Assuring high quality treatment delivery in clinical trials – Results from the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG) study 03.04 “RADAR” set-up accuracy study

An overview of the medical-physics-related verification system for radiotherapy multicenter clinical trials by the Medical Physics Working Group in the Japan Clinical Oncology Group-Radiation Therapy Study Group

The Japan Clinical Oncology Group-Radiation Therapy Study Group (JCOG-RTSG) has initiated several multicenter clinical trials for high-precision radiotherapy, which are presently ongoing. When conducting multi-center clinical trials, a large difference in physical quantities, such as the absolute doses to the target and the organ at risk, as well as the irradiation localization accuracy, affects the treatment outcome. Therefore, the differences in the various physical quantities used in different institutions must be within an acceptable range for conducting multicenter clinical trials, and this must be verified with medical physics consideration. In 2011, Japan's first Medical Physics Working Group (MPWG) in the JCOG-RTSG was established to perform this medical-physics-related verification for multicenter clinical trials. We have developed an auditing method to verify the accuracy of the absolute dose and the irradiation localization. Subsequently, we credentialed the participating institutions in the JCOG multicenter clinical trials that were using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for lungs, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for several disease sites, and proton beam therapy (PT) for the liver. From the verification results, accuracies of the absolute dose and the irradiation localization among the participating institutions of the multicenter clinical trial were assured, and the JCOG clinical trials could be initiated.

Short-term androgen suppression and radiotherapy versus intermediate-term androgen suppression and radiotherapy, with or without zoledronic acid, in men with locally advanced prostate cancer (TROG 03.04 RADAR): 10-year results from a randomised, phase 3, factorial trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal duration of androgen suppression for men with locally advanced prostate cancer receiving radiotherapy with curative intent is yet to be defined. Zoledronic acid is effective in preventing androgen suppression-induced bone loss, but its role in preventing castration-sensitive bone metastases in locally advanced prostate cancer is unclear. The RADAR trial assessed whether the addition of 12 months of adjuvant androgen suppression, 18 months of zoledronic acid, or both, can improve outcomes in men with locally advanced prostate cancer who receive 6 months of androgen suppression and prostatic radiotherapy. This report presents 10-year outcomes from this trial.

METHODS

For this randomised, phase 3, 2 × 2 factorial trial, eligible men were 18 years or older with locally advanced prostate cancer (either T2b-4, N0 M0 tumours or T2a, N0 M0 tumours provided Gleason score was ≥7 and baseline prostate-specific antigen [PSA] concentration was ≥10 μg/L). We randomly allocated participants in a 2 × 2 factorial design by computer-generated randomisation (using the minimisation technique, and stratified by centre, baseline PSA concentration, clinical tumour stage, Gleason score, and use of a brachytherapy boost) in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to four treatment groups. Patients in the control group received 6 months of neoadjuvant androgen suppression with leuprorelin (22·5 mg every 3 months, intramuscularly) and radiotherapy alone (short-term androgen suppression [STAS]); this treatment was either followed by another 12 months of adjuvant androgen suppression with leuprorelin (22·5 mg every 3 months, intramuscularly; intermediate-term androgen suppression [ITAS]), or accompanied by 18 months of zoledronic acid (4 mg every 3 months, intravenously) starting at randomisation (STAS plus zoledronic acid), or both (ITAS plus zoledronic acid). All patients received radiotherapy to the prostate and seminal vesicles, starting from the end of the fifth month of androgen suppression; dosing options were 66, 70, and 74 Gy in 2-Gy fractions per day, or 46 Gy in 2-Gy fractions followed by a high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost dose of 19·5 Gy in 6·5-Gy fractions. Treatment allocation was open label. The primary endpoint was prostate cancer-specific mortality and was analysed according to intention-to-treat using competing-risks methods. The trial is closed to follow-up and this is the final report of the main endpoints. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00193856.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 20, 2003, and Aug 15, 2007, 1071 men were enrolled and randomly assigned to STAS (n=268), ITAS (n=268), STAS plus zoledronic acid (n=268), and ITAS plus zoledronic acid (n=267). Median follow-up was 10·4 years (IQR 7·9-11·7). At this 10-year follow-up, no interactions were observed between androgen suppression and zoledronic acid so the treatment groups were collapsed to compare treatments according to duration of androgen suppression: 6 months of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy (6AS+RT) versus 18 months of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy (18AS+RT) and to compare treatments according to whether or not patients received zoledronic acid. The total number of deaths was 375 (200 men receiving 6AS+RT and 175 men receiving 18AS+RT), of which 143 (38%) were attributable to prostate cancer (81 men receiving 6AS+RT and 62 men receiving 18AS+RT). When analysed by duration of androgen suppression, the adjusted cumulative incidence of prostate cancer-specific mortality was 13·3% (95% CI 10·3-16·0) for 6AS+RT versus 9·7% (7·3-12·0) for 18AS+RT, representing an absolute difference of 3·7% (95% CI 0·3-7·1; sub-hazard ratio [sHR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·50-0·98], adjusted p=0·035). The addition of zoledronic acid did not affect prostate cancer-specific mortality; the adjusted cumulative incidence of prostate cancer-specific mortality was 11·2% (95% CI 8·7-13·7) with zoledronic acid vs 11·7% (9·2-14·1) without, representing an absolute difference of -0·5% (95% CI -3·8 to 2·9; sHR 0·95 [95% CI 0·69-1·32], adjusted p=0·78). Although safety analysis was not prespecified for this 10-year analysis, one new serious adverse event (osteonecrosis of the mandible, in a patient who received 18 months of androgen suppression plus zoledronic acid) occurred since our previous report, bringing the total number of cases of this serious adverse event to three (<1% out of 530 patients who received zoledronic acid evaluated for safety) and the total number of drug-related serious adverse events to 12 (1% out of all 1065 patients evaluable for safety). No treatment-related deaths occurred during the study.

INTERPRETATION

18 months of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy is a more effective treatment option for locally advanced prostate cancer than 6 months of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy, but the addition of zoledronic acid to this treatment regimen is not beneficial. Evidence from the RADAR and French Canadian Prostate Cancer Study IV trials suggests that 18 months of androgen suppression with moderate radiation dose escalation is an effective but more tolerable option than longer durations of androgen suppression for men with locally advanced prostate cancer including intermediate and high risk elements.

FUNDING

National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Australia, AbbVie Pharmaceuticals Australia, New Zealand Health Research Council, New Zealand Cancer Society, Cancer Standards Institute New Zealand, University of Newcastle (Australia), Hunter Medical Research Institute, Calvary Mater Newcastle Radiation Oncology Fund, and Maitland Cancer Appeal.

Long-term outcomes in 1121 Australian prostate cancer patients treated with definitive radiotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Optimal definitive treatment of prostate cancer is controversial, especially in high-risk patients. We report the largest prospective cohort of Australian patients treated with radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer.

METHODS

One thousand, one hundred and twenty-one patients with prostate cancer were prospectively registered and treated to a dose of 70-74 Gy. Patients were classified as low, intermediate or high risk based on PSA, clinical staging and Gleason score. Intermediate-risk patients were treated with 0-6 months of hormonal therapy (ADT) and high-risk patients were offered neoadjuvant and adjuvant ADT. Overall survival (OS) and biochemical relapse-free survival (bNED) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 92 months. Eight-year OS and bNED were 78.4% and 68.1% respectively in the entire cohort. OS for the low, intermediate and high-risk groups was 84.5%, 78.4% and 68% respectively. For these risk groups, bNED was 80.3%, 65.7% and 53.7% respectively. In the intermediate and high-risk group, OS and bNED decreased with increasing number of risk factors.

CONCLUSION

Definitive radiotherapy is an effective treatment for prostate cancer, including in high-risk cases.

A virtual dosimetry audit - Towards transferability of gamma index analysis between clinical trial QA groups

PURPOSE

Quality assurance (QA) for clinical trials is important. Lack of compliance can affect trial outcome. Clinical trial QA groups have different methods of dose distribution verification and analysis, all with the ultimate aim of ensuring trial compliance. The aim of this study was to gain a better understanding of different processes to inform future dosimetry audit reciprocity.

MATERIALS

Six clinical trial QA groups participated. Intensity modulated treatment plans were generated for three different cases. A range of 17 virtual 'measurements' were generated by introducing a variety of simulated perturbations (such as MLC position deviations, dose differences, gantry rotation errors, Gaussian noise) to three different treatment plan cases. Participants were blinded to the 'measured' data details. Each group analysed the datasets using their own gamma index (γ) technique and using standardised parameters for passing criteria, lower dose threshold, γ normalisation and global γ.

RESULTS

For the same virtual 'measured' datasets, different results were observed using local techniques. For the standardised γ, differences in the percentage of points passing with γ < 1 were also found, however these differences were less pronounced than for each clinical trial QA group's analysis. These variations may be due to different software implementations of γ.

CONCLUSIONS

This virtual dosimetry audit has been an informative step in understanding differences in the verification of measured dose distributions between different clinical trial QA groups. This work lays the foundations for audit reciprocity between groups, particularly with more clinical trials being open to international recruitment.

Statistical-learning strategies generate only modestly performing predictive models for urinary symptoms following external beam radiotherapy of the prostate: A comparison of conventional and machine-learning methods

PURPOSE

Given the paucity of available data concerning radiotherapy-induced urinary toxicity, it is important to ensure derivation of the most robust models with superior predictive performance. This work explores multiple statistical-learning strategies for prediction of urinary symptoms following external beam radiotherapy of the prostate.

METHODS

The performance of logistic regression, elastic-net, support-vector machine, random forest, neural network, and multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) to predict urinary symptoms was analyzed using data from 754 participants accrued by TROG03.04-RADAR. Predictive features included dose-surface data, comorbidities, and medication-intake. Four symptoms were analyzed: dysuria, haematuria, incontinence, and frequency, each with three definitions (grade ≥ 1, grade ≥ 2 and longitudinal) with event rate between 2.3% and 76.1%. Repeated cross-validations producing matched models were implemented. A synthetic minority oversampling technique was utilized in endpoints with rare events. Parameter optimization was performed on the training data. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was used to compare performance using sample size to detect differences of ≥0.05 at the 95% confidence level.

RESULTS

Logistic regression, elastic-net, random forest, MARS, and support-vector machine were the highest-performing statistical-learning strategies in 3, 3, 3, 2, and 1 endpoints, respectively. Logistic regression, MARS, elastic-net, random forest, neural network, and support-vector machine were the best, or were not significantly worse than the best, in 7, 7, 5, 5, 3, and 1 endpoints. The best-performing statistical model was for dysuria grade ≥ 1 with AUROC ± standard deviation of 0.649 ± 0.074 using MARS. For longitudinal frequency and dysuria grade ≥ 1, all strategies produced AUROC>0.6 while all haematuria endpoints and longitudinal incontinence models produced AUROC<0.6.

CONCLUSIONS

Logistic regression and MARS were most likely to be the best-performing strategy for the prediction of urinary symptoms with elastic-net and random forest producing competitive results. The predictive power of the models was modest and endpoint-dependent. New features, including spatial dose maps, may be necessary to achieve better models.

Modeling Urinary Dysfunction After External Beam Radiation Therapy of the Prostate Using Bladder Dose-Surface Maps: Evidence of Spatially Variable Response of the Bladder Surface

PURPOSE

We assessed the association of the spatial distribution of dose to the bladder surface, described using dose-surface maps, with the risk of urinary dysfunction.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The bladder dose-surface maps of 754 participants from the TROG 03.04-RADAR trial were generated from the volumetric data by virtually cutting the bladder at the sagittal slice, intersecting the bladder center-of-mass through to the bladder posterior and projecting the dose information on a 2-dimensional plane. Pixelwise dose comparisons were performed between patients with and without symptoms (dysuria, hematuria, incontinence, and an International Prostate Symptom Score increase of ≥10 [ΔIPSS10]). The results with and without permutation-based multiple-comparison adjustments are reported. The pixelwise multivariate analysis findings (peak-event model for dysuria, hematuria, and ΔIPSS10; event-count model for incontinence), with adjustments for clinical factors, are also reported.

RESULTS

The associations of the spatially specific dose measures to urinary dysfunction were dependent on the presence of specific symptoms. The doses received by the anteroinferior and, to lesser extent, posterosuperior surface of the bladder had the strongest relationship with the incidence of dysuria, hematuria, and ΔIPSS10, both with and without adjustment for clinical factors. For the doses to the posteroinferior region corresponding to the area of the trigone, the only symptom with significance was incontinence.

CONCLUSIONS

A spatially variable response of the bladder surface to the dose was found for symptoms of urinary dysfunction. Limiting the dose extending anteriorly might help reduce the risk of urinary dysfunction.

Urinary symptoms following external beam radiotherapy of the prostate: Dose-symptom correlates with multiple-event and event-count models

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare urinary dose-symptom correlates after external beam radiotherapy of the prostate using commonly utilised peak-symptom models to multiple-event and event-count models which account for repeated events.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Urinary symptoms (dysuria, haematuria, incontinence and frequency) from 754 participants from TROG 03.04-RADAR trial were analysed. Relative (R1-R75 Gy) and absolute (A60-A75Gy) bladder dose-surface area receiving more than a threshold dose and equivalent uniform dose using exponent a (range: a ∈[1 … 100]) were derived. The dose-symptom correlates were analysed using; peak-symptom (logistic), multiple-event (generalised estimating equation) and event-count (negative binomial regression) models.

RESULTS

Stronger dose-symptom correlates were found for incontinence and frequency using multiple-event and/or event-count models. For dysuria and haematuria, similar or better relationships were found using peak-symptom models. Dysuria, haematuria and high grade (⩾ 2) incontinence were associated to high dose (R61-R71 Gy). Frequency and low grade (⩾ 1) incontinence were associated to low and intermediate dose-surface parameters (R13-R41Gy). Frequency showed a parallel behaviour (a=1) while dysuria, haematuria and incontinence showed a more serial behaviour (a=4 to a ⩾ 100). Relative dose-surface showed stronger dose-symptom associations.

CONCLUSIONS

For certain endpoints, the multiple-event and event-count models provide stronger correlates over peak-symptom models. Accounting for multiple events may be advantageous for a more complete understanding of urinary dose-symptom relationships.

Dosimetry, clinical factors and medication intake influencing urinary symptoms after prostate radiotherapy: An analysis of data from the RADAR prostate radiotherapy trial

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

To identify dosimetry, clinical factors and medication intake impacting urinary symptoms after prostate radiotherapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data describing clinical factors and bladder dosimetry (reduced with principal component (PC) analysis) for 754 patients treated with external beam radiotherapy accrued by TROG 03.04 RADAR prostate radiotherapy trial were available for analysis. Urinary symptoms (frequency, incontinence, dysuria and haematuria) were prospectively assessed using LENT-SOMA to a median of 72months. The endpoints assessed were prevalence (grade ⩾1) at the end of radiotherapy (representing acute symptoms), at 18-, 36- and 54-month follow-ups (representing late symptoms) and peak late incidence including only grade ⩾2. Impact of factors was assessed using multivariate logistic regression models with correction for over-optimism.

RESULTS

Baseline symptoms, non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus, age and PC1 (correlated to the mean dose) impact symptoms at >1 timepoints. Associations at a single timepoint were found for cerebrovascular condition, ECOG status and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug intake. Peak incidence analysis shows the impact of baseline, bowel and cerebrovascular condition and smoking status.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence and incidence analysis provide a complementary view for urinary symptom prediction. Sustained impacts across time points were found for several factors while some associations were not repeated at different time points suggesting poorer or transient impact.

Quality improvement process to assess tattoo alignment, set-up accuracy and isocentre reproducibility in pelvic radiotherapy patients

INTRODUCTION

This quality improvement study tested three methods of tattoo alignment and isocentre definition to investigate if aligning lateral tattoos to minimise pitch, roll and yaw decreased set-up error, and if defining the isocentre using the lateral tattoos for cranio-caudal (CC) position improved isocentre reproducibility. The study population was patients receiving curative external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for prostate cancer. The results are applicable to all supine pelvic EBRT patients.

METHODS

The three sequential cohorts recruited 11, 11 and 10 patients respectively. A data set of 20 orthogonal pairs of electronic portal images (EPI) was acquired for each patient. EPIs were matched offline to digitally reconstructed radiographs. In cohort 1, lateral tattoos were adjusted to minimise roll. The anterior tattoo was used to define the isocentre. In cohort 2, lateral tattoos were aligned to minimise roll and yaw. Isocentre was defined as per cohort 1. In cohort 3, lateral tattoos were aligned as per cohort 2 and the anterior tattoo was adjusted to minimise pitch. Isocentre was defined by the lateral tattoos for CC position and the anterior tattoo for the left-right position.

RESULTS

Cohort 3 results were superior as CC systematic and random set-up errors reduced from -1.3 mm to -0.5 mm, and 3.1 mm to 1.4 mm respectively, from cohort 1 to cohort 3. Isocentre reproducibility also improved from 86.7% to 92.1% of treatment isocentres within 5 mm of the planned isocentre.

CONCLUSION

The methods of tattoo alignment and isocentre definition in cohort 3 reduced set-up errors and improved isocentre reproducibility.

Impact of treatment planning and delivery factors on gastrointestinal toxicity: an analysis of data from the RADAR prostate radiotherapy trial

BACKGROUND

To assess the impact of incremental modifications of treatment planning and delivery technique, as well as patient anatomical factors, on late gastrointestinal toxicity using data from the TROG 03.04 RADAR prostate radiotherapy trial.

METHODS

The RADAR trial accrued 813 external beam radiotherapy participants during 2003-2008 from 23 centres. Following review and archive to a query-able database, digital treatment plans and data describing treatment technique for 754 patients were available for analysis. Treatment demographics, together with anatomical features, were assessed using uni- and multivariate regression models against late gastrointestinal toxicity at 18-, 36- and 54-month follow-up. Regression analyses were reviewed in the context of dose-volume data for the rectum and anal canal.

RESULTS

A multivariate analysis at 36-month follow-up shows that patients planned using a more rigorous dose calculation algorithm (DCA) was associated with a lower risk of stool frequency (OR: 0.435, CI: 0.242-0.783, corrected p = 0.04). Patients using laxative as a method of bowel preparation had higher risk of having increased stool frequency compared to patients with no dietary intervention (OR: 3.639, CI: 1.502-8.818, corrected p = 0.04). Despite higher risks of toxicities, the anorectum, anal canal and rectum dose-volume histograms (DVH) indicate patients using laxative had unremarkably different planned dose distributions. Patients planned with a more rigorous DCA had lower median DVH values between EQD23 = 15 Gy and EQD23 = 35 Gy. Planning target volume (PTV), conformity index, rectal width and prescription dose were not significant when adjusted for false discovery rate. Number of beams, beam energy, treatment beam definition, positioning orientation, rectum-PTV separation, rectal length and mean cross sectional area did not affect the risk of toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

The RADAR study dataset has allowed an assessment of technical modifications on gastrointestinal toxicity. A number of interesting associations were subsequently found and some factors, previously hypothesised to influence toxicity, did not demonstrate any significant impact. We recommend trial registries be encouraged to record technical modifications introduced during the trial in order for more powerful evidence to be gathered regarding the impact of the interventions.

Short-term androgen suppression and radiotherapy versus intermediate-term androgen suppression and radiotherapy, with or without zoledronic acid, in men with locally advanced prostate cancer (TROG 03.04 RADAR): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 factorial trial

BACKGROUND

We investigated whether 18 months of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy, with or without 18 months of zoledronic acid, is more effective than 6 months of neoadjuvant androgen suppression plus radiotherapy with or without zoledronic acid.

METHODS

We did an open-label, randomised, 2 × 2 factorial trial in men with locally advanced prostate cancer (either T2a N0 M0 prostatic adenocarcinomas with prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≥10 μg/L and a Gleason score of ≥7, or T2b-4 N0 M0 tumours regardless of PSA and Gleason score). We randomly allocated patients by computer-generated minimisation--stratified by centre, baseline PSA, tumour stage, Gleason score, and use of a brachytherapy boost--to one of four groups in a 1:1:1:1 ratio. Patients in the control group were treated with neoadjuvant androgen suppression with leuprorelin (22·5 mg every 3 months, intramuscularly) for 6 months (short-term) and radiotherapy alone (designated STAS); this procedure was either followed by another 12 months of androgen suppression with leuprorelin (intermediate-term; ITAS) or accompanied by 18 months of zoledronic acid (4 mg every 3 months for 18 months, intravenously; STAS plus zoledronic acid) or by both (ITAS plus zoledronic acid). The primary endpoint was prostate cancer-specific mortality. This analysis represents the first, preplanned assessment of oncological endpoints, 5 years after treatment. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00193856.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 20, 2003, and Aug 15, 2007, 1071 men were randomly assigned to STAS (n=268), STAS plus zoledronic acid (n=268), ITAS (n=268), and ITAS plus zoledronic acid (n=267). Median follow-up was 7·4 years (IQR 6·5-8·4). Cumulative incidences of prostate cancer-specific mortality were 4·1% (95% CI 2·2-7·0) in the STAS group, 7·8% (4·9-11·5) in the STAS plus zoledronic acid group, 7·4% (4·6-11·0) in the ITAS group, and 4·3% (2·3-7·3) in the ITAS plus zoledronic acid group. Cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality was 17·0% (13·0-22·1), 18·9% (14·6-24·2), 19·4% (15·0-24·7), and 13·9% (10·3-18·8), respectively. Neither prostate cancer-specific mortality nor all-cause mortality differed between control and experimental groups. Cumulative incidence of PSA progression was 34·2% (28·6-39·9) in the STAS group, 39·6% (33·6-45·5) in the STAS plus zoledronic acid group, 29·2% (23·8-34·8) in the ITAS group, and 26·0% (20·8-31·4) in the ITAS plus zoledronic acid group. Compared with STAS, no difference was noted in PSA progression with ITAS or STAS plus zoledronic acid; however, ITAS plus zoledronic acid reduced PSA progression (sub-hazard ratio [SHR] 0·71, 95% CI 0·53-0·95; p=0·021). Cumulative incidence of local progression was 4·1% (2·2-7·0) in the STAS group, 6·1% (3·7-9·5) in the STAS plus zoledronic acid group, 1·5% (0·5-3·7) in the ITAS group, and 3·4% (1·7-6·1) in the ITAS plus zoledronic acid group; no differences were noted between groups. Cumulative incidences of bone progression were 7·5% (4·8-11·1), 14·6% (10·6-19·2), 8·4% (5·5-12·2), and 7·6% (4·8-11·2), respectively. Compared with STAS, STAS plus zoledronic acid increased the risk of bone progression (SHR 1·90, 95% CI 1·14-3·17; p=0·012), but no differences were noted with the other two groups. Cumulative incidence of distant progression was 14·7% (10·7-19·2) in the STAS group, 17·3% (13·0-22·1) in the STAS plus zoledronic acid group, 14·2% (10·3-18·7) in the ITAS group, and 11·1% (7·6-15·2) in the ITAS plus zoledronic acid group; no differences were recorded between groups. Cumulative incidence of secondary therapeutic intervention was 25·6% (20·5-30·9), 28·9% (23·5-34·5), 20·7% (16·1-25·9), and 15·3% (11·3-20·0), respectively. Compared with STAS, ITAS plus zoledronic acid reduced the need for secondary therapeutic intervention (SHR 0·67, 95% CI 0·48-0·95; p=0·024); no differences were noted with the other two groups. An interaction between trial factors was recorded for Gleason score; therefore, we did pairwise comparisons between all groups. Post-hoc analyses suggested that the reductions in PSA progression and decreased need for secondary therapeutic intervention with ITAS plus zoledronic acid were restricted to tumours with a Gleason score of 8-10, and that ITAS was better than STAS in tumours with a Gleason score of 7 or lower. Long-term morbidity and quality-of-life scores were not affected adversely by 18 months of androgen suppression or zoledronic acid.

INTERPRETATION

Compared with STAS, ITAS plus zoledronic acid was more effective for treatment of prostate cancers with a Gleason score of 8-10, and ITAS alone was effective for tumours with a Gleason score of 7 or lower. Nevertheless, these findings are based on secondary endpoint data and post-hoc analyses and must be regarded cautiously. Long- term follow-up is necessary, as is external validation of the interaction between zoledronic acid and Gleason score. STAS plus zoledronic acid can be ruled out as a potential therapeutic option.

FUNDING

National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Australia, Abbott Pharmaceuticals Australia, New Zealand Health Research Council, New Zealand Cancer Society, University of Newcastle (Australia), Calvary Health Care (Calvary Mater Newcastle Radiation Oncology Fund), Hunter Medical Research Institute, Maitland Cancer Appeal, Cancer Standards Institute New Zealand.

Quality assurance for clinical trials

Cooperative groups, of which the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group is one example, conduct national clinical trials that often involve the use of radiation therapy. In preparation for such a trial, the cooperative group prepares a protocol to define the goals of the trial, the rationale for its design, and the details of the treatment procedure to be followed. The Radiological Physics Center (RPC) is one of several quality assurance (QA) offices that is charged with assuring that participating institutions deliver doses that are clinically consistent and comparable. The RPC does this by conducting a variety of independent audits and credentialing processes. The RPC has compiled data showing that credentialing can help institutions comply with the requirements of a cooperative group clinical protocol. Phantom irradiations have been demonstrated to exercise an institution's procedures for planning and delivering advanced external beam techniques (1-3). Similarly, RPC data indicate that a rapid review of patient treatment records or planning procedures can improve compliance with clinical trials (4). The experiences of the RPC are presented as examples of the contributions that a national clinical trials QA center can make to cooperative group trials. These experiences illustrate the critical need for comprehensive QA to assure that clinical trials are successful and cost-effective. The RPC is supported by grants CA 10953 and CA 81647 from the National Cancer Institute, NIH, DHHS.

Dosimetric consequences of prostate-based couch shifts on the precision of dose delivery during simultaneous IMRT irradiation of the prostate, seminal vesicles and pelvic lymph nodes

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the impact interfraction prostate (CTV1) motion corrections on doses delivered to seminal vesicles (CTV2) and lymph nodes (CTV3), and to determine ideal planning target volume (PTV) margins for these targets with prostate-based position verification.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis based on 253 cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) studies of 28 patients. The isocenter-shift method was used to estimate the interfraction prostate and bony shift effects on the original plan coverage. Friedman's test was used to assess statistical significance between dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters which were calculated for prostate-based sum plans, bony-based sum plans and original treatment plans. The van Herk formula was used to determine the set-up margin size for prostate-based verification.

RESULTS

The tracked shifts influenced the minimum, maximum and mean CTV2 and CTV3 doses, with a range differential of 0.17%-2.63% (prostate shifts) and 0.13%-1.92% (bony shifts) compared to the corresponding original parameters. Friedman's test revealed significant differences in the minimum doses to the CTV3 and maximum doses to both the CTV2 and CTV3. The calculated set-up margins of 1.22 cm (vertical), 0.19 cm (longitudinal) and 0.39 cm (lateral) should be added to CTV3 while performing prostate-based positioning.

CONCLUSION

To avoid geographical miss during simultaneous irradiation of independently moving targets (CTV1-3) appropriate margins should be used in accordance with the position verification method used. Based on our findings the following margin sizes should be used: 0.7 cm for the CTV1, 0.8-0.9 cm for the CTV2 , and asymmetric 1.0 cm (vertically) and 0.5 cm (other axes) for the CTV3.

Quality assurance in radiotherapy on a national level; experience from Norway: the KVIST initiative

Background and purpose

In radiotherapy (RT), there are high requirements for quality assurance (QA) in all the steps of the process. Development of QA systems are demanding in terms of financial and human resources. A national QA programme (KVIST) has been established in Norway to facilitate implementation of QA activity on hospital level.

Method

The KVIST organisation comprises the KVIST team, the reference group (RG) and the working groups (WGs). The KVIST team is multidisciplinary and are employed in permanent positions. The RG acts as an advisory body for the KVIST team in defining and ranking the priority of projects. Relevant national QA projects are identified in collaboration with the RG, and WGs are established to carry out the various projects.

Result

Several national consensus documents have been prepared by the various WGs. Systems for incident handling and activity reporting have been established and clinical audits have been implemented in Norwegian RT. Guidelines for RT of various diagnoses have also been prepared in collaboration with National Cancer groups.

Conclusion

The KVIST programme has been very well acknowledged in the Norwegian RT community. It has succeeded in creating a positive attitude towards QA and improved the communication between centres and the various professions.

Evaluation of combining bony anatomy and soft tissue position correction strategies for IMRT prostate cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy treatment requires delivering high homogenous dose to target volume while sparing organs at risk. That is why accurate patient positioning is one of the most important steps during the treatment process. It reduces set-up errors which have a strong influence on the doses given to the target and surrounding tissues.

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficiency of combining bony anatomy and soft tissue imaging position correction strategies for patients with prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study based on pre-treatment position verification results determined for 10 patients using kV images and CBCT match. At the same patients' position, two orthogonal kV images and set of CT scans were acquired. Both verification methods gave the information about patients' position changes in vertical, longitudinal and lateral directions.

RESULTS

For 93 verifications, the mean values of kV shifts in vertical, longitudinal and lateral directions equaled: -0.11 ± 0.54 cm, 0.26 ± 0.38 cm and -0.06 ± 0.47 cm, respectively. The same values achieved for CBCT matching equaled: 0.07 ± 0.62 cm, 0.22 ± 0.36 cm and -0.02 ± 0.45 cm. Statistically significant changes between the values of shifts received during the first week of treatment and the rest time of the irradiation process were found for 2 patients in the lateral direction and 2 patients in vertical direction among kV results and for 3 patients in the longitudinal direction among CBCT results. A significant difference between kV and CBCT match results was found in the vertical direction.

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical practice, CBCT combined with kV or even portal imaging improves precision and effectiveness of prostate cancer treatment accuracy.

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.

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.

Combining radiation therapy and androgen deprivation for localized prostate cancer-a critical review

Interest has been increasing in the use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with radiation therapy (RT) in the management of localized prostate cancer. Preclinical studies have provided some rationale for the use of this combination. In patients with high-risk disease, the benefit of a combined approach, with the addition of adjuvant hormonal therapy, is supported by results of randomized trials. In contrast, for patients with low-risk disease, there is no obvious therapeutic advantage except for cytoreduction. The usefulness of short-term hormonal therapy in association with rt for intermediate-risk patients is still debatable, particularly in the context of doseescalated RT. The optimal timing and duration of ADT, in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings alike, are still under investigation. In view of the potential side effects with ADT, further studies are being performed to better identify subsets of patients who will definitely benefit from this therapy in combination with rt.