Results of the Australasian (Trans-Tasman Oncology Group) radiotherapy benchmarking exercise in preparation for participation in the PORTEC-3 trial

Authors

  • Michael G Jameson,

    Corresponding author
    1. Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
    2. Liverpool Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
    3. Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
    • Correspondence

      Mr Michael Jameson, Cancer Therapy Centre & Ingham Institute, Liverpool Hospital, Locked Bag 7103, Liverpool, NSW 1871, Australia.

      Email: michael.jameson@sswahs.nsw.gov.au

    Search for more papers by this author
  • Jo McNamara,

    1. Illawarra Shoalhaven Cancer & Haematology Network, Illawarra, New South Wales, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Michael Bailey,

    1. Illawarra Shoalhaven Cancer & Haematology Network, Illawarra, New South Wales, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Peter E Metcalfe,

    1. Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
    2. Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Lois C Holloway,

    1. Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
    2. Liverpool Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
    3. Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
    4. School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Kerwyn Foo,

    1. School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
    2. Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
    3. Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Viet Do,

    1. Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
    2. Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
    3. Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Linda Mileshkin,

    1. Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    2. University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    3. Australia New Zealand Gynaecological Oncology Group (ANZGOG), Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Carien L Creutzberg,

    1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Pearly Khaw

    1. Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    2. University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    3. Australia New Zealand Gynaecological Oncology Group (ANZGOG), Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author

  • MG Jameson B Med Rad Phys (Hons); J McNamara MSc; M Bailey MSc, MBAAdv (HealthMgmt), QMPS; PE Metcalfe PhD; LC Holloway PhD; K Foo FRANZCR; V Do FRANZCR; L Mileshkin MBBS, MD, FRACP, MBioeth; CL Creutzberg MD, PhD; P Khaw FRANZCR.
  • Conflict of interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abstract

Introduction

Protocol deviations in Randomised Controlled Trials have been found to result in a significant decrease in survival and local control. In some cases, the magnitude of the detrimental effect can be larger than the anticipated benefits of the interventions involved. The implementation of appropriate quality assurance of radiotherapy measures for clinical trials has been found to result in fewer deviations from protocol. This paper reports on a benchmarking study conducted in preparation for the PORTEC-3 trial in Australasia.

Methods

A benchmarking CT dataset was sent to each of the Australasian investigators, it was requested they contour and plan the case according to trial protocol using local treatment planning systems. These data was then sent back to Trans-Tasman Oncology Group for collation and analysis.

Results

Thirty three investigators from eighteen institutions across Australia and New Zealand took part in the study. The mean clinical target volume (CTV) volume was 383.4 (228.5–497.8) cm3 and the mean dose to a reference gold standard CTV was 48.8 (46.4–50.3) Gy.

Conclusions

Although there were some large differences in the contouring of the CTV and its constituent parts, these did not translate into large variations in dosimetry. Where individual investigators had deviations from the trial contouring protocol, feedback was provided. The results of this study will be used to compare with the international study QA for the PORTEC-3 trial.

Ancillary