In Regard to Hesse et al.

To the Editor:

Our team of residents and faculty have reviewed Hesse et al.’s work on peer review in head and neck cancer with great interest. Peer review is indeed an essential component of quality assurance in radiation oncology. We, as part of a Joint Commission International Accredited tertiary care university hospital have been extensively practicing and publishing on peer review in radiation treatment planning.

Our team would like to applaud the authors for publishing this study and share our experience in this regard. Our peer review meetings were conducted weekly until 2019, but identifying the need of more frequent evaluation of contours for cases which require prompt planning, we have now switched to a daily peer review meeting model. Overall treatment time is a potential factor for outcome in head and neck cancers, therefore, it is crucial to keep the delays in treatment initiation as short as reasonably achievable and expedite treatment planning.

During COVID-19 pandemic, inter and intradepartmental meetings were conducted online, which led to a hybrid meeting model, still practiced daily with better meeting attendance alongside busy clinical schedules and avoiding treatment initiation delays. This also ensures better compliance with the guidelines of discussing every plan before the first fraction is being delivered.

Our team finds Jennifer Hesse and coauthors weekly volume round as a commendable effort, but we believe that it is imperative to consider daily volume rounds for a prompt and more efficient patient centered approach. Expert comment from the author and its feasibility at their institute will be appreciated.