A systematic literature review of definitions and classification systems for radiotherapy innovation: A first step towards building a value-based assessment tool for radiation oncology

Vandemaele, Miet; Aznar, Marianne C.; Blanchard, Pierre; Borràs, Josep M.; Leech, Michelle; Aggarwal, Ajay; Lievens, Yolande

doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109602

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to demonstrating progress and identifying gaps in evidence for researchers, we believe that such a clear visualization will also help financial and medical policy decision makers to evaluate the development of evidence for MedTech innovations, giving them confidence that initial hypotheses and findings are correct and continue to be built on ( 8 ). We therefore propose it could be used within an RT value-based assessment framework, such as that being developed by the ESTRO-HERO project ( 9 ). This project highlights the lack of common definitions for radiation therapy innovations and is planning to define criteria for an RT specific value-based assessment tool.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Radiation Therapy Technology Evidence Matrix: a framework to visualize evidence development for innovations in radiation therapy

Edwards,

Luzzara,

Dell’Acqua

et al. 2024

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical evidence is crucial in enabling the judicious adoption of technological innovations in radiation therapy (RT). Pharmaceutical evidence development frameworks are not useful for understanding how technical advances are maturing. In this paper, we introduce a new framework, the Radiation Therapy Technology Evidence Matrix (rtTEM), that helps visualize how the clinical evidence supporting new technologies is developing. The matrix is a unique 2D model based on the R-IDEAL clinical evaluation framework. It can be applied to clinical hypothesis testing trials, as well as publications reporting clinical treatment. We present the rtTEM and illustrate its application, using emerging and mature RT technologies as examples. The model breaks down the type of claim along the vertical axis and the strength of the evidence for that claim on the horizontal axis, both of which are inherent in clinical hypothesis testing. This simplified view allows for stakeholders to understand where the evidence is and where it is heading. Ultimately, the value of an innovation is typically demonstrated through superiority studies, which we have divided into three key categories – administrative, toxicity and control, to enable more detailed visibility of evidence development in that claim area. We propose the rtTEM can be used to track evidence development for new interventions in RT. We believe it will enable researchers and sponsors to identify gaps in evidence and to further direct evidence development. Thus, by highlighting evidence looked for by key policy decision makers, the rtTEM will support wider, timely patient access to high value technological advances.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Radiation Therapy Technology Evidence Matrix: a framework to visualize evidence development for innovations in radiation therapy

Edwards,

Luzzara,

Dell’Acqua

et al. 2024

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Perhaps future efforts should develop care MR-linac pathways for patients with more substantial MR-related anxiety at baseline, in order to expand its benefits to more patients. Finally, our patient-centered outcomes captured using tools not specific to MR-linac may be crucial in evaluating other radiotherapy innovations and establishing value-based care [24] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospective evaluation of patient-reported anxiety and experiences with adaptive radiation therapy on an MR-linac

Moreira,

Li,

Berlin

et al. 2024

Technical Innovations & Patient Support in Radiation Oncolo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The European Society of Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), through the Health Economics in Radiation Oncology (HERO) project, has dedicated more than a decade, to strictly define the adequate number of staff personnel and technical equipment, [8][9][10] needed to provide high-quality radiation treatments. 11,12 This sharp increase in radiotherapy treatments will differ among European countries. There are differences in the number of cases needing radiotherapy 4,5 but also there is a wide variation of available Radiation/Clinical oncologist (RO/CO) per million inhabitants in Europe (mean 12.8; range 2.5-30.9).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Training in Radiation and Clinical Oncology in Europe

Lara,

Benstead,

Erikssen

2023

Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European population is strongly affected by cancer. Radiotherapy is roughly used in 50% of cancer patients in European countries. The increased cancer burden demands a new generation of radiation/clinical oncologist (RO/CO) that, besides a strong evidence-based oncological knowledge, will be ready for leadership in cancer care. The mutual recognition of professional qualifications of Radiation/Clinical Oncology in the EU needs training harmonization. The European Society of Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Union for Medical Specialties (UEMS) made important efforts toward a European Common Curriculum for RO/CO leadership in cancer care. If qualifications are mutually recognized, the training supporting these qualifications should be also harmonized. Since 1991, ESTRO produced several editions of the Core Curriculum in Radiation Oncology (1991, 2004, 2012, 2019). These Core Curricula were endorsed as European Training Requirements by the UEMS in 2004, 2013, and 2019. A core curriculum for clinical oncology was also produced to provide this harmonization tool to countries where radiation oncology is practiced inside the broader specialty of clinical oncology. New initiatives are in place to continuously adapt the training programs to the rapidly evolving cancer care organization.

show abstract

A systematic literature review of definitions and classification systems for radiotherapy innovation: A first step towards building a value-based assessment tool for radiation oncology

Cited by 4 publications

References 35 publications

The Radiation Therapy Technology Evidence Matrix: a framework to visualize evidence development for innovations in radiation therapy

The Radiation Therapy Technology Evidence Matrix: a framework to visualize evidence development for innovations in radiation therapy

Prospective evaluation of patient-reported anxiety and experiences with adaptive radiation therapy on an MR-linac

Training in Radiation and Clinical Oncology in Europe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About