Sandy Kessel

PROCESSES FOR QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS IN RADIATION ONCOLOGY CLINICAL TRIALS

Quality assurance in radiotherapy (RT) has been an integral aspect of cooperative group clinical trials since 1970. In early clinical trials, data acquisition was nonuniform and inconsistent and computational models for radiation dose calculation varied significantly. Process improvements developed for data acquisition, credentialing, and data management have provided the necessary infrastructure for uniform data. With continued improvement in the technology and delivery of RT, evaluation processes for target definition, RT planning, and execution undergo constant review. As we move to multimodality image-based definitions of target volumes for protocols, future clinical trials will require near real-time image analysis and feedback to field investigators. The ability of quality assurance centers to meet these real-time challenges with robust electronic interaction platforms for imaging acquisition, review, archiving, and quantitative review of volumetric RT plans will be the primary challenge for future successful clinical trials.

Patterns of Relapse From a Phase 3 Study of Response-Based Therapy for Intermediate-Risk Hodgkin Lymphoma (AHOD0031): A Report From the Children's Oncology Group

PURPOSE The study was designed to determine whether response-based therapy improves outcomes in intermediate-risk Hodgkin lymphoma. We examined patterns of first relapse in the study. PATIENTS AND METHODS From September 2002 to July 2010, 1712 patients <22 years old with stage I-IIA with bulk, I-IIAE, I-IIB, and IIIA-IVA with or without doxorubicin, bleomycin, vincristine, etoposide, prednisone, and cyclophosphamide were enrolled. Patients were categorized as rapid (RER) or slow early responders (SER) after 2 cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vincristine, etoposide, prednisone, and cyclophosphamide (ABVE-PC). The SER patients were randomized to 2 additional ABVE-PC cycles or augmented chemotherapy with 21 Gy involved field radiation therapy (IFRT). RER patients were stipulated to undergo 2 additional ABVE-PC cycles and were then randomized to 21 Gy IFRT or no further treatment if complete response (CR) was achieved. RER without CR patients were non-randomly assigned to 21 Gy IFRT. Relapses were characterized without respect to site (initial, new, or both; and initial bulk or initial nonbulk), and involved field radiation therapy field (in-field, out-of-field, or both). Patients were grouped by treatment assignment (SER; RER/no CR; RER/CR/IFRT; and RER/CR/no IFRT). Summary statistics were reported. RESULTS At 4-year median follow-up, 244 patients had experienced relapse, 198 of whom were fully evaluable for review. Those who progressed during treatment (n=30) or lacked relapse imaging (n=16) were excluded. The median time to relapse was 12.8 months. Of the 198 evaluable patients, 30% were RER/no CR, 26% were SER, 26% were RER/CR/no IFRT, 16% were RER/CR/IFRT, and 2% remained uncategorized. The 74% and 75% relapses involved initially bulky and nonbulky sites, respectively. First relapses rarely occurred at exclusively new or out-of-field sites. By contrast, relapses usually occurred at nodal sites of initial bulky and nonbulky disease. CONCLUSION Although response-based therapy has helped define treatment for selected RER patients, it has not improved outcome for SER patients or facilitated refinement of IFRT volumes or doses.

Quality of radiotherapy reporting in randomized controlled trials of Hodgkin's lymphoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: in regard to Bekelman and Yahalom (Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;73:492-498)

Drs. Bekelman and Yahalom’s (1) paper describing radiation therapy (RT) quality assurance (QA) in lymphoma clinical trials places emphasis for RT standards. Insuring study defined dose/volume constraint compliance, RTQA requires central pre-treatment diagnostic imaging and RT plan review. This letter describes Children’s Oncology Group (COG) historical and current RTQA process for Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL) trials. For 33 years the Quality Assurance Review Center (QARC) has performed RTQA on cooperative group trials. Process improvements demonstrate maturing of clinical trials QA in response to protocol needs. The increasingly crucial role of imaging in clinical trials QA is validated. Pediatric Oncology Group (POG) protocol 8725 (intermediate/advanced staged HL) required 8 chemotherapy cycles +/− Involved Field RT. Initial publication(2) demonstrated no advantage for RT. Retrospective data review revealed 10% survival advantage for patients receiving compliant RT.(3) 30% of patients had treatment deviations including omission of RT to involved sites. To improve compliance, POG required pre-treatment RT review for next generation advanced/early stage HL studies, P9425/P9426(4,5). Strategy improved RT compliance. P9426 required post chemotherapy imaging response treatment adaptation. Retrospective response-imaging central review established that ~50% of patients had discordance between local and central review.(6) COG AHOD0031 (intermediate risk HL) included patient response-adapted therapy. QARC initiated real time response review with integrated imaging (anatomic and metabolic) and RT review prior to RT start. Discordant local and central interpretations were resolved in real time. (7,8) 1733 patients from 251 centers worldwide were enrolled. Near uniform data submission compliance has been obtained with >95% RT compliance in ~600 cases reviewed. Process feasibility allows extension of adaptive treatments based on centrally-confirmed response for the next high risk HL study. QARC-developed an informatics platform and processes that contribute to success of these clinical trials improvements. QARC acquires and manages imaging and RT data in several digital formats(9). The QARC database houses images and RT objects in side-by-side format, enabling remote investigator access. In collaborating with Dr. Purdy and the Advanced Technology Consortium, full digital RT files are received at QARC for review and DVH analysis. Currently strategies to incorporate Dicom compatible pathology objects into the database and use of open-source format for data sharing are being evaluated. The objectives identified in this paper for developing consensus standards and peer-review are in place for cooperative groups. Applying these established programs at enterprise level insures the objectives of this publication are met.