Quality Control of Involved Field Radiotherapy in Patients With Early-Favorable (HD10) and Early-Unfavorable (HD11) Hodgkin's Lymphoma: An Analysis of the German Hodgkin Study Group

Quality control of involved-field radiotherapy for patients with early stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma based on a central prospective review

“…This aspect shows the importance of the QA program to guarantee that patients are treated in the correct protocol. The QA program revealed a significant impact onto the adequate RT treatment volume [13,14]. The IF-RT volume had to be enlarged less often and to be reduced more often in the present analysis.…”

“…There are further regions that were frequently corrected, such as the infraclavicular region or pulmonary hilar lymph nodes, which are sometimes difficult to interpret. Although the radiotherapy reference center organized and performed periodical training programs on the definition of involved-field radiotherapy and pitfalls in diagnostic radiology of malignant lymphoma for study participants at the annual meetings of the GHSG and at the German Society for Radiation Therapy (DE-GRO), there are still remarkable numbers of corrections [13,14]. This could be due to the fact that in German institutions, there is a high rate of fluctuation in staff members.…”

Current and future management of NK/T-cell lymphoma based on clinical trials

“…Detailed information on radiation planning (e.g., dose prescription, schedule, definition of target volume, and instructions to prevent adverse reactions in risk organs) should be reported to facilitate the general application of the results of a study. A quality assurance program of RT [24,25] is recommended to maintain the quality of RT in a prospective clinical trial for localized nasal NKTCL [26].…”

Point/counterpoint: early-stage Hodgkin lymphoma and the role of radiation therapy

“…First, the HD10 and HD11 trials included rigorous radiation therapy quality assurance measures. 48 Among the 60% of cases evaluated in HD10, coverage of the target volume was assessed as inadequate in 43%; in the 67% of cases assessed in HD11, coverage was deemed inadequate in 48%. These data suggest that practice variation exists.…”