The quality assurance programme of the Radiotherapy Group of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer: past, present and future

Chemotherapy administration standards and guidelines: The development of a resource document

There are no nationally recognised guidelines for the handling and administration of chemotherapy in South Africa. The Independent Clinical Oncology Network’s Chemotherapy Administration Standards and Guidelines Resource Documentwas developed over 2 years and first introduced at a South African international oncology conference in 2017. A working group consisting of oncologists and oncology nurses was set up to address this deficiency. Pragmatic guidelines suitable to a wide range of local chemotherapy administration practices were developed using an iterative, multidisciplinary, collaborative process. The consensus was that these guidelines should be appropriate to the South African context. Safety, standard operational procedures, recommended professional competencies and training were central to the document. Guidelines for prescribing, storing, mixing, dispensing, administering and disposing of chemotherapy were included. Patient consent and involvement, patient and staff safety, recommended professional competencies, management of accidents and errors, error reporting and local legal requirements are dealt with in detail. The hope is that these guidelines will be used as a resource document for South African chemotherapy practices, both public and private. The document is supported by standard operating procedures and action steps. These were developed to promote the use of the guidelines and to support pragmatic quality assurance measures at practice level. These standards and guidelines will be regularly updated, based on needs identified and deficiencies noted.

Beam Output Audit results within the EORTC Radiation Oncology Group network

Beam Output Auditing (BOA) is one key process of the EORTC radiation therapy quality assurance program. Here the results obtained between 2005 and 2014 are presented and compared to previous results.

For all BOA reports the following parameters were scored: centre, country, date of audit, beam energies and treatment machines audited, auditing organisation, percentage of agreement between stated and measured dose.

Four-hundred and sixty-one BOA reports were analyzed containing the results of 1790 photon and 1366 electron beams, delivered by 755 different treatment machines. The majority of beams (91.1%) were within the optimal limit of ≤ 3%. Only 13 beams (0.4%; n = 9 electrons; n = 4 photons), were out of the range of acceptance of ≤ 5%. Previous reviews reported a much higher percentage of 2.5% or more of the BOAs with >5% deviation.

The majority of EORTC centres present beam output variations within the 3% tolerance cutoff value and only 0.4% of audited beams presented with variations of more than 5%. This is an important improvement compared to previous BOA results.

Phase II Trial of Cetuximab and Conformal Radiotherapy Only in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer with Concurrent Tissue Sampling Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

Preclinical data have indicated the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) agent cetuximab (Erbitux) as a radiosensitizer in pancreatic cancer, but this has not been specifically addressed in a clinical study. We report the results of an original study initiated in 2007, where cetuximab was tested with radiotherapy (RT) alone in locally advanced pancreatic cancer in a phase II trial (PACER).

METHODS

Patients (n = 21) received cetuximab loading dose (400 mg/m(2)) and weekly dose (250 mg/m(2)) during RT (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions). Toxicity and disease response end point data were prospectively assessed. A feasibility study of on-trial patient blood and skin sampling was incorporated.

RESULTS

Treatment was well tolerated, and toxicity was low; most patients (71%) experienced acute toxicities of grade 2 or less. Six months posttreatment, stable local disease was achieved in 90% of evaluable patients, but only 33% were free from metastatic progression. Median overall survival was 7.5 months, and actuarial survival was 33% at 1 year and 11% at 3 years, reflecting swift metastatic progression in some patients but good long-term control of localized disease in others. High-grade acneiform rash (P = .0027), posttreatment stable disease (P = .0059), and pretreatment cancer antigen 19.9 (CA19.9) level (P = .0042) associated with extended survival. Patient skin and blood samples yielded sufficient RNA and good quality protein, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that cetuximab inhibits EGFR-mediated radioresistance to achieve excellent local control with minimal toxicity but does not sufficiently control metastatic progression in all patients. Translational studies of patient tissue samples may yield molecular information that may enable individual treatment response prediction.

Radiotherapy quality assurance review for a multi-center randomized trial of locally advanced esophageal cancer: the Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) trial 0303

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the radiotherapy (RT) quality assurance (QA) for JCOG 0303.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

JCOG 0303 was a multi-center phase II/III trial that compared two types of chemotherapy administered concomitantly with RT for locally advanced esophageal cancer. RT requirements included a total dose of 60 Gy in 30 fractions and CTV with a 2-cm margin cranio-caudally to the primary tumor. The QA assessment was given as per protocol (PP), deviation acceptable (DA), violation unacceptable (VU), and incomplete/not evaluable following predefined criteria for quality parameters.

RESULTS

A total of 142 cases were accrued. After excluding 36 incomplete/not evaluable, 106 (75%) were fully evaluable for RT quality review. Of these 106, there were 4 VU (4%) and overall RT compliance (PP + DA) was 96%. Comparing the incidence of VU based on the numbers enrolled by institution, the highest quarter of enrollment (≥7 cases) had no VU, while all VU (4; 11%) were from institutions enrolling <7 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the RTQA assessment for JCOG 0303 were sufficient to provide reliable results. Additional improvements will be needed for institutions with low accrual rates.

[Quality criteria for treatment of colorectal cancer. From a surgeon's viewpoint]

The surgeon is the key "prognosis factor" for colorectal cancer. For this reason quality criteria were recently established (including minimum numbers) in order to treat patients who are entitled to the best quality of care and to improve the prognosis. The aim of this study was to critically discuss the existing demands on the surgeon based on the current literature and our own results and to formulate evidence-based quality criteria for surgical clinics. After reviewing the current literature criteria were compiled, discussed and finally presented in a summarized form. These are based on current developments on the diagnostic and therapy of large intestine and colorectal carcinoma. New developments of the German Cancer Society for planning of organ centers are incorporated. The quintessence of our study is that the number of cases alone is not decisive for the success of therapy. Important are the application of the correct surgical-oncology operation procedure, adherence to standards and the training of surgeons. Following the S3 guidelines stage-oriented therapy should additionally be carried out in a structured sequence. This includes an interdisciplinary decision making on the diagnostic and therapy strategy (tumor board). The organization structure of the hospital (teams, tumor board, emergency care with intensive care unit, emergency diagnostic and options for interventional measures) can be more important than the hospital case numbers alone. These demands which have been evaluated from published data and own results are designed to raise the therapy of colorectal cancer to the best possible level of quality and to effect a further improvement in the prognosis.

Evidence based radiation oncology: Breast cancer

PURPOSE

Radiotherapy is, similar to surgery, a local treatment. In the case of breast cancer, it is generally given after conservative or after more extensive, tumour and patient adapted, surgery. The target volumes can be the breast and/or the thoracic wall and/or the regional lymph node areas. The integration and the extent of radiotherapy as part of the comprehensive treatment of the breast cancer patient, including the amount of surgery and the sequencing with the systemic treatments, has to be well discussed with all medical specialists involved in treating breast cancer on a multidisciplinary basis. Guidelines for the appropriate prescription and execution of radiotherapy are of utmost importance. However, individualisation based on the individual patients' and tumours' characteristics should always be envisaged.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Based on a review of the literature the level of evidence that is available for the indications for radiotherapy is summarised, as well as the main clinical questions that are unanswered today. An overview of the recent and ongoing clinical trails in breast cancer will highlight some of the current ongoing debates.

CONCLUSIONS

In the case of breast cancer, radiotherapy, given after as well conservative as extensive risk-adapted surgery, significantly reduces the risk of local and regional recurrences. Especially for patients with an intermediate to high absolute risk for local recurrences, a positive influence on overall survival has been shown, notably when appropriate radiotherapy techniques are used. Most important is that the best results that we can offer to our breast cancer patients for all clinical endpoints (local and regional control; quality of life; cosmetic results; survival) can be obtained by a multidisciplinary and patient-oriented approach, involving all those involved in the treatment of breast cancer patients.