Radiation dose is central to much of radiobiological research. Precision and accuracy of dose measurements and reporting of the measurement details should be sufficient to allow the work to be interpreted and repeated and to allow valid comparisons to be made, both in the same laboratory and by other laboratories. Despite this, a careful reading of published manuscripts suggests that measurement and reporting of radiation dosimetry and setup for radiobiology research is frequently inadequate, thus undermining the reliability and reproducibility of the findings. To address these problems and propose a course of action, the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) brought together representatives of the radiobiology and radiation physics communities in a workshop in September, 2011. The workshop participants arrived at a number of specific recommendations as enumerated in this paper and they expressed the desirability of creating dosimetry standard operating procedures (SOPs) for cell culture and for small and large animal experiments. It was also felt that these SOPs would be most useful if they are made widely available through mechanism(s) such as the web, where they can provide guidance to both radiobiologists and radiation physicists, be cited in publications, and be updated as the field and needs evolve. Other broad areas covered were the need for continuing education through tutorials at national conferences, and for journals to establish standards for reporting dosimetry. This workshop did not address issues of dosimetry for studies involving radiation focused at the sub-cellular level, internally-administered radionuclides, biodosimetry based on biological markers of radiation exposure, or dose reconstruction for epidemiological studies.

The purpose of this editorial is to provide a brief history of National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute (NCI) workshops as related to quantitative imaging within the oncology setting. The editorial will then focus on the recently supported NCI initiatives, including the Quantitative Imaging Network (QIN) initiative and its organizational structure, including planned research goals and deliverables. The publications in this issue of Translational Oncology come from many of the current members of this QIN research network.

No abstract

Radiotherapy is an effective, personalized cancer treatment that has benefited from technological advances associated with growing ability to identify and target tumors with accuracy and precision. As these advances have played a central role in the success of radiation therapy as a major component of comprehensive cancer care, the American Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) sponsored a workshop entitled “Technology for Innovation in Radiation Oncology”, which took place at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, MD, on June 13-14, 2013. The purpose of this workshop was to discuss emerging technology for the field and recognize areas for greater research investment. Expert clinicians and scientists discussed innovative technology in radiation oncology, in particular as to how they are being developed and translated to clinical practice in the face of current and future challenges and opportunities. Technologies encompassed topics in functional imaging, treatment devices, nanotechnology, as well as information technology. The technical, quality, and safety performance of these technologies were also considered. A major theme of the workshop was the growing importance of innovation in the domain of process automation and oncology informatics. The technologically-advanced nature of radiation therapy treatments pre-disposes radiation oncology research teams to take on informatics research initiatives. In addition, the discussion on technology development was balanced with a parallel conversation regarding the need for evidence of efficacy and effectiveness. The linkage between the need for evidence and the efforts in informatics research were clearly identified as synergistic.

BACKGROUND: Clinical testing of new therapeutic interventions requires comprehensive, high-quality preclinical data. Concerns regarding quality of preclinical data have been raised in recent reports. This report examines the data on the interaction of 10 drugs with radiation and provides recommendations for improving the quality, reproducibility, and utility of future studies. The drugs were AZD6244, bortezomib, 17-DMAG, erlotinib, gefitinib, lapatinib, oxaliplatin/Lipoxal, sunitinib (Pfizer, Corporate headquarters, New York, NY), thalidomide, and vorinostat. METHODS: In vitro and in vivo data were tabulated from 125 published papers, including methods, radiation and drug doses, schedules of administration, assays, measures of interaction, presentation and interpretation of data, dosimetry, and conclusions. RESULTS: In many instances, the studies contained inadequate or unclear information that would hamper efforts to replicate or intercompare the studies, and that weakened the evidence for designing and conducting clinical trials. The published reports on these drugs showed mixed results on enhancement of radiation response, except for sunitinib, which was ineffective. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for improved experimental design, execution, and reporting of preclinical testing of agents that are candidates for clinical use in combination with radiation. A checklist is provided for authors and reviewers to ensure that preclinical studies of drug-radiation combinations meet standards of design, execution, and interpretation, and report necessary information to ensure high quality and reproducibility of studies. Improved design, execution, common measures of enhancement, and consistent interpretation of preclinical studies of drug-radiation interactions will provide rational guidance for prioritizing drugs for clinical radiotherapy trials and for the design of such trials.