Suppr超能文献

通过每周会议的方式对大型癌症中心的头颈部轮廓进行质量保证同行评审。

Quality Assurance Peer Review of Head and Neck Contours in a Large Cancer Centre via a Weekly Meeting Approach.

机构信息

Department of Clinical Oncology, Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds, UK.

Department of Clinical Oncology, Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds, UK.

出版信息

Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2019 Jun;31(6):344-351. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2019.03.001. Epub 2019 Mar 16.

Abstract

AIMS

To assess the impact of weekly scheduled peer review of head and neck contours for definitive and adjuvant radiotherapy cases based on rates of recommended changes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of a prospective database. Recommended changes were prospectively classified as 'major' (change in gross tumour volume and/or high-dose clinical target volume, dose/fractionation) or 'minor' (change in intermediate or elective dose clinical target volumes or organs at risk). Univariate analysis to explore associations between recommended changes and tumour site/stage and radical/adjuvant indication.

RESULTS

In total, 307/375 (82%) head and neck cases treated with volumetric-modulated arc therapy were prospectively peer reviewed over a 12-month period; 195 (64%) cases received definitive and 112 (36%) received adjuvant radiotherapy. Overall, 43/307 (14.0%) changes were recommended within the peer review meetings. This comprised 27/307 (8.8%) major changes and 16/307 (5.2%) minor changes; 33/43 (77%) changes were in the clinical target volume. Rates of recommended changes were significantly higher for adjuvant versus definitive radiotherapy (odds ratio 2.26, P = 0.014) and for larynx compared with oropharynx (odds ratio 3.02, P = 0.02). There was no overall correlation between clinician experience and rates of change (P = 0.62).

CONCLUSION

Routine weekly meeting contour-based peer review resulted in a number of major and minor changes to treatment. Compliance was high. Peer review was potentially beneficial for all tumour sites/stages/indications and any degree of clinician experience.

摘要

目的

评估每周对头颈部轮廓进行同行评审对根治性和辅助性放疗病例的影响,基于推荐改变的比率。

材料和方法

回顾性分析前瞻性数据库。推荐的改变被前瞻性地分为“主要”(肿瘤体积和/或高剂量临床靶区的改变,剂量/分割)或“次要”(中间或选择性剂量临床靶区或危及器官的改变)。单变量分析探索推荐改变与肿瘤部位/分期和根治/辅助指征之间的关系。

结果

在 12 个月的时间里,共有 307/375(82%)例接受容积调强弧形治疗的头颈部病例进行了前瞻性同行评审;195 例(64%)接受根治性放疗,112 例(36%)接受辅助放疗。总体而言,在同行评审会议上推荐了 43/307(14.0%)的改变。这包括 27/307(8.8%)的主要改变和 16/307(5.2%)的次要改变;33/43(77%)的改变发生在临床靶区。辅助放疗比根治性放疗的推荐改变率显著更高(比值比 2.26,P=0.014),喉癌比口咽癌更高(比值比 3.02,P=0.02)。临床医生经验与改变率之间没有总体相关性(P=0.62)。

结论

常规每周一次的基于轮廓的同行评审导致治疗发生了一些主要和次要的改变。合规性很高。同行评审可能对所有肿瘤部位/分期/指征以及任何程度的临床医生经验都有益。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验