2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.08.029
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimizing Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance in Clinical Trials: A TROG 08.03 RAVES Substudy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The planning studies also demonstrated that all centres could upload plans as required for the real-time review 27,28 that was part of the trial for all SABR patients. For the purpose of the trial during real-time review of plans, the report of the planning system (as signed by the oncologist) was taken as ground truth.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The planning studies also demonstrated that all centres could upload plans as required for the real-time review 27,28 that was part of the trial for all SABR patients. For the purpose of the trial during real-time review of plans, the report of the planning system (as signed by the oncologist) was taken as ground truth.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The rate of resubmissions decreased as the study progressed, indicating both the presence of an institutional learning curve and the importance of providing timely feedback to clinicians. The most common dosimetric violation was failure to meet rectal DVH constraints followed by PTV DVH violations [26] but it was difficult for the QA team to know if violations were due to poor planning or challenging anatomy (eg small rectum adjacent to CTV). Consequently, the comprehensive QA process was labour intensive and was at times a barrier to trial accrual [26] .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patients included in the trial were treated by 46 clinicians at 32 different hospitals [26] . All clinicians and sites had to submit a credentialing dummy run prior to recruitment as part of QA.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The Australia-led Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG) 02–02 study for patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer showed that non-protocol compliant plans had a locoregional control and overall survival decrement of 24% and 20%, respectively 26. Via TROG, Australia has become leaders in the use of approaches such as stringent credentialing and RT review (RTR) of RT contours and plans, with work in PC subsequently showing very low rates of protocol deviations both in the definitive prostate and post-prostatectomy irradiation scenarios 27 28…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%