J McAleese1, S Baluch2, K Drinkwater3. 1. Northern Ireland Cancer Centre, Belfast City Hospital, Belfast, UK. Electronic address: j.mcaleese@doctors.org.uk. 2. Queen Alexandra Hospital, Cosham, Portsmouth, UK. 3. Royal College of Radiologists, London, UK.
Abstract
AIMS: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in the UK. The quality of curative-intent radiotherapy is associated with better outcomes. National quality standards from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) on patient work-up and treatment selection were used, with guidance from the Royal College of Radiologists on the technical delivery of radiotherapy, to assess the quality of curative-intent non-small cell lung cancer radiotherapy and to describe current UK practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiotherapy departments completed one questionnaire for each patient started on curative-intent radiotherapy for 8 weeks in 2013. RESULTS: Eighty-two per cent of centres returned a total of 317 proformas. Patient selection with positron emission tomography/computed tomography, performance status and Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second (FEV1) was usually undertaken. Fifty-six per cent had pathological confirmation of mediastinal lymph nodes and 22% staging brain scans; 20% were treated with concurrent chemoradiation, 12% with Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) and 8% with Continuous Hyperfractionated Accelerated Radiotherapy (CHART). Sixty-three per cent of patients received 55 Gy/20 fractions. Although respiratory compensation was routinely undertaken, only 33% used four-dimensional computed tomography. Seventy per cent of patients were verified with cone beam computed tomography. There was consistency of practice in dosimetric constraints for organs at risk and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This audit has described current UK practice. The latest recommendations for patient selection with pathological confirmation of mediastinal lymph nodes, brain staging and respiratory function testing are not universally followed. Although there is evidence of increasing use of newer techniques such as four-dimensional computed tomography and cone beam image-guided radiotherapy, there is still variability in access. Efforts should be made to improve access to modern technologies and quality assurance of radiotherapy plans.
AIMS: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in the UK. The quality of curative-intent radiotherapy is associated with better outcomes. National quality standards from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) on patient work-up and treatment selection were used, with guidance from the Royal College of Radiologists on the technical delivery of radiotherapy, to assess the quality of curative-intent non-small cell lung cancer radiotherapy and to describe current UK practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiotherapy departments completed one questionnaire for each patient started on curative-intent radiotherapy for 8 weeks in 2013. RESULTS: Eighty-two per cent of centres returned a total of 317 proformas. Patient selection with positron emission tomography/computed tomography, performance status and Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second (FEV1) was usually undertaken. Fifty-six per cent had pathological confirmation of mediastinal lymph nodes and 22% staging brain scans; 20% were treated with concurrent chemoradiation, 12% with Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) and 8% with Continuous Hyperfractionated Accelerated Radiotherapy (CHART). Sixty-three per cent of patients received 55 Gy/20 fractions. Although respiratory compensation was routinely undertaken, only 33% used four-dimensional computed tomography. Seventy per cent of patients were verified with cone beam computed tomography. There was consistency of practice in dosimetric constraints for organs at risk and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This audit has described current UK practice. The latest recommendations for patient selection with pathological confirmation of mediastinal lymph nodes, brain staging and respiratory function testing are not universally followed. Although there is evidence of increasing use of newer techniques such as four-dimensional computed tomography and cone beam image-guided radiotherapy, there is still variability in access. Efforts should be made to improve access to modern technologies and quality assurance of radiotherapy plans.
Authors: Johanna Ramroth; David J Cutter; Sarah C Darby; Geoff S Higgins; Paul McGale; Mike Partridge; Carolyn W Taylor Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2016-07-25 Impact factor: 7.038