PURPOSE: To test the feasibility of using proposed quality indicators to assess radiotherapy quality in prostate cancer management based on a 2007 stratified random survey of treating academic and non-academic US institutions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: 414 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or brachytherapy were selected from 45 institutions. Indicators used as specific measurable clinical performance measures to represent surrogates for quality of radiotherapy delivery included established measures, such as the use of prescription doses ≥75 Gy for intermediate- and high-risk EBRT patients and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in conjunction with EBRT for patients with high-risk disease, and emerging measures, including daily target localization (image-guidance) to correct for organ motion for EBRT patients. RESULTS: 167 patients (47%) were treated with 6 MV photons, 31 (9%) were treated with 10 MV, 65 (18%) received 15 MV, and the remaining 90 (26%) 16-23 MV. For intermediate- plus high-risk patients (n=181), 78% were treated to ≥75 Gy. Among favorable-risk patients, 72% were treated to ≥75 Gy. Among high-risk EBRT patients, 60 (87%) were treated with ADT in conjunction with EBRT and 13% (n=9) with radiotherapy alone. Among low- and intermediate-risk patients, 10% and 42%, respectively, were treated with ADT plus EBRT. For 24% of EBRT patients (85/354), weekly electronic portal imaging was obtained as verification films without daily target localization and the remaining 76% were treated with daily localization of the target using various methods. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to defined quality indicators was observed in a majority of patients. ≈90% of high-risk patients are treated with ADT plus EBRT and ≈80% of intermediate- and high-risk patients receive prescription doses >=75 Gy, consistent with the published results of randomized trials.
PURPOSE: To test the feasibility of using proposed quality indicators to assess radiotherapy quality in prostate cancer management based on a 2007 stratified random survey of treating academic and non-academic US institutions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: 414 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or brachytherapy were selected from 45 institutions. Indicators used as specific measurable clinical performance measures to represent surrogates for quality of radiotherapy delivery included established measures, such as the use of prescription doses ≥75 Gy for intermediate- and high-risk EBRTpatients and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in conjunction with EBRT for patients with high-risk disease, and emerging measures, including daily target localization (image-guidance) to correct for organ motion for EBRTpatients. RESULTS: 167 patients (47%) were treated with 6 MV photons, 31 (9%) were treated with 10 MV, 65 (18%) received 15 MV, and the remaining 90 (26%) 16-23 MV. For intermediate- plus high-risk patients (n=181), 78% were treated to ≥75 Gy. Among favorable-risk patients, 72% were treated to ≥75 Gy. Among high-risk EBRTpatients, 60 (87%) were treated with ADT in conjunction with EBRT and 13% (n=9) with radiotherapy alone. Among low- and intermediate-risk patients, 10% and 42%, respectively, were treated with ADT plus EBRT. For 24% of EBRTpatients (85/354), weekly electronic portal imaging was obtained as verification films without daily target localization and the remaining 76% were treated with daily localization of the target using various methods. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to defined quality indicators was observed in a majority of patients. ≈90% of high-risk patients are treated with ADT plus EBRT and ≈80% of intermediate- and high-risk patients receive prescription doses >=75 Gy, consistent with the published results of randomized trials.
Authors: Cheryl Crozier; Beth Erickson-Wittmann; Benjamin Movsas; Jean Owen; Najma Khalid; J Frank Wilson Journal: J Healthc Qual Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 1.095
Authors: Stephanie T H Peeters; Wilma D Heemsbergen; Peter C M Koper; Wim L J van Putten; Annerie Slot; Michel F H Dielwart; Johannes M G Bonfrer; Luca Incrocci; Joos V Lebesque Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Paul L Nguyen; Xiangmei Gu; Stuart R Lipsitz; Toni K Choueiri; Wesley W Choi; Yin Lei; Karen E Hoffman; Jim C Hu Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-03-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Anthony L Zietman; Kyounghwa Bae; Jerry D Slater; William U Shipley; Jason A Efstathiou; John J Coen; David A Bush; Margie Lunt; Daphna Y Spiegel; Rafi Skowronski; B Rodney Jabola; Carl J Rossi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michel Bolla; Laurence Collette; Léo Blank; Padraig Warde; Jean Bernard Dubois; René-Olivier Mirimanoff; Guy Storme; Jacques Bernier; Abraham Kuten; Cora Sternberg; Johan Mattelaer; José Lopez Torecilla; J Rafael Pfeffer; Carmel Lino Cutajar; Alfredo Zurlo; Marianne Pierart Journal: Lancet Date: 2002-07-13 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: M Roach; M DeSilvio; C Lawton; V Uhl; M Machtay; M J Seider; M Rotman; C Jones; S O Asbell; R K Valicenti; S Han; C R Thomas; W S Shipley Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-05-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael J Zelefsky; Jennifer Moughan; Jean Owen; Anthony L Zietman; Mack Roach; Gerald E Hanks Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-07-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Gerald E Hanks; Thomas F Pajak; Arthur Porter; David Grignon; Harmart Brereton; Varagur Venkatesan; Eric M Horwitz; Colleen Lawton; Seth A Rosenthal; Howard M Sandler; William U Shipley Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-11-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Cédric M Panje; Alan Dal Pra; Thomas Zilli; Daniel R Zwahlen; Alexandros Papachristofilou; Fernanda G Herrera; Oscar Matzinger; Ludwig Plasswilm; Paul Martin Putora Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2015-05-19 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Jean B Owen; Najma Khalid; Alex Ho; Lisa A Kachnic; Ritsuko Komaki; May Lin Tao; Adam Currey; J Frank Wilson Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2014-03-18 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Dian Wang; Alex Ho; Ann S Hamilton; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Mary Lo; Steven Fleming; Michael Goodman; Trevor Thompson; Jean Owen Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2014-02-05 Impact factor: 3.481