Treatment and planning decisions in non-small cell carcinoma of the lung: an Australasian patterns of practice study

Moving towards process-based radiotherapy quality assurance using statistical process control

Monitoring Radiotherapy Quality Assurance (QA) using Statistical Process Control (SPC) methods has gained wide acceptance. The significance of understanding the SPC methodologies has increased among the medical physics community with the release of Task Group (TG) reports from the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) on patient-specific QA (PSQA) (TG-218) and Proton therapy QA (TG-224). Even though these reports recommend using SPC for QA analysis, physicists have ambiguities and doubts in choosing proper SPC tools and methodologies. This review article summarises the utilisation of SPC methods for different Radiotherapy QAs published in the literature, such as PSQA, routine Linac QA and patient positional verification. QA analysis using SPC could assist the user in distinguishing between 'special' and 'routine' sources of variations in the QA, which can aid in reducing actions on false positive QA results. For improved PSQA monitoring, machine-specific, site-specific, and technique-specific Tolerance Limits and Action Limits derived from a two-stage SPC-based approach can be used. Adopting a combination of Shewhart's control charts and time-weighted control charts for routine Linac QA monitoring could add more insights to the QA process. Incorporating SPC tools into existing image review modules or introducing new SPC software packages specifically designed for clinical use can significantly enhance the image review process. Proper selection and having adequate knowledge of SPC tools are essential for efficient QA monitoring, which is a function of the type of QA data available, and the magnitude of process drift to be monitored.

Impact of Interobserver Variability in Manual Segmentation of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Applying Low-Rank Radiomic Representation on Computed Tomography

Simple Summary

Discovery of predictive and prognostic radiomic features in cancer is currently of great interest to the radiologic and oncologic community. Tumor phenotypic and prognostic information can be obtained by extracting features on tumor segmentations, and it is typically imaging analysts, physician trainees, and attending physicians who provide these labeled datasets for analysis. The potential impact of level and type of specialty training on interobserver variability in manual segmentation of NSCLC was examined. Although there was some variability in segmentation between readers, the subsequently extracted radiomic features were overall well correlated. High fidelity radiomic feature extraction relies on accurate feature extraction from imaging that produce robust prognostic and predictive radiomic NSCLC biomarkers. This study concludes that this goal can be obtained using segmenters of different levels of training and clinical experience.

Abstract

This study tackles interobserver variability with respect to specialty training in manual segmentation of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Four readers included for segmentation are: a data scientist (BY), a medical student (LS), a radiology trainee (MH), and a specialty-trained radiologist (SK) for a total of 293 patients from two publicly available databases. Sørensen–Dice (SD) coefficients and low rank Pearson correlation coefficients (CC) of 429 radiomics were calculated to assess interobserver variability. Cox proportional hazard (CPH) models and Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves of overall survival (OS) prediction for each dataset were also generated. SD and CC for segmentations demonstrated high similarities, yielding, SD: 0.79 and CC: 0.92 (BY-SK), SD: 0.81 and CC: 0.83 (LS-SK), and SD: 0.84 and CC: 0.91 (MH-SK) in average for both databases, respectively. OS through the maximal CPH model for the two datasets yielded c-statistics of 0.7 (95% CI) and 0.69 (95% CI), while adding radiomic and clinical variables (sex, stage/morphological status, and histology) together. KM curves also showed significant discrimination between high- and low-risk patients (p-value < 0.005). This supports that readers’ level of training and clinical experience may not significantly influence the ability to extract accurate radiomic features for NSCLC on CT. This potentially allows flexibility in the training required to produce robust prognostic imaging biomarkers for potential clinical translation.

The Impact of Transitioning to Prospective Contouring and Planning Rounds as Peer Review

Purpose

Our peer-review program previously consisted of weekly chart rounds performed before the end of the first week of treatment. In order to perform peer review before the start of treatment when possible, we implemented daily prospective contouring and planning rounds (CPR).

Methods and materials

At the time of computed tomography simulation, patients were categorized by the treating physician into 5 treatment groups based on urgency and complexity (ie, standard, urgent, palliative nonemergent, emergent, and special procedures). A scoring system was developed to record the outcome of case presentations, and the results of the CPR case presentations were compared with the time period 2.5 years before CPR implementation, for which peer review was performed retrospectively.

Results

CPR was implemented on October 1, 2015, and a total of 4759 patients presented for care through May 31, 2018. The majority were in the standard care path (n = 3154; 66.3%). Among the remainder of the charts, 358 (7.5%), 430 (9.0%), and 179 (3.8%) cases were in the urgent, nonemergent palliative, and emergent care paths, respectively. The remaining patients were in the special procedures group, representing brachytherapy and stereotactic radiosurgery. A total of 125 patients (2.6%) required major changes and were re-presented after the suggested modifications, 102 patients (2.1%) had minor recommendations that did not require a repeat presentation, and 247 cases (5.2%) had minor documentation-related recommendations that did not require editing of the contours. In the 2.5 years before the implementation, records of a total of 1623 patients were reviewed, and only 9 patients (0.6%) had minor recommendation for change. The remainder was noted as complete agreement.

Conclusions

Contouring and planning rounds were successfully implemented at our clinic. Pretreatment and, most often, preplanning review of contours and directives allows for a more detailed review and changes to be made early on in the treatment planning process. When compared with historical case presentations, the CPR method made our peer review more thorough and improved standardization.

Extracting fuzzy classification rules from texture segmented HRCT lung images

Automatic tools for detection and identification of lung and lesion from high-resolution CT (HRCT) are becoming increasingly important both for diagnosis and for delivering high-precision radiation therapy. However, development of robust and interpretable classifiers still presents a challenge especially in case of non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) patients. In this paper, we have attempted to devise such a classifier by extracting fuzzy rules from texture segmented regions from HRCT images of NSCLC patients. A fuzzy inference system (FIS) has been constructed starting from a feature extraction procedure applied on overlapping regions from the same organs and deriving simple if-then rules so that more linguistically interpretable decisions can be implemented. The proposed method has been tested on 138 regions extracted from CT scan images acquired from patients with lung cancer. Assuming two classes of tissues C1 (healthy tissues) and C2 (lesion) as negative and positive, respectively; preliminary results report an AUC = 0.98 for lesions and AUC = 0.93 for healthy tissue, with an optimal operating condition related to sensitivity = 0.96, and specificity = 0.98 for lesions and sensitivity 0.99, and specificity = 0.94 for healthy tissue. Finally, the following results have been obtained: false-negative rate (FNR) = 6 % (C1), FNR = 2 % (C2), false-positive rate (FPR) = 4 % (C1), FPR = 3 % (C2), true-positive rate (TPR) = 94 %, (C1) and TPR = 98 % (C2).

Conformal radiotherapy for lung cancer: interobservers' variability in the definition of gross tumor volume between radiologists and radiotherapists

Background

Conformal external radiotherapy aims to improve tumor control by boosting tumor dose, reducing morbidity and sparing healthy tissues. To meet this objective careful visualization of the tumor and adjacent areas is required. However, one of the major issues to be solved in this context is the volumetric definition of the targets. This study proposes to compare the gross volume of lung tumors as delineated by specialized radiologists and radiotherapists of a cancer center.

Methods

Chest CT scans of a total of 23 patients all with non-small cell lung cancer, not submitted to surgery, eligible and referred to conformal radiotherapy on the Hospital A. C. Camargo (São Paulo, Brazil), during the year 2004 were analyzed. All cases were delineated by 2 radiologists and 2 radiotherapists. Only the gross tumor volume and the enlarged lymph nodes were delineated. As such, four gross tumor volumes were achieved for each one of the 23 patients.

Results

There was a significant positive correlation between the 2 measurements (among the radiotherapists, radiologists and intra-class) and there was randomness in the distribution of data within the constructed confidence interval.

Conclusion

There were no significant differences in the definition of gross tumor volume between radiologists and radiotherapists.

Basal cell carcinoma of the nose: an Australian and New Zealand radiation oncology patterns-of-practice study

Patients with a basal cell carcinoma (BCC) of the nose may be recommended radiotherapy (RT) with a wide variation in techniques and prescribed dose fractionation schedules between clinicians. The aim of this study was to ascertain variability in the patterns of practice among Australian and New Zealand radiation oncologists (ROs) when treating BCC arising on the nose. A postal survey was sent to 222 practising ANZ ROs detailing 12 different clinical scenarios of a BCC arising on the nose. The treatment selected for each scenario was analysed according to clinician's attitudes, training, experience and the availability of resources. The response rate was 74% (165/222) with 90 respondents treating non-melanoma skin cancer. Training was perceived to have a marked influence on treatment practice by most (79%). In total, 72% of ROs were 'very certain' in their choice of a dose fractionation schedule for obtaining local control and 61% for a satisfactory cosmetic outcome, respectively. Most (76%) favoured low-voltage photons over electrons as the optimal method of treatment, although for certain clinical scenarios most would use electrons. Dose fractionation schedules were highly variable with a lower total dose and hypofractionation favoured for older patients. Low-voltage photons were favoured for the T1 BCC and electrons for the T2 and T4 BCC. Nearly one-third of the ROs chose megavoltage photons for the T4 lesion. There is marked variation in treatment practices in terms of recommending RT over other treatment options, the choice of RT method, the dose fractionation schedule, the extent of field margins and the point of dose prescription.

Early clinical evaluation of a novel three-dimensional structure delineation software tool (SCULPTER) for radiotherapy treatment planning

Modern radiotherapy treatment planning (RTP) necessitates increased delineation of target volumes and organs at risk. Conventional manual delineation is a laborious, time-consuming and subjective process. It is prone to inconsistency and variability, but has the potential to be improved using automated segmentation algorithms. We carried out a pilot clinical evaluation of SCULPTER (Structure Creation Using Limited Point Topology Evidence in Radiotherapy) - a novel prototype software tool designed to improve structure delineation for RTP. Anonymized MR and CT image datasets from patients who underwent radiotherapy for bladder or prostate cancer were studied. An experienced radiation oncologist used manual and SCULPTER-assisted methods to create clinically acceptable organ delineations. SCULPTER was also tested by four other RTP professionals. Resulting contours were compared by qualitative inspection and quantitatively by using the volumes of the structures delineated and the time taken for completion. The SCULPTER tool was easy to apply to both MR and CT images and diverse anatomical sites. SCULPTER delineations closely reproduced manual contours with no significant volume differences detected, but SCULPTER delineations were significantly quicker (p<0.05) in most cases. In conclusion, clinical application of SCULPTER resulted in rapid and simple organ delineations with equivalent accuracy to manual methods, demonstrating proof-of-principle of the SCULPTER system and supporting its potential utility in RTP.

O uso de FDG-PET/TC scan no planejamento da radioterapia em câncer do pulmão não de pequenas células

Radioterapia é uma importante alternativa de tratamento curativo em pacientes com câncer do pulmão não de pequenas células. Entretanto, pulmões são muito sensíveis à radiação e isto aumenta a importância em se delimitar o volume a ser irradiado com precisão. Ultimamente, a tomografia por emissão de pósitron (PET) e a tomografia computadorizada (TC) são feitas de forma combinada, e a literatura sugere que seu impacto no planejamento da radioterapia é significativo. Ao se utilizar exames de PET/TC no planejamento da radioterapia é importante reconhecer e adaptar-se às diferenças entre os equipamentos de diagnóstico e de tratamento. Este texto discute alguns dos problemas técnicos que devem ser resolvidos quando se incorpora PET no planejamento radioterápico.

Variability of gross tumor volume delineation in head-and-neck cancer using CT and PET/CT fusion

PURPOSE

To assess the need for gross tumor volume (GTV) delineation protocols in head-and-neck cancer (HNC) treatment planning by use of positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) fusion imaging. Assessment will consist of interobserver and intermodality variation analysis.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Sixteen HNC patients were accrued for the study. Four physicians (2 neuroradiologists and 2 radiation oncologists) contoured GTV on 16 patients. Physicians were asked to contour GTV on the basis of the CT alone, and then on PET/CT fusion. Statistical analysis included analysis of variance for interobserver variability and Student's paired sample t test for intermodality and interdisciplinary variability. A Boolean pairwise analysis was included to measure degree of overlap.

RESULTS

Near-significant variation occurred across physicians' CT volumes (p = 0.09) and significant variation occurred across physicians' PET/CT volumes (p = 0.0002). The Boolean comparison correlates with statistical findings. One radiation oncologist's PET/CT fusion volumes were significantly larger than his CT volumes (p < 0.01). Conversely, the other radiation oncologist's CT volumes tended to be larger than his fusion volumes (p = 0.06). No significant interdisciplinary variation was seen. Significant disagreement occurred between radiation oncologists.

CONCLUSION

Significant differences in GTV delineation were found between multiple observers contouring on PET/CT fusion. The need for delineation protocol has been confirmed.

Observer variation in target volume delineation of lung cancer related to radiation oncologist–computer interaction: A ‘Big Brother’ evaluation

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To evaluate the process of target volume delineation in lung cancer for optimization of imaging, delineation protocol and delineation software.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eleven radiation oncologists (observers) from five different institutions delineated the Gross Tumor Volume (GTV) including positive lymph nodes of 22 lung cancer patients (stages I-IIIB) on CT only. All radiation oncologist-computer interactions were recorded with a tool called 'Big Brother'. For each radiation oncologist and patient the following issues were analyzed: delineation time, number of delineated points and corrections, zoom levels, level and window (L/W) settings, CT slice changes, use of side windows (coronal and sagittal) and software button use.

RESULTS

The mean delineation time per GTV was 16 min (SD 10 min). The mean delineation time for lymph node positive patients was on average 3 min larger (P = 0.02) than for lymph node negative patients. Many corrections (55%) were due to L/W change (e.g. delineating in mediastinum L/W and then correcting in lung L/W). For the lymph node region, a relatively large number of corrections was found (3.7 corr/cm2), indicating that it was difficult to delineate lymph nodes. For the tumor-atelectasis region, a relative small number of corrections was found (1.0 corr/cm2), indicating that including or excluding atelectasis into the GTV was a clinical decision. Inappropriate use of L/W settings was frequently found (e.g. 46% of all delineated points in the tumor-lung region were delineated in mediastinum L/W settings). Despite a large observer variation in cranial and caudal direction of 0.72 cm (1 SD), the coronal and sagittal side windows were not used in 45 and 60% of the cases, respectively. For the more difficult cases, observer variation was smaller when the coronal and sagittal side windows were used.

CONCLUSIONS

With the 'Big Brother' tool a method was developed to trace the delineation process. The differences between observers concerning the delineation style were large. This study led to recommendations on how to improve delineation accuracy by adapting the delineation protocol (guidelines for L/W use) and delineation software (double window with lung and mediastinum L/W settings at the same time, enforced use of coronal and sagittal views) and including FDG-PET information (lymph nodes and atelectasis).

Volumetric Uncertainty in Radiotherapy

The technologies available to identify anatomical structures (including radiotherapy target and normal tissue 'volumes'), and to deliver dose accurately to these volumes, have improved significantly in the past decade. However, the ability of clinicians to identify volumes accurately and consistently in patients still suffers from uncertainties that arise from human error, inadequate training, lack of consensus on the derivation of volumes and inadequate characterisation of the accuracy and specificity of imaging technologies. Inadequate volume definition of a target can result in treatment failure and, consequently, disease progression; excessive volume may also lead to unnecessary patient injury. This is a serious problem in routine clinical care. In the context of large multi-centre clinical trials, uncertainty and inconsistency in tissue-volume reporting will be carried through to the analysis of treatment effect on outcome, which will subsequently influence the treatment of future patients. Strategies need to be set in place to ensure that the abilities and consistency of clinicians in defining volumes are aligned with the ability of new technologies to present volumetric information. This review seeks to define the concept of volumetric uncertainty and propose a conceptual model that has these errors evaluated and responded to separately. Specifically, we will explore the major causes, consequences of, and possible remediation of volumetric uncertainty, from the point of view of a multidisciplinary radiotherapy clinical environment.

Radiotherapy quality assurance: time for everyone to take it seriously

Like high-risk industries, radiotherapy requires intense attention to detail, alertness, precision, and adequate human and material resources to minimise the risk of irreversible consequences. Clinical trials data such as that generated by the Quality Assurance programme of the Radiotherapy Group of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) in this issue of the Journal have been instrumental in identifying problems with technical quality, the understanding of which can have a direct impact on improving the quality of care in the community. Consistency in absolute dosimetry, dose delivery, volume definition and reproducibility are paramount in radiotherapy quality assurance and have become even more important with the advent of conformal therapy. Extension of these principles to other oncological disciplines has added an additional dimension of improvement. Waiting times and measures of access must also be monitored if overall quality at the population level is to be assessed and enhanced. Lessons should be learned from clinical trials methodology in the use of intervention-specific guidelines, physician education and real time audit of treatment planning decisions. In the future, novel approaches, such as web based systems may further improve education and audit. Wider application and audit of evidence-based management guidelines about the use radiotherapy will bring to standard clinical practice the quality benefits that are considered a basic minimum standard for clinical trials.

Definition of gross tumor volume in lung cancer: inter-observer variability

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To determine the inter-observer variation in gross tumor volume (GTV) definition in lung cancer, and its clinical relevance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five clinicians involved in lung cancer were asked to define GTV on the planning CT scan of eight patients. Resulting GTVs were compared on the base of geometric volume, dimensions and extensions. Judgement of invasion of lymph node (LN) regions was evaluated using the ATS/LCSG classification of LN. Clinical relevance of the variation was studied through 3D-dosimetry of standard conformal plans: volume of critical organs (heart, lungs, esophagus, spinal cord) irradiated at toxic doses, 95% isodose volumes of GTVs, normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP) and tumor control probabilities (TCP) were compared for evaluation of observer variability.

RESULTS

Before evaluation of observer variability, critical review of planning CT scan led to up- (two cases) and downstaging (one case) of patients as compared to the respective diagnostic scans. The defined GTVs showed an inter-observer variation with a ratio up to more than 7 between maximum and minimum geometric content. The dimensions of the primary tumor had inter-observer ranges of 4.2 (transversal), 7.9 (cranio-caudal) and 5.4 (antero-posterior) cm. Extreme extensions of the GTVs (left, right, cranial, caudal, anterior and posterior) varied with ranges of 2.8-7.3 cm due to inter-observer variation. After common review, only 63% of involved lymph node regions were delineated by the clinicians (i.e. 37% are false negative). Twenty-two percent of drawn in lymph node regions were accepted to be false positive after review. In the conformal plans, inter-observer ranges of irradiated normal tissue volume were on average 12%, with a maximum of 66%. The probability (in the population of all conformal plans) of irradiating at least 95% of the GTV with at least 95% of the nominal treatment dose decreased from 96 to 88% when swapping the matched GTV with an unmatched one. The average (over all patients) inter-observer range in NTCP varied from 5% (spinal cord) to 20% (ipsilateral lung), whereas the maximal ranges amounted 16% (spinal cord) to 45% (heart). The average TCP amounted 51% with an average range of 2% (maximally 5%) in case of matched GTVs. These values shifted to 42% (average TCP) with an average range of 14% (maximally 31%) when defining unmatched GTVs. Four groups of causes are suggested for the large inter-observer variation: (1) problems of methodology; (2) impossible differentiation between pathologic structures and tumor; or (3) between normal structures and tumor, and (4); lack of knowledge. Only the minority of these can be resolved objectively. For most of the causal factors agreements have to be made between clinicians, intra- and inter-departmentally. Some of the factors will never be unequivocally solved.

CONCLUSIONS

GTV definition in lung cancer is one of the cornerstones in quality assurance of radiotherapy. The large inter-observer variation in GTV definition jeopardizes comparison between clinicians, institutes and treatments.

Observer variation in contouring gross tumor volume in patients with poorly defined non-small-cell lung tumors on CT: the impact of 18FDG-hybrid PET fusion

PURPOSE

To quantify interobserver variation in gross tumor volume (GTV) localization using CT images for patients with non-small-cell lung carcinoma and poorly defined tumors on CT and to determine whether variability would be reduced if coregistered 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose (FDG)-hybrid positron emission tomography (PET) with CT images were used.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Prospectively, 30 patients with non-small-cell lung carcinoma had CT and FDG-hybrid PET examinations in radiation treatment position on the same day. Images were coregistered using eight fiducial markers. Guidelines were established for contouring GTVs. Three radiation oncologists performed localization independently. The coefficient of variation was used to assess interobserver variability.

RESULTS

The size of the GTV defined showed great variation among observers. The mean ratios of largest to smallest GTV were 2.31 and 1.56 for CT only and for CT/FDG coregistered data, respectively. The addition of PET reduced this ratio in 23 of 30 cases and increased it in 7. The mean coefficient of variation for GTV based on the combined modalities was significantly smaller (p < 0.01) than that for CT data only.

CONCLUSIONS

High observer variability in CT-based definition of the GTV can occur. A more consistent definition of the GTV can often be obtained if coregistered FDG-hybrid PET images are used.

Breast radiotherapy: an Australasian survey of current treatment techniques

Prior to the dissemination of evidence-based quality assurance guidelines, the Australian National Breast Cancer Centre Radiation Oncology Group conducted a process survey of breast radiotherapy treatment delivery throughout Australia. A process survey was conducted in August/September 1998. This survey comprised questions enquiring about treatment positioning, immobilization devices used, planning strategies, simulation and dose computation methods, treatment prescribing and quality assurance. The survey was sent to 123 Australian fellows of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) and to the six directors of New Zealand radiation oncology departments. Fifty-eight questionnaires were returned of which 38 were received from individuals and 20 represented a reply from a department with a routine breast radiotherapy protocol (representing an average of 4.5 radiation oncologists per reply). The study identified great consistency between departments with respect to dose and fractionation for breast tangents. The study also identified some areas of treatment planning and delivery that varied between individuals or departments. These mainly reflected a lack of evidence in some areas of radiotherapy treatment delivery. The circulation of quality assurance guidelines will perhaps improve consistency of radiotherapy techniques in which studies have identified that technique changes improve outcome. This study identified that these areas include the taking of simulation and port films and the use of off-axis dosimetry. Further studies are required for areas of radiotherapy treatment delivery that have little evidence for or against their implementation.

Mantle planning: report of the Australasian Radiation Oncology Lymphoma Group film survey and consensus guidelines

The purpose of the present paper was to measure the variation in mantle planning in Australia and New Zealand. A chest X-ray (CXR) of a patient in the supine position with a neck node marked by wire was sent to every radiation oncologist in Australia and New Zealand. They were to mark on the CXR the lung blocks that they would use to treat this patient, assuming that the patient had stage IA Hodgkin's disease. These marks were compared with a small sample of radiologists who were asked to define the mediastinum on the same CXR. Radiation oncologists were also asked to complete a short questionnaire about other modifications to their treatment fields and their experience with this technique. One hundred and six films were sent out and 44 radiation oncologists replied. There was a maximum variation in the placement of their lung blocks of 6 cm. Half of the lung blocks were within a 2-cm range. One respondent said they would not use a mantle field to treat this patient. Mediastinal coverage was inadequate in at least 50% of cases. There was a very large variation in mantle field planning practices within Australia and New Zealand. For this reason Australasian Radiation Oncology Lymphoma Group has produced consensus guidelines for mantle block design. These are appended to the present paper.

Evaluation of a target contouring protocol for 3D conformal radiotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

A protocol for the contouring of target volumes in lung cancer was implemented. Subsequently, a study was performed in order to determine the intra and inter-clinician variations in contoured volumes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Six radiation oncologists (RO) contoured the gross tumour volume (GTV) and/or clinical target volume (CTV), and planning target volume (PTV) for three patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), on two separate occasions. These were, respectively, a well-circumscribed T1N0M0 lesion, an irregularly shaped T2N0M0 lesion, and a T2N2M0 tumour. Detailed diagnostic radiology reports were provided and contours were entered into a 3D planning system. The target volumes were calculated and beams-eye view (BEV) plots were generated to visualise differences in contouring. A software tool was used to expand the GTV and CTV in three dimensions for an automatically derived PTV.

RESULTS

Significant inter-RO variations in contoured target volumes were observed for all patients, and these were greater than intra-RO differences. The ratio of the largest to smallest contoured volume ranged from 1.6 for the GTV in the T1N0 lesion, to 2.0 for the PTV in the T2N2 lesion. The BEV plots revealed significant inter-RO variations in contouring the mediastinal CTV. The PTV's derived using a 3D margin programme were larger than manually contoured PTV's. These variations did not correlate with the experience of ROs.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the use of an institutional contouring protocol, significant interclinician variations persist in contouring target volumes in NSCLC. Additional measures to decrease such variations should be incorporated into clinical trials.

Intra- and inter-observer variability in contouring prostate and seminal vesicles: implications for conformal treatment planning

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Accurate contouring of the clinical target volume (CTV) is a fundamental prerequisite for successful conformal radiotherapy of prostate cancer. The purpose of this study was to investigate intra- and inter-observer variability in contouring prostate (P) and seminal vesicles (SV) and its impact on conformal treatment planning in our working conditions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Inter-observer variability was investigated by asking five well-trained radiotherapists of contouring on CT images the P and the SV of six supine-positioned patients previously treated with conformal techniques. Short-term intra-observer variability was assessed by asking the radiotherapists to contour the P and SV of one patient for a second time, just after the first contouring. The differences among the inserted volumes were considered for both intra- and inter-observer variability. Regarding intra-observer variability, the differences between the two inserted contours were estimated by taking the relative differences in correspondence to the CT slices on BEV plots (antero-posterior and left-right beams). Concerning inter-observer variability, the distances between the internal and external envelopes of the inserted contours (named projected diagnostic uncertainties or PDUs) and the distances from the mean inserted contours (named mean contour distances or MCDs) were measured from BEV plots (i.e. parallel to the CT slices).

RESULTS

Intra-observer variability was relatively small (the average percentage variation of the volume was approximately 5%; SD of the differences measured on BEV plots within 1.8 mm). Concerning inter-observer variability, the percentage SD of the inserted volumes ranged from 10 to 18%. Differences equal to 1 cm in the cranio-caudal extension of P + SV were found in four out of six patients. The largest inter-observer variability was found when considering the anterior margin in the left-right beam of P top (MCD = 7.1 mm, 1 SD). Relatively high values for MCDs were also found for P bottom, for the posterior and lateral margins of P top (2.6 and 3.1 mm, respectively, I SD) and for the anterior margin of SV (2.8 mm, 1 SD). Relatively small values were found for P central (from 1.4 to 2.0 mm, 1 SD) and the posterior margin of SV (1.5 mm, 1 SD).

CONCLUSIONS

The application of larger margins taking inter-observer variability into account should be taken into consideration for the anterior and the lateral margins of SV and P top and for the lateral margin of P. The impact of short-term intra-observer variability does not seem to be relevant.

Locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: do we know the questions? A survey of randomized trials from 1966-1993

BACKGROUND

Substantial lack of consensus exists regarding the appropriate management of patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The purpose of the present study was to investigate why published clinical trials have not resolved this uncertainty, and to examine the potential of current randomized studies to resolve the major controversies regarding the treatment of locally advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

A literature search identified papers addressing the therapy of locally advanced NSCLC published in the English language from January 1966 through May 1993. The treatment modalities studied in these trials were recorded. The CD-ROM Physician Data Query database was used to identify ongoing studies in NSCLC. For phase III trials in stage III NSCLC, the treatment modalities, eligibility criteria, outcome measures, and statistical considerations were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 164 reports of phase III trials were identified, representing 11% of the 1516 publications meeting search criteria. A wide range of comparisons have been reported; the number of study arms, the number of different modalities employed as control arms, and the number of modalities employed as investigational arms increased over time. Eighteen active phase III protocols open to patients with stage III NSCLC were identified. In trials which enrolled patients with stage IIIB disease, therapy in control arms employed six different strategies of surgery, radiation, or chemotherapy, alone or in combination, and investigational arms were equally heterogeneous. Variation was also present in the spectrum of disease stages studied, in patient eligibility criteria, and in the clinical outcome measures investigated. The magnitude of improvement in survival sought was varied in its absolute magnitude, in the selection of survival probability for the control arm, and in the time point of its evaluation.

IMPLICATIONS

We demonstrated diversity in research practice reflected in five major types of variation: (i) selection of control arms, (ii) selection of study investigational arms, (iii) choice of eligibility criteria, (iv) outcome measures selected for study, and (v) type and magnitude of benefit sought in the primary outcome measure. This variation has important implications regarding the inability of these studies to address some fundamental management controversies, and the ability to generalize the results of these trials to the general population of NSCLC patients. This diversity reflects a poorly defined process for setting the goals of clinical research. The generation of future trials may be improved by strategies that identify the most important controversies, identify important outcome measures, improve consensus among physicians, and provide the opportunity to incorporate patients' preferences in this clinical situation.

Hypofractionated irradiation for inoperable non-small cell lung cancer

A policy of palliative intent thoracic irradiation was prospectively evaluated in 38 consecutive patients referred for treatment of inoperable non-small cell lung cancer at a single institution. A target dose of 1700 cGy in two fractions 1 week apart was delivered. Characteristics of the treatment group revealed most (87%; 33/38) to be of good-excellent performance status with minimal weight loss before irradiation. Although three patients (8%) had initial metastatic disease, all had symptoms referable to the thorax with cough (71%), dyspnoea (55%), haemoptysis (39%), and chest wall pain (34%) being dominant. Following treatment, the relative risk of maintaining complete response with regard to each of these symptoms was 0.91, 0.40, 0.92 and 0.78, respectively. Overall 70% of patients maintained complete symptomatic response to time of death or last review. Uncorrected median survival was 35 weeks and was comparable to best international end-results for either palliative intent or curative intent radiation schedules. We conclude that the radiation regimen employed is safe, efficacious and eminently resource conscious. Recognition of patient groups who overwhelmingly derive no benefit from conventional fractionation schedules will streamline access to radiotherapy services of patients suitable for radical treatment.

Radiotherapy planning for lung cancer: can we do better?

Modern radiotherapy planning and treatment techniques allow the delivery of treatment with considerable geographic and dosimetric precision. Uncertainties and variability in the radiotherapy process prior to this stage, that is, localization of the target volume, has received little systematic study. The results of a planning study in non-small cell carcinoma of the lung are presented to highlight the possible variability in the planning process, both at an inter-clinician and intra-clinician level. The implications of this survey, both in terms of treatment outcome and training issues, are discussed.