Developing a national radiation oncology registry: From acorns to oaks

Palta, Jatinder; Efstathiou, Jason A.; Bekelman, Justin E.; Mutic, Sasa; Bogardus, Carl R.; McNutt, Todd; Gabriel, Peter; Lawton, Colleen A.; Zietman, Anthony L.; Rose, Christopher M.

doi:10.1016/j.prro.2011.06.002

Cited by 38 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…ASTRO and the Radiation Oncology Institute are embarking on the nascent National Radiation Oncology Registry (NROR), which aims to monitor and improve the quality of care for patients treated with radiation. 8788 In the state of Michigan, Blue Cross Blue Shield has funded a Collaborative Quality Initiative known as the Michigan Radiation Oncology Quality Consortium (MROQC). MROQC collects detailed dosimetric, clinical, and patient-reported outcomes data from multiple academic and community sites across the state, on all patients treated with adjuvant whole breast irradiation after lumpectomy and radiation therapy for lung cancer with curative intent.…”

Section: Data Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Considerations for Observational Research Using Large Data Sets in Radiation Oncology

Jagsi

Bekelman

Chen

et al. 2014

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The radiation oncology community has witnessed growing interest in observational research conducted using large-scale data sources such as registries and claims-based datasets. With the growing emphasis on observational analyses in health care, the radiation oncology community must possess a sophisticated understanding of the methodological considerations of such studies in order to evaluate evidence appropriately to guide practice and policy. Because observational research has unique features that distinguish it from clinical trials and other forms of traditional radiation oncology research, the Red Journal assembled a panel of experts in health services research to provide a concise and well-referenced review, intended to be informative for the lay reader, as well as for scholars who wish to embark on such research without prior experience. This review begins by discussing the types of research questions relevant to radiation oncology that large-scale databases may help illuminate. It then describes major potential data sources for such endeavors, including information regarding access and insights regarding the strengths and limitations of each. Finally, it provides guidance regarding the analytic challenges that observational studies must confront, along with discussion of the techniques that have been developed to help minimize the impact of certain common analytical issues in observational analysis. Features characterizing a well-designed observational study include clearly defined research questions, careful selection of an appropriate data source, consultation with investigators with relevant methodological expertise, inclusion of sensitivity analyses, caution not to overinterpret small but significant differences, and recognition of limitations when trying to evaluate causality. This review concludes that carefully designed and executed studies using observational data that possess these qualities hold substantial promise for advancing our understanding of many unanswered questions of importance to the field of radiation oncology.

show abstract

Section: Data Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Considerations for Observational Research Using Large Data Sets in Radiation Oncology

Jagsi

Bekelman

Chen

et al. 2014

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Open-source-based infrastructure to facilitate data sharing between multiple centres is becoming available. 16 A similar initiative is underway in North America under the auspices of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology to develop a National Radiation Oncology Registry 17 with the goals of providing real-time comparative effectiveness data and circumventing the financial perils of technological introduction without thorough assessment. 18 Another approach to gathering evidence sees the interim funding of new medical technologies for treating patients on clinical trials to generate the additional benefit and safety information needed to make an informed general-coverage decision.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group: Development of the Assessment of New Radiation Oncology Technology and Treatments (ANROTAT) Framework

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The study aim was to develop a generic framework to derive the parameters to populate health-economic models for the rapid evaluation of new techniques and technologies in radiation oncology. Methods: A draft framework was developed through horizon scanning for relevant technologies, literature review to identify framework models, and a workshop program with radiation oncology professionals, biostatisticians, health economists and consumers to establish the Framework's structure. It was tested using four clinical protocols, comparing intensity modulated with 3D conformal therapy (post-prostatectomy, anal canal and nasopharynx) and image-guided radiation therapy techniques with off-line review of portal imaging (in the intact prostate). Results: The draft generic research framework consisted of five sequential stages, each with a number of components, and was assessed as to its suitability for deriving the evidence needed to populate the decision-analytic models required for the health-economic evaluations. A final Framework was established from this experience for use by future researchers to provide evidence of clinical efficacy and cost-utility for other novel techniques. The four clinical treatment sites tested during the project were considered suitable to use in future evaluations. Conclusions: Development of a generic research framework to predict early and long-term clinical outcomes, combined with health-economic data, produced a generally applicable method for the rapid evaluation of new techniques and technologies in radiation oncology. Its application to further health technology assessments in the radiation oncology sector will allow further refinement and support its generalisability.

show abstract

“…At the same time, institutions should participate in radiation oncology practice accreditations, national protocols or data registry [11] for all treatment modalities, including prostate seed implant, allowing certain cases to be independently reviewed by the experts. Technical issues can then be identified and addressed through continuing education, training, and prompting ethical practice, in combination with regulatory efforts.…”

Section: Regulatory Standard and Qa Standardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis on the Reporting of Medical Events in Permanent Prostate Brachytherapy

Gao¹

2013

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developing a national radiation oncology registry: From acorns to oaks

Cited by 38 publications

References 18 publications

Considerations for Observational Research Using Large Data Sets in Radiation Oncology

Considerations for Observational Research Using Large Data Sets in Radiation Oncology

Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group: Development of the Assessment of New Radiation Oncology Technology and Treatments (ANROTAT) Framework

Analysis on the Reporting of Medical Events in Permanent Prostate Brachytherapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About