization and further OARs sparing. Data were summarized by Spearman-correlogram (p < 0.05) and boxplots. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the re-plans to the original plans.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight SBRT plans from 13 centers were evaluated. EL correlated with modulation of plan parameters and reduction of OARs doses, such as volume receiving 28 Gy of rectum (rectum-V28Gy), rectum-V32Gy, and bladder-V30Gy. The re-plans showed significant reduced variability in rectum-V28Gy and increased PTV dose homogeneity. No significant difference in plan complexity metrics and plan parameters between plans and re-plans were obtained.

CONCLUSIONS

Planner's experience in prostate SBRT was correlated with dosimetric parameters. Sharing median DVHs reduced variability among centers whilst keeping the same level of plan complexity. SBRT planning skills can benefit from a replanning phase after sharing DVHs from multiple centers, improving plan quality and concordance among centers.

Head and Neck Cancer Adaptive Radiation Therapy (ART): Conceptual Considerations for the Informed Clinician

For nearly 2 decades, adaptive radiation therapy (ART) has been proposed as a method to account for changes in head and neck tumor and normal tissue to enhance therapeutic ratios. While technical advances in imaging, planning and delivery have allowed greater capacity for ART delivery, and a series of dosimetric explorations have consistently shown capacity for improvement, there remains a paucity of clinical trials demonstrating the utility of ART. Furthermore, while ad hoc implementation of head and neck ART is reported, systematic full-scale head and neck ART remains an as yet unreached reality. To some degree, this lack of scalability may be related to not only the complexity of ART, but also variability in the nomenclature and descriptions of what is encompassed by ART. Consequently, we present an overview of the history, current status, and recommendations for the future of ART, with an eye toward improving the clarity and description of head and neck ART for interested clinicians, noting practical considerations for implementation of an ART program or clinical trial. Process level considerations for ART are noted, reminding the reader that, paraphrasing the writer Elbert Hubbard, "Art is not a thing, it is a way."

Standardizing Normal Tissue Contouring for Radiation Therapy Treatment Planning: An ASTRO Consensus Paper

PURPOSE

The comprehensive identification and delineation of organs at risk (OARs) are vital to the quality of radiation therapy treatment planning and the safety of treatment delivery. This guidance aims to improve the consistency of ontouring OARs in external beam radiation therapy treatment planning by providing a single standardized resource for information regarding specific OARs to be contoured for each disease site. The guidance is organized in table format as a quality assurance tool for practices and a training resource for residents and other radiation oncology students (see supplementary materials).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The Task Force formulated recommendations based on clinical practice and consensus. The draft manuscript was peer reviewed by 16 reviewers, the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) legal counsel, and ASTRO's Multidisciplinary Quality Assurance Subcommittee and revised accordingly. The recommendations were posted on the ASTRO website for public comment in June 2018 for a 6-week period. The final document was approved by the ASTRO Board of Directors in August 2018.

RESULTS

Standardization improves patient safety, efficiency, and accuracy in radiation oncology treatment. This consensus guidance represents an ASTRO quality initiative to provide recommendations for the standardization of normal tissue contouring that is performed during external beam treatment planning for each anatomic treatment site. Table 1 defines 2 sets of structures for anatomic sites: Those that are recommended in all adult definitive cases and may assist with organ selection for palliative cases, and those that should be considered on a case-by-case basis depending on the specific clinical scenario. Table 2 outlines some of the resources available to define the parameters of general OAR tissue delineation.

CONCLUSIONS

Using this paper in conjunction with resources that define tissue parameters and published dose constraints will enable practices to develop a consistent approach to normal tissue evaluation and dose documentation.