Quality and safety considerations in stereotactic radiosurgery and stereotactic body radiation therapy: Executive summary.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Solberg TD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3808746 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC3808751 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Radiation therapy is an effective cancer treatment that is constantly being transformed by technological innovation. Dedicated devices for fraction-by-fraction imaging and guidance within the treatment room have enabled image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) allowing clinicians to pursue highly conformal dose distributions, higher dose prescriptions, and shorter fractionation schedules. Capitalizing on IGRT-enabled accuracy and precision requires a strong link between IGRT practices and planning target volume (PTV) design. This is clearly central to high quality, safe radiation therapy. Failure to properly apply IGRT methods or to coordinate their use with an appropriate PTV margin can result in a treatment that is 'precisely wrong'. The white paper summarized in this executive summary recommends foundational elements and specific activities to maximize the safety and effectiveness of IGRT.
| S-EPMC3808747 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe American Radium Society (ARS) Appropriate Use Criteria brain malignancies panel systematically reviewed (PRISMA [Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses]) published literature on neurocognitive outcomes after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for patients with multiple brain metastases (BM) to generate consensus guidelines.MethodsThe panel developed 4 key questions (KQs) to guide systematic review. From 11 614 original articles, 12 were selected. The panel developed model cases addressing KQs and potentially controversial scenarios not addressed in the systematic review (which might inform future ARS projects). Based upon quality of evidence, the panel confidentially voted on treatment options using a 9-point scale of appropriateness.ResultsThe panel agreed that SRS alone is usually appropriate for those with good performance status and 2-10 asymptomatic BM, and usually not appropriate for >20 BM. For 11-15 and 16-20 BM there was (between 2 case variants) agreement that SRS alone may be appropriate or disagreement on the appropriateness of SRS alone. There was no scenario (among 6 case variants) in which conventional whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) was considered usually appropriate by most panelists. There were several areas of disagreement, including: hippocampal sparing WBRT for 2-4 asymptomatic BM; WBRT for resected BM amenable to SRS; fractionated versus single-fraction SRS for resected BM, larger targets, and/or brainstem metastases; optimal treatment (WBRT, hippocampal sparing WBRT, SRS alone to all or select lesions) for patients with progressive extracranial disease, poor performance status, and no systemic options.ConclusionsFor patients with 2-10 BM, SRS alone is an appropriate treatment option for well-selected patients with good performance status. Future study is needed for those scenarios in which there was disagreement among panelists.
| S-EPMC7746939 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeStereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become the standard of care for inoperable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer and is often used for recurrent lung cancer and pulmonary metastases. Radiation-induced lung toxicity (RILT), including radiation pneumonitis and pulmonary fibrosis, is a major concern for which it is important to understand dosimetric and clinical predictors.Methods and materialsThis study was undertaken through the American Association of Physicists in Medicine's Working Group on Biological Effects of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy. Data from studies of lung SBRT published through the summer of 2016 that provided detailed information about RILT were analyzed.ResultsNinety-seven studies were ultimately considered. Definitions of the risk organ and complication endpoints as well as dose-volume information presented varied among studies. The risk of RILT, including radiation pneumonitis and pulmonary fibrosis, was reported to be associated with the size and location of the tumor. Patients with interstitial lung disease appear to be especially susceptible to severe RILT. A variety of dosimetric parameters were reported to be associated with RILT. There was no apparent threshold "tolerance dose-volume" level. However, most studies noted safe treatment with a rate of symptomatic RILT of <10% to 15% after lung SBRT with a mean lung dose (MLD) of the combined lungs ≤8 Gy in 3 to 5 fractions and the percent of total lung volume receiving more than 20 Gy (V20) <10% to 15%.ConclusionsTo allow more rigorous analysis of this complication, future studies should standardize reporting by including standardized endpoint and volume definitions and providing dose-volume information for all patients, with and without RILT.
| S-EPMC9454379 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6499015 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This report is part of a series of white papers commissioned for the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Board of Directors as part of ASTRO's Target Safely Campaign, focusing on the role of peer review as an important component of a broad safety/quality assurance (QA) program. Peer review is one of the most effective means for assuring the quality of qualitative, and potentially controversial, patient-specific decisions in radiation oncology. This report summarizes many of the areas throughout radiation therapy that may benefit from the application of peer review. Each radiation oncology facility should evaluate the issues raised and develop improved ways to apply the concept of peer review to its individual process and workflow. This might consist of a daily multidisciplinary (eg, physicians, dosimetrists, physicists, therapists) meeting to review patients being considered for, or undergoing planning for, radiation therapy (eg, intention to treat and target delineation), as well as meetings to review patients already under treatment (eg, adequacy of image guidance). This report is intended to clarify and broaden the understanding of radiation oncology professionals regarding the meaning, roles, benefits, and targets for peer review as a routine quality assurance tool. It is hoped that this work will be a catalyst for further investigation, development, and study of the efficacy of peer review techniques and how these efforts can help improve the safety and quality of our treatments.
| S-EPMC3808744 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeRadical treatment of metastases with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is commonly implemented in patients receiving concurrent immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI), despite limited safety and toxicity data. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of lung SBRT with concurrent ICI.Methods and materialsRecords from a single academic institution were reviewed to identify patients treated with lung SBRT and concurrent (within 30 days) ICI; a contemporaneous cohort receiving lung SBRT alone was included for reference. Treatment-related adverse effects occurring within 30 days (acute) and 180 days (subacute) of SBRT were evaluated.ResultsOur study included 117 patients; 54 received SBRT with concurrent ICI (56 courses, 69 target lesions), and 63 received SBRT alone (68 courses, 79 lesions). Median follow-up was 9.2 months in the SBRT + ICI cohort. Among the patients, 67.9% received ICI monotherapy, 17.9% ICI/chemotherapy, and 14.3% ICI/ICI combinations; 25% received ICI between SBRT fractions, and 42.9% received ICI both before and after SBRT. The risk of grade 3 pneumonitis was higher in the SBRT + ICI versus SBRT alone cohort (10.7% vs 0%, P < .01) and any-grade pneumonitis was similar (33.9% vs 27.9%, SBRT + ICI vs SBRT, P = .47). The risk of any-grade pneumonitis appeared elevated with ICI/ICI combinations (62.5% vs 29.2%). Receipt of ICI, planning treatment volume, and lobes involved in SBRT were linked to high-grade pneumonitis. Subacute grade 3+ adverse effects occurred in 26.8% of SBRT + ICI and 2.9% of SBRT-alone patients.ConclusionsOverall, concurrent lung SBRT + ICI is safe. Given the clinically meaningful risk of pneumonitis, closer monitoring should be considered for SBRT + ICI patients, especially those receiving radiation therapy with ICI/ICI combinations.
| S-EPMC7747230 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe use of treatment planning prostate MRI for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) is largely a standard, yet not all patients can receive MRI for a variety of clinical reasons. Thus, we aim to investigate the safety of patients who received CT alone based SBRT planning for the definitive treatment of localized prostate cancer.MethodsOur study analyzed 3410 patients with localized prostate cancer who were treated with SBRT at a single academic institution between 2006 and 2020. Acute and late toxicity was evaluated using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) questionnaires evaluated QOL and PSA nadir was evaluated to detect biochemical failures.ResultsA total of 162 patients (4.75%) received CT alone for treatment planning. The CT alone group was older relative to the MRI group (69.9 vs 67.2, p < 0.001) and had higher risk and grade disease (p < 0.001). Additionally, the CT group exhibited a trend in larger CTVs (82.56 cc vs 76.90 cc; p = 0.055), lower total radiation doses (p = 0.048), and more frequent pelvic nodal radiation versus the MRI group (p < 0.001). There were only two reported cases of Grade 3 + toxicity within the CT alone group. Quality of life data within the CT alone group revealed declines in urinary and bowel scores at one month with return to baseline at subsequent follow up. Early biochemical failure data at median time of 2.3 years revealed five failures by Phoenix definition.ConclusionsWhile clinical differences existed between the MRI and CT alone group, we observed tolerable toxicity profiles in the CT alone cohort, which was further supported by EPIC questionnaire data. The overall clinical outcomes appear comparable in patients unable to receive MRI for their SBRT treatment plan with early clinical follow up.
| S-EPMC8977039 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo compare trends and outcomes in early stage bronchopulmonary carcinoid (BPC) tumors treated nonoperatively with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).Methods/materialsWe queried the National Cancer Database for primary (typical) BPC staged cT1-2N0M0 and treated nonsurgically with lung-directed radiation and ≥1 month of follow-up. Odds ratios were used to predict likelihood of SBRT treatment and multivariable Cox regression determined predictors of survival.ResultsOut of 154 patients, 84 (55%) were treated with SBRT and the remainder were treated with CFRT. Although SBRT use was 0% from 2004 to 2007, it varied from 50 to 70% per year thereafter. Propensity-matched Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed improved survival with lung SBRT (median: 66 vs 58 months; p = 0.034).ConclusionSBRT for early stage, primary BPC has increased over time and was associated with higher survival than CFRT.
| S-EPMC6891931 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo evaluate acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities and patient reported urinary and sexual function following accelerated, hypofractionated external beam radiotherapy to the prostate, seminal vesicles and pelvic lymph nodes and high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) prostate boost.MethodsPatients at a single institution with NCCN intermediate- and high-risk localized prostate cancer with logistical barriers to completing five weeks of whole pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) were retrospectively reviewed for toxicity following accelerated, hypofractionated WPRT (41.25 Gy in 15 fractions of 2.75 Gy). Patients also received prostate boost radiotherapy with either HDR brachytherapy (1 fraction of 15 Gy) or SBRT (19 Gy in 2 fractions of 9.5 Gy). The duration of androgen deprivation therapy was at the discretion of the treating radiation oncologist. Toxicity was evaluated by NCI CTCAE v 5.0.ResultsBetween 2015 and 2017, 22 patients with a median age of 71 years completed accelerated, hypofractionated WPRT. Median follow-up from the end of radiotherapy was 32 months (range 2-57). 5%, 73%, and 23% of patients had clinical T1, T2, and T3 disease, respectively. 86% of tumors were Gleason grade 7 and 14% were Gleason grade 9. 68% and 32% of patients had NCCN intermediate- and high-risk disease, respectively. 91% and 9% of patients received HDR brachytherapy and SBRT prostate boost following WPRT, respectively. Crude rates of grade 2 or higher GI and GU toxicities were 23% and 23%, respectively. 3 patients (14%) had late or persistent grade 2 toxicities of urinary frequency and 1 patient (5%) had late or persistent GI toxicity of diarrhea. No patient experienced grade 3 or higher toxicity at any time. No difference in patient-reported urinary or sexual function was noted at 12 months.ConclusionsAccelerated, hypofractionated whole pelvis radiotherapy was associated with acceptable GU and GI toxicities and should be further validated for those at risk for harboring occult nodal disease.
| S-EPMC8772149 | biostudies-literature