Dataset Information

Quality assurance of radiotherapy in the ongoing EORTC 1420 "Best of" trial for early stage oropharyngeal, supraglottic and hypopharyngeal carcinoma: results of the benchmark case procedure.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The current phase III EORTC 1420 Best-of trial (NCT02984410) compares the swallowing function after transoral surgery versus intensity modulated radiotherapy (RT) in patients with early-stage carcinoma of the oropharynx, supraglottis and hypopharynx. We report the analysis of the Benchmark Case (BC) procedures before patient recruitment with special attention to dysphagia/aspiration related structures (DARS).

Materials and methods

Submitted RT volumes and plans from participating centers were analyzed and compared against the gold-standard expert delineations and dose distributions. Descriptive analysis of protocol deviations was conducted. Mean Sorensen-Dice similarity index (mDSI) and Hausdorff distance (mHD) were applied to evaluate the inter-observer variability (IOV).

Results

65% (23/35) of the institutions needed more than one submission to achieve Quality assurance (RTQA) clearance. OAR volume delineations were the cause for rejection in 53% (40/76) of cases. IOV could be improved in 5 out of 12 OARs by more than 10 mm after resubmission (mHD). Despite this, final IOV for critical OARs in delineation remained significant among DARS by choosing an aleatory threshold of 0.7 (mDSI) and 15 mm (mHD).

Conclusions

This is to our knowledge the largest BC analysis among Head and neck RTQA programs performed in the framework of a prospective trial. Benchmarking identified non-common OARs and target delineations errors as the main source of deviations and IOV could be reduced in a significant number of cases after this process. Due to the substantial resources involved with benchmarking, future benchmark analyses should assess fully the impact on patients' clinical outcome.

SUBMITTER: Stelmes JJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8088557 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Polyculture is a potentially interesting rearing practice for future aquaculture developments. Nevertheless, it may result in beneficial as well as detrimental consequences for fish production. One way to maximize the benefits of polyculture is to combine species with high levels of compatibility and complementarity. This requires the development of a ranking procedure, based on a multi-trait assessment, that highlights the most suitable species combinations for polyculture. Moreover, in order to ensure the relevance of such a procedure, it is important to integrate the socio-economic expectations by assigning relative weights to each trait according to the stakeholder priorities. Here, we proposed a ranking procedure of candidate fish polycultures (i.e., species combinations that could be potentially interesting for aquaculture) based on a multi-trait assessment approach and the stakeholder priorities. This procedure aims at successively (i) weighting evaluation results obtained for each candidate polyculture according to stakeholder priorities; (ii) assessing differentiation between candidate species combinations based on these weighted results; and (iii) ranking differentiated candidate polycultures. We applied our procedure on three test cases of fish polycultures in recirculated aquaculture systems. These test cases each focused on a target species (two on Sander lucioperca and one on Carassius auratus), which were reared in two or three different alternative candidate fish polycultures. For each test case, our procedure aimed at ranking alternative combinations according to their benefits for production and/or welfare of the target species. These benefits were evaluated based on survival rate as well as morphology, behavioral, and physiological traits. Three scenarios of stakeholder priorities were considered for weighting evaluation results: placing a premium on production, welfare, or both for the target species. A comparison of our procedure results between these scenarios showed that the ranking changed for candidate polycultures in two test cases. This highlights the need to carefully consider stakeholder priorities when choosing fish polycultures.