Justin E. Bekelman

Head-and-Neck Target Delineation Among Radiation Oncology Residents After a Teaching Intervention: A Prospective, Blinded Pilot Study

PURPOSE We conducted this study to determine the feasibility of incorporating a teaching intervention on target delineation into the educational curriculum of a radiation oncology residency program and to assess the short-term effects on resident skills. METHODS AND MATERIALS The study schema consisted of a baseline evaluation, the teaching intervention, and a follow-up evaluation. At the baseline evaluation, the participants contoured three clinical tumor volumes (CTVs) (70 Gy, 59.4 Gy, and 54 Gy) on six contrast-enhanced axial computed tomography images of a de-identified patient with Stage T2N2bM0 squamous cell carcinoma of the right base of the tongue. The participants attended a series of head-and-neck oncology and anatomy seminars. The teaching intervention consisted of a didactic lecture and an interactive hands-on practical session designed to improve the knowledge and skills for target delineation in the head and neck. At the follow-up evaluation, the residents again contoured the CTVs. RESULTS Of the 14 eligible residents, 11 (79%) actually participated in the study. For all participants, but especially for those who had not had previous experience with head-and-neck target delineation, the teaching intervention was associated with improvement in the delineation of the node-negative neck (CTV 54 Gy contour). Regardless of clinical experience, participants had difficulty determining what should be included in the CTV 59.4 Gy contour to ensure adequate coverage of potential microscopic disease. CONCLUSION Incorporating a teaching intervention into the education curriculum of a radiation oncology residency program is feasible and was associated with short-term improvements in target delineation skills. Subsequent interventions will require content refinement, additional validation, longer term follow-up, and multi-institutional collaboration.

Quality of Radiotherapy Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials of Hodgkin's Lymphoma and Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE Standards for the reporting of radiotherapy details in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. Although radiotherapy (RT) is an important component of curative therapy for Hodgkins lymphoma (HL) and non-Hodgkins lymphoma (NHL), we postulated that RT reporting may be inadequate in Phase III HL and NHL trials. METHODS AND MATERIALS We searched PubMed and the Cochrane registry for reports of RCTs involving RT and either HL or NHL published between 1998 and 2007. We screened 133 titles and abstracts to identify relevant studies. We included a total of 61 reports. We assessed these reports for the presence of six quality measures: target volume, radiation dose, fractionation, radiation prescription, quality assurance (QA) process use, and adherence to QA (i.e., reporting of major or minor deviations). RESULTS Of 61 reports, 23 (38%) described the target volume. Of the 42 reports involving involved-field RT alone, only 8 (19%) adequately described the target volume. The radiation dose and fractionation was described in most reports (54 reports [89%] and 39 reports [64%], respectively). Thirteen reports specified the RT prescription point (21%). Only 12 reports (20%) described using a RT QA process, and 7 reports (11%) described adherence to the QA process. CONCLUSION Reporting of RT in HL and NHL RCTs is deficient. Because the interpretation, replication, and application of RCT results depend on adequate description and QA of therapeutic interventions, consensus standards for RT reporting should be developed and integrated into the peer-review process.