1 / 8

Radiation Therapy Trials - Quality Assurance: patient safety adherence to protocol constraints

Radiation Therapy Trials - Quality Assurance: patient safety adherence to protocol constraints uniformity of patient treatments efficient review of patient data. CTEP supported CLINICAL TRIAL QA CENTERS RTOG , Philadelphia (RTOG) QARC , Providence (COG, CALGB, SWOG, ECOG, ACOSOG, - - - )

nitara
Download Presentation

Radiation Therapy Trials - Quality Assurance: patient safety adherence to protocol constraints

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Radiation Therapy Trials - Quality Assurance: • patient safety • adherence to protocol constraints • uniformity of patient treatments • efficient review of patient data

  2. CTEP supported CLINICAL TRIAL QA CENTERS RTOG, Philadelphia (RTOG) QARC, Providence (COG, CALGB, SWOG, ECOG, ACOSOG, - - - ) RPC, MD Anderson (NSABP, GOG and physical dose QA for ALL groups) Review item: chart: images: study chairs: archives: Conventional Post Tx Few – hard copy- largely 2D Travel to QA center Hard copy- difficult searches Advanced tech trials Real-time and pre-Tx Gbytes of digital – multi modality Remote review by internet Digital full datasets ATC cooperative agreement developmental: ITC, RCET implementation: RTOG, QARC, RPC

  3. TLDs RPC IMRT Phantom Test • RPC tests ability of each institution to deliver IMRT by asking facility to: • Scan RPC phantom (CT, MRI, etc.) • Generate an IMRT plan according to defined protocol • Deliver treatment to phantom • Return phantom and dosimeters to RPC for evaluation. • Submit digital planning data to the ITC • RPC uses ATC Remote Review Tool to analyze data

  4. Phantom Results Comparison between institution’s plan and delivered dose. Criteria for agreement: 7% or 4 mm DTA * 30% of institutions failed H&N phantom on the first attempt

  5. RTOG 0022 Dry-Run TestPHASE I/II STUDY OF CONFORMAL ANDINTENSITY MODULATED IRRADIATION FOR OROPHARYNGEAL CANCER Of 18 Institutions* that were ultimately credentialed: • Number of submissions it took to meet credentialing guidelines • 6 institutions required 1 submission • 9 institutions required 2 submissions • 3 institutions required 3 submissions ( * these were large academic centers)

  6. NCI IMRT PROTOCOL REQUIREMENTS • 2002: guidelines for IMRT use in clinical trials were established to ensure the safety and comparability of these radiation treatments. • 2005: NCI announced revisions in these guidelines allowing use of IMRT for intra-thoracic treatments. • 2006: specific guidelines for use of IMRT for intra-thoracic treatment protocols with respiratory gating

  7. ISSUES (some) CONCERNING • PROTON THERAPY (multi-institutional trails) 1) No national standard for proton calibration 2) Two different calibration protocols in use among US facilities 3) RPC still developing methods for remote review of dosimetry ( TLD?) 4) RPC still developing a proton compatible phantom 5) ATC still verifying compatibility of proton Tx planning computers 6) Proton dose computation algorithms standards at the QA centers in addition to secondary neutron production modeling 7) Protocol specific: field placement verification,critical nature of heterogeneity corrections, GTV margins re: SOBP distal edge dosimetry and lateral penumbra,

More Related