Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2013 Oct 1;87(2):246-60.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.03.036. Epub 2013 May 15.

Does quality of radiation therapy predict outcomes of multicenter cooperative group trials? A literature review

Affiliations
Review

Does quality of radiation therapy predict outcomes of multicenter cooperative group trials? A literature review

Alysa Fairchild et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. .

Abstract

Central review of radiation therapy (RT) delivery within multicenter clinical trials was initiated in the early 1970s in the United States. Early quality assurance publications often focused on metrics related to process, logistics, and timing. Our objective was to review the available evidence supporting correlation of RT quality with clinical outcomes within cooperative group trials. A MEDLINE search was performed to identify multicenter studies that described central subjective assessment of RT protocol compliance (quality). Data abstracted included method of central review, definition of deviations, and clinical outcomes. Seventeen multicenter studies (1980-2012) were identified, plus one Patterns of Care Study. Disease sites were hematologic, head and neck, lung, breast, and pancreas. Between 0 and 97% of treatment plans received an overall grade of acceptable. In 7 trials, failure rates were significantly higher after inadequate versus adequate RT. Five of 9 and 2 of 5 trials reported significantly worse overall and progression-free survival after poor-quality RT, respectively. One reported a significant correlation, and 2 reported nonsignificant trends toward increased toxicity with noncompliant RT. Although more data are required, protocol-compliant RT may decrease failure rates and increase overall survival and likely contributes to the ability of collected data to answer the central trial question.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest notification: There are no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

    1. Reinstein L, Peachey S, Laurie F, Glicksman A. Impact of a dosimetry review program on radiotherapy in group trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1985;11:1179–1184. - PubMed
    1. Fisher B, Montague E, Redmond C, et al. Findings from NSABP Protocol No B-04: Comparison of radical mastectomy with alternative treatments for primary breast cancer. Cancer. 1980;46:1–13. - PubMed
    1. Peters L, O’Sullivan B, Giralt J, et al. Critical impact of radiotherapy protocol compliance and quality in the treatment of advanced head and neck cancer: Results from TROG 0202. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(18):2996–3001. - PubMed
    1. Bentzen S, Bernier J, Davis J, et al. Clinical impact of dosimetry quality assurance programmes assessed by radiobiological modelling of data from the thermoluminescent dosimetry study of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2000;36:615–20. - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization. Quality Assurance in Radiotherapy. Geneva: WHO; 1998.

Publication types