RESUMEN
PURPOSE: While peer review is critical for quality and safety in radiotherapy, there are neither formal guidelines nor format examples for brachytherapy (BT) peer review. We report on a gynecologic BT peer-review method implemented at a high-volume academic center. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We analyzed discussions at bimonthly gynecologic BT peer-review rounds between July and December 2018. Rounds consisted of 2-5 attending physicians with gynecologic BT expertise, 1-2 BT physicists, and trainees. Peer-review targets included clinical case review, contours, implant technique, dose/fractionation, and target/organ-at-risk (OAR) dosimetry. The projected/final target and OAR dosimetry were analyzed. RESULTS: 55 separate implants from 44 patients were reviewed. Implants were mostly reviewed after the first BT fraction (n = 16, 29%) or at another time point during BT (n = 20, 36%). One (2%) implant was presented prospectively. The applicator type and BT technique were reviewed for all implants. Dose/fractionation was evaluated for 46 implants (84%); contours were discussed for 21 (38%). Target and OAR dosimetry were reviewed for 54 (98%) and 28 implants (51%), respectively. Six cases (11%) underwent minor changes to the applicator type to improve target and/or OAR dosimetry. One case (2%) had a major change recommended to the dose/fractionation. CONCLUSIONS: Gynecologic BT peer review may enhance BT quality by allowing for implant optimization and formal review of challenging cases, ultimately improving medical decision-making and team communication. Peer review should be implemented in centers offering gynecologic BT.
Asunto(s)
Braquiterapia/normas , Neoplasias de los Genitales Femeninos/radioterapia , Revisión por Pares/métodos , Oncología por Radiación/normas , Centros Médicos Académicos/organización & administración , Braquiterapia/instrumentación , Braquiterapia/métodos , Fraccionamiento de la Dosis de Radiación , Femenino , Hospitales de Alto Volumen , Humanos , Órganos en Riesgo , Dosis de Radiación , Oncología por Radiación/educación , Rondas de EnseñanzaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: In 2012, we instituted detailed prospective peer review of new cases. We present the outcomes of peer review on patient management and time required for peer review. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Peer review rounds were held 3 to 4 days weekly and required 2 physicians to review pertinent information from the electronic medical record and treatment planning system. Eight aspects were reviewed for each case: 1) workup and staging; 2) treatment intent and prescription; 3) position, immobilization, and simulation; 4) motion assessment and management; 5) target contours; 6) normal tissue contours; 7) target dosimetry; and 8) normal tissue dosimetry. Cases were marked as, "Meets standard of care," "Variation," or "Major deviation." Changes in treatment plan were noted. As our process evolved, we recorded the time spent reviewing each case. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2014, we collected peer review data on 442 of 465 (95%) radiation therapy patients treated in our hospital-based clinic. Overall, 91 (20.6%) of the cases were marked as having a variation, and 3 (0.7%) as major deviation. Forty-two (9.5%) of the cases were altered after peer review. An overall peer review score of "Variation" or "Major deviation" was highly associated with a change in treatment plan (P < .01). Changes in target contours were recommended in 10% of cases. Gastrointestinal cases were significantly associated with a change in treatment plan after peer review. Indicators on position, immobilization, simulation, target contours, target dosimetry, motion management, normal tissue contours, and normal tissue dosimetry were significantly associated with a change in treatment plan. The mean time spent on each case was 7 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: Prospective peer review is feasible in a community radiation oncology practice. Our process led to changes in 9.5% of cases. Peer review should focus on technical factors such as target contours and dosimetry. Peer review required 7 minutes per case.
Asunto(s)
Revisión por Expertos de la Atención de Salud , Oncología por Radiación , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Dosificación Radioterapéutica , Planificación de la Radioterapia Asistida por ComputadorRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Incident learning is a critical tool to improve patient safety. The Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005 established essential legal protections to allow for the collection and analysis of medical incidents nationwide. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Working with a federally listed patient safety organization (PSO), the American Society for Radiation Oncology and the American Association of Physicists in Medicine established RO-ILS: Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System (RO-ILS). This paper provides an overview of the RO-ILS background, development, structure, and workflow, as well as examples of preliminary data and lessons learned. RO-ILS is actively collecting, analyzing, and reporting patient safety events. RESULTS: As of February 24, 2015, 46 institutions have signed contracts with Clarity PSO, with 33 contracts pending. Of these, 27 sites have entered 739 patient safety events into local database space, with 358 events (48%) pushed to the national database. CONCLUSIONS: To establish an optimal safety culture, radiation oncology departments should establish formal systems for incident learning that include participation in a nationwide incident learning program such as RO-ILS.
Asunto(s)
Oncología por Radiación/normas , Humanos , Administración de la SeguridadRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Physician peer review seeks to improve the quality of care through the evaluation of physician performance, specifically medical decision making and technical expertise. To establish current peer review practice patterns, evaluate interest in recommendations for peer review, and establish a framework for future recommendations, the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) surveyed its physician members. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A radiation oncology-specific peer review survey instrument was developed, formally tested, and found to meet established levels of reliability and validity. The final instrument was delivered using a web-based survey platform including reminders. All ASTRO physician-members and members-in-training worldwide were invited by email to participate. RESULTS: A total of 5674 physicians were contacted starting in January 2013. A total of 572 physicians participated (10%) yielding a ±4% margin of error. Those responding were split evenly between academic providers and private practice and others. The median time since training=16 years, median number of new patients per year=215, and median practice size=6 physicians; 83% of respondents were involved in peer review and 75% were comfortable with their program. Of those involved, 65% report doing some review before radiation begins. Of patients treated by these physicians, 56% are reviewed before treatment. Peer review elements reviewed include overall treatment strategy (86%), dose and fractionation (89%), contouring (59%), and isodose or dose-volume histogram (75%). Ninety percent of physicians have changed radiation plans because of peer review. These providers make changes in 7%-10% of cases. Seventy-four percent of physicians agree that ASTRO should make formal peer review recommendations, with 7% in opposition. CONCLUSIONS: This survey suggests that peer review in radiation oncology is common and leads to changes in management in a meaningful fraction of cases. There is much variation in the manner of conducting, and reported utility of, peer review. The majority of ASTRO physician members support formal recommendations and guidance on peer review.
Asunto(s)
Revisión por Pares/métodos , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Oncología por Radiación/normas , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Humanos , Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de SaludRESUMEN
PURPOSE: There are multiple current strategies for breast radiotherapy (RT). The alignment of physician practice patterns with best evidence and patient preferences will enhance patient autonomy and improve cancer care. However, there is little information describing patient preferences for breast RT and physician practice patterns. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using a reliable and valid instrument, we assessed the preferences of 5,000 randomly selected women (with or without cancer) undergoing mammography. To assess practice patterns, 2,150 randomly selected physician-members of American Society for Radiation Oncology were surveyed. RESULTS: A total of 1,807 women (36%) and 363 physicians (17%) provided usable responses. The 95% confidence interval is < ± 2.3% for patients and < ± 5.3% for physicians. Patient preferences were hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HF-WBI) 62%, partial breast irradiation (PBI) 28%, and conventionally fractionated whole breast irradiation (CF-WBI) 10%. By comparison, 82% of physicians use CF-WBI for more than 2/3 of women and 56% never use HF-WBI. With respect to PBI, 62% of women preferred three-dimensional (3D)-PBI and 38% favor brachytherapy-PBI, whereas 36% of physicians offer 3D-PBI and 66% offer brachytherapy-PBI. 70% of women prefer once-daily RT over 10 days vs. twice-daily RT over 5 days. 55% of physicians who use PBI do not offer PBI on clinical trial. CONCLUSIONS: HF-WBI, while preferred by patients and supported by evidence, falls behind the unproven and less preferred strategy of PBI in clinical practice. There is a discrepancy between women's preferences for PBI modality and type of PBI offered by physicians. Further alignment is needed between practice patterns, patient preferences, and clinical evidence.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/radioterapia , Prioridad del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Oncología por Radiación/estadística & datos numéricos , Braquiterapia/métodos , Braquiterapia/estadística & datos numéricos , Intervalos de Confianza , Demografía , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Femenino , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Radioterapia Conformacional/métodos , Radioterapia Conformacional/estadística & datos numéricos , Sociedades Médicas , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Routine assessment was made of tumor metabolic activity as measured by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in Stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This report describes PET correlates prospectively collected after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with medically inoperable NSCLC. METHODS AND MATERIALS: 14 consecutive patients with medically inoperable Stage I NSCLC were enrolled. All patients received SBRT to 60-66 Gy in three fractions. Patients underwent serial planned FDG-PET/computed tomography fusion imaging before SBRT and at 2, 26, and 52 weeks after SBRT. RESULTS: With median follow-up of 30.2 months, no patients experienced local failure. One patient developed regional failure, 1 developed distant failure, and 1 developed a second primary. The median tumor maximum standardized uptake value (SUV(max)) before SBRT was 8.70. The median SUV(max) values at 2, 26, and 52 weeks after SBRT were 6.04, 2.80, and 3.58, respectively. Patients with low pre-SBRT SUV were more likely to experience initial 2-week rises in SUV, whereas patients with high pre-SBRT SUV commonly had SUV declines 2 weeks after treatment (p = 0.036). Six of 13 patients had primary tumor SUV(max) >3.5 at 12 months after SBRT but remained without evidence of local disease failure on further follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of patients may have moderately elevated FDG-PET SUV(max) at 12 months without evidence of local failure on further follow-up. Thus, slightly elevated PET SUV(max) should not be considered a surrogate for local treatment failure. Our data do not support routine serial FDG-PET/computed tomography for follow-up of patients receiving SBRT for Stage I NSCLC.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas , Fluorodesoxiglucosa F18 , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones/métodos , Radiofármacos , Radiocirugia/métodos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/diagnóstico por imagen , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/patología , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/cirugía , Fraccionamiento de la Dosis de Radiación , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patología , Neoplasias Pulmonares/cirugía , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Proyectos Piloto , Estudios Prospectivos , Radiocirugia/efectos adversosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To investigate the utility of positron emission tomography (PET) in patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) on prospective institutional trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with medically inoperable stage I NSCLC who participated in prospective phase I and II trials of SBRT, had >or=2 years of follow-up, and received FDG-PET imaging are the focus of this evaluation. Fifty-seven of 58 patients received pre-SBRT FDG-PET to confirm stage I status. All patients received stereotactic body frame immobilization and treatment with 7-10 photon beams. SBRT total doses ranged from 24 to 72Gy in three fractions. No elective nodal irradiation was undertaken. Regular follow-up with planned CT imaging was performed on all patients. Post-SBRT FDG-PET was not mandated by protocol and was typically ordered upon concern for disease recurrence. Thirty-eight post-SBRT PET studies were performed in 28 patients at a median 17.3 months following SBRT. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 42.5 months, the 3-year actuarial overall survival and local control for this select subset of our SBRT experience were 48.9% and 74.8%, respectively. Pre-SBRT FDG-PET SUV did not predict 3-year overall survival or local control. Fourteen of 57 patients eventually failed in nodal stations by CT and/or PET. Isolated first site of failure was nodal in 6 patients (10%). Out of 28 patients with post-SBRT PET, 4 (14%) had delayed PET imaging (22-26 months after SBRT) showing moderate hypermetabolic activity (SUV 2.5-5.07), but no evidence of local, nodal, or distant recurrence by clinical examination and conventional imaging performed 20-26 months following these concerning PET findings. CONCLUSIONS: Isolated nodal recurrence following PET-staged I NSCLC treated with SBRT is uncommon. Moderate post-SBRT PET hypermetabolic activity may persist 2 years following treatment without definite evidence of recurrence. Further study is needed to confirm these results in larger populations with longer follow-up.