Clinical quality assurance in image guided brachytherapy of cervical cancer
OC-0447
Abstract
Clinical quality assurance in image guided brachytherapy of cervical cancer
Authors: Laura Allex1, Michael Baumgartl1, Klara Uher1, Laura Motisi1, Claudia Linsenmeier1, Michele Keane1, Nikolaus Kremer1, Primoz Petric2
1University Hospital Zürich, Department of Radiation-Oncology, Zürich, Switzerland; 2University Hospital Zürich, Department of Radiation-Oncology , Zürich, Switzerland
Show Affiliations
Hide Affiliations
Purpose or Objective
Image guided adaptive BT (IGABT) in the context of
chemo-radiation (ChRT) improves outcomes when compared with conventional BT of
cervical cancer. IGABT implementation requires technological upgrading, process
adaptation and personnel training. Systematic clinical oversight is needed for its safe and effective utilisation,
but recommendations on this topic are lacking. We aimed
to develop and test a clinical quality assurance (cQA) system for cervix cancer
ChRT/IGABT.
Material and Methods
We identified treatment parameters with established
prognostic impact on the outcome of cervical cancer ChRT/IGABT. For each parameter,
an evidence-based threshold was determined, indicating the minimal proportion
of patients in whom a certain condition should be met for optimal outcome.
Based on this framework and the GEC ESTRO-ICRU 89 Report, we developed a system
for routine recording and automated reporting of parameters. The system was
tested on the first 4 consecutive cervical cancer patients treated with ChRT/IGABT
at our department.
Results
We established 17 key performance indicators (KPIs) and
a minimal required set of 6 dose-volume checkpoints for patient-specific cQA.
KPIs were selected to probe 4 domains of treatment performance: overall ChRT schedule,
IGABT procedure, doses to organs at risk and doses to target volumes. Patient-specific
checkpoints were designed to track the total reference air kerma (TRAK) and
relation between the D90 for high-risk clinical target volume and D2cc for
rectum, bladder, sigmoid colon, bowel, and vagina. The automated reporting
system was proven feasible for routine clinical use: cQA for the first 4
patients is presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1. (A) 17 KPIs. Red lines: literature
benchmarks. (B) Patient-specific cQA. Red solid and dotted line: soft and hard
constraint for high-risk clinical target volume (CTV-HR), respectively. Horizontal
lines: dose constraints for respective organs at risk (OAR). Crossed squares: conventional
BT; Circles: optimized IGABT. Each new patient is benchmarked against the
population treated at the department up to that time. Cases with
post-optimization location outside right lower quadrant warrant justification
of deviation or re-optimization. (C) TRAK (presented as curie-seconds) as a function of CTV HR size. TRAK of each new patient is benchmarked to the
experience of department up to that time.
Conclusion
Our cQA system enables standardized, automated and
evidence-based oversight of ChRT/IGABT, real-time treatment adaptations,
literature-benchmarking and continuous streamlining of clinical pathways. The
system has been proven feasible and was implemented in routine clinical
practice at our department.