Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-08-2021 | Medulloblastoma | Original Article

Pretreatment central quality control for craniospinal irradiation in non-metastatic medulloblastoma

First experiences of the German radiotherapy quality control panel in the SIOP PNET5 MB trial

Authors: Dr. med. Stefan Dietzsch, MD, Annett Braesigk, Clemens Seidel, MD, Julia Remmele, MPh, Ralf Kitzing, MPh, Tina Schlender, MPh, Martin Mynarek, MD, Dirk Geismar, MD, Karolina Jablonska, MD, Rudolf Schwarz, MD, Montserrat Pazos, MD, Marc Walser, MD, Silke Frick, MD, Kristin Gurtner, MD, Christiane Matuschek, MD, Semi Ben Harrabi, MD, Albrecht Glück, MD, Victor Lewitzki, MD, Karin Dieckmann, MD, Martin Benesch, MD, Nicolas U. Gerber, MD, Stefan Rutkowski, MD, Beate Timmermann, MD, Rolf-Dieter Kortmann, MD

Published in: Strahlentherapie und Onkologie | Issue 8/2021

Abstract

Purpose

Several studies have demonstrated the negative impact of radiotherapy protocol deviations on tumor control in medulloblastoma. In the SIOP PNET5 MB trial, a pretreatment radiotherapy quality control (RT-QC) program was introduced. A first analysis for patients enrolled in Germany, Switzerland and Austria with focus on types of deviations in the initial plan proposals and review criteria for modern radiation technologies was performed.

Methods and patients

Sixty-nine craniospinal irradiation (CSI) plans were available for detailed analyses. RT-QC was performed according to protocol definitions on dose uniformity. Because of the lack of definitions for high-precision 3D conformal radiotherapy within the protocol, additional criteria for RT-QC on delineation and coverage of clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV) were defined and evaluated.

Results

Target volume (CTV/PTV) deviations occurred in 49.3% of initial CSI plan proposals (33.3% minor, 15.9% major). Dose uniformity deviations were less frequent (43.5%). Modification of the RT plan was recommended in 43.5% of CSI plans. Unacceptable RT plans were predominantly related to incorrect target delineation rather than dose uniformity. Unacceptable plans were negatively correlated to the number of enrolled patients per institution with a cutoff of 5 patients (p = 0.001).

Conclusion

This prospective pretreatment individual case review study revealed a high rate of deviations and emphasizes the strong need of pretreatment RT-QC in clinical trials for medulloblastoma. Furthermore, the experiences point out the necessity of new RT-QC criteria for high-precision CSI techniques.

Available only for authorised users

Carrie C, Hoffstetter S, Gomez F et al (1999) Impact of targeting deviations on outcome in medulloblastoma: study of the French Society of Pediatric Oncology (SFOP). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 45(2):435–439CrossRef

Kortmann RD, Timmermann B, Kuhl J et al (1999) HIT ’91 (prospective, co-operative study for the treatment of malignant brain tumors in childhood): accuracy and acute toxicity of the irradiation of the craniospinal axis. Results of the quality assurance program. Strahlenther Onkol 175(4):162–169CrossRef

Miralbell R, Bleher A, Huguenin P et al (1997) Pediatric medulloblastoma: radiation treatment technique and patterns of failure. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 37(3):523–529CrossRef

Fairchild A, Weber DC, Bar-Deroma R et al (2012) Quality assurance in the EORTC 22033-26033/CE5 phase III randomized trial for low grade glioma: the digital individual case review. Radiother Oncol 103(3):287–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2012.04.002CrossRefPubMed

Gondi V, Cui Y, Mehta MP et al (2015) Real-time pretreatment review limits unacceptable deviations on a cooperative group radiation therapy technique trial: quality assurance results of RTOG 0933. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 91(3):564–570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.10.054CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Coskun M, Straube W, Hurkmans CW et al (2013) Quality assurance of radiotherapy in the ongoing EORTC 22042-26042 trial for atypical and malignant meningioma: results from the dummy runs and prospective individual case reviews. Radiat Oncol 8:23. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-8-23CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Goodman KA (2013) Quality assurance for radiotherapy: a priority for clinical trials. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 105(6):376–377. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djt031CrossRefPubMed

Weber DC, Tomsej M, Melidis C et al (2012) QA makes a clinical trial stronger: evidence-based medicine in radiation therapy. Radiother Oncol 105(1):4–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2012.08.008CrossRefPubMed

FitzGerald TJ (2014) A new model for imaging and radiation therapy quality assurance in the National Clinical Trials Network of the National Cancer Institute. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 88(2):272–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.09.030CrossRefPubMed

10.

Fairchild A, Straube W, Laurie F et al (2013) Does quality of radiation therapy predict outcomes of multicenter cooperative group trials? A literature review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 87(2):246–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.03.036CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Bartlett F, Kortmann R, Saran F (2013) Medulloblastoma. Clin Oncol 25(1):36–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clon.2012.09.008CrossRef

12.

Lannering B, Rutkowski S, Doz F et al (2012) Hyperfractionated versus conventional radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy in standard-risk medulloblastoma: results from the randomized multicenter HIT-SIOP PNET 4 trial. J Clin Oncol 30(26):3187–3193. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2011.39.8719CrossRefPubMed

13.

Zeltzer PM, Boyett JM, Finlay JL et al (1999) Metastasis stage, adjuvant treatment, and residual tumor are prognostic factors for medulloblastoma in children: conclusions from the Children’s Cancer Group 921 randomized phase III study. J Clin Oncol 17(3):832–845. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1999.17.3.832CrossRefPubMed

14.

Landberg T, Chavaudra J, Dobbs J et al (2016) Report 50. J ICRU. https://doi.org/10.1093/jicru/os26.1.Report50CrossRef

15.

Landberg T, Chavaudra J, Dobbs J et al (2016) Report 62. J ICRU. https://doi.org/10.1093/jicru/os32.1.Report62CrossRef

16.

Ajithkumar T, Horan G, Padovani L et al (2018) SIOPE—brain tumor group consensus guideline on craniospinal target volume delineation for high-precision radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 128(2):192–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2018.04.016CrossRefPubMed

17.

Gaze MN, Boterberg T, Dieckmann K et al (2013) Results of a quality assurance review of external beam radiation therapy in the International Society of Paediatric Oncology (Europe) Neuroblastoma Group’s high-risk neuroblastoma trial: a SIOPEN study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 85(1):170–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.05.004CrossRefPubMed

18.

Miralbell R, Fitzgerald TJ, Laurie F et al (2006) Radiotherapy in pediatric medulloblastoma: quality assessment of Pediatric Oncology Group trial 9031. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 64(5):1325–1330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.11.002CrossRefPubMed

19.

Donahue B, Marymont MAH, Kessel S et al (2012) Radiation therapy quality in CCG/POG intergroup 9961: implications for craniospinal irradiation and the posterior fossa boost in future medulloblastoma trials. Front Oncol 2:185. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2012.00185CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Meroni S, Cavatorta C, Barra S et al (2019) Ein spezielles Cloud-System für die Real-time‑/Vorab-Qualitätssicherung in der pädiatrischen Strahlentherapie. Strahlenther Onkol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-019-01469-y (A dedicated cloud system for real-time upfront quality assurance in pediatric radiation therapy)CrossRefPubMed

21.

Laprie A, Hu Y, Alapetite C et al (2015) Paediatric brain tumours: a review of radiotherapy, state of the art and challenges for the future regarding protontherapy and carbontherapy. Cancer Radiother 19(8):775–789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canrad.2015.05.028CrossRefPubMed

22.

Yock TI, Yeap BY, Ebb DH et al (2016) Long-term toxic effects of proton radiotherapy for paediatric medulloblastoma: a phase 2 single-arm study. Lancet Oncol 17(3):287–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00167-9CrossRefPubMed

23.

Eaton BR, Esiashvili N, Kim S et al (2016) Endocrine outcomes with proton and photon radiotherapy for standard risk medulloblastoma. Neuro Oncol 18(6):881–887. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/nov302CrossRefPubMed

24.

Huynh M, Marcu LG, Giles E et al (2019) Are further studies needed to justify the use of proton therapy for paediatric cancers of the central nervous system? A review of current evidence. Radiother Oncol 133:140–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2019.01.009CrossRefPubMed

25.

Hoeben BA, Carrie C, Timmermann B et al (2019) Management of vertebral radiotherapy dose in paediatric patients with cancer: consensus recommendations from the SIOPE radiotherapy working group. Lancet Oncol 20(3):e155–e166. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30034-8CrossRefPubMed

26.

Taylor RE, Donachie PHJ, Weston CL et al (2009) Impact of radiotherapy parameters on outcome for patients with supratentorial primitive neuro-ectodermal tumours entered into the SIOP/UKCCSG PNET 3 study. Radiother Oncol 92(1):83–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2009.02.017CrossRefPubMed

27.

The International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (2010) Prescribing, recording, and reporting intensity-modulated photon-beam therapy (IMRT). J ICRU. https://doi.org/10.1093/jicru/ndq001CrossRef

28.

The International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (2007) Prescribing, recording and reporting proton-beam therapy. J ICRU. https://doi.org/10.1093/jicru/ndm021CrossRef

29.

Carrie C, Muracciole X, Gomez F et al (2005) Conformal radiotherapy, reduced boost volume, hyperfractionated radiotherapy, and online quality control in standard-risk medulloblastoma without chemotherapy: results of the French M‑SFOP 98 protocol. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 63(3):711–716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.03.031CrossRefPubMed

Title: Pretreatment central quality control for craniospinal irradiation in non-metastatic medulloblastoma
First experiences of the German radiotherapy quality control panel in the SIOP PNET5 MB trial
Authors: Dr. med. Stefan Dietzsch, MD
Annett Braesigk
Clemens Seidel, MD
Julia Remmele, MPh
Ralf Kitzing, MPh
Tina Schlender, MPh
Martin Mynarek, MD
Dirk Geismar, MD
Karolina Jablonska, MD
Rudolf Schwarz, MD
Montserrat Pazos, MD
Marc Walser, MD
Silke Frick, MD
Kristin Gurtner, MD
Christiane Matuschek, MD
Semi Ben Harrabi, MD
Albrecht Glück, MD
Victor Lewitzki, MD
Karin Dieckmann, MD
Martin Benesch, MD
Nicolas U. Gerber, MD
Stefan Rutkowski, MD
Beate Timmermann, MD
Rolf-Dieter Kortmann, MD
Publication date: 01-08-2021
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Medulloblastoma
Medulloblastoma
Medulloblastoma
Brain Tumor
Radiotherapy
Published in: Strahlentherapie und Onkologie / Issue 8/2021
Print ISSN: 0179-7158
Electronic ISSN: 1439-099X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-020-01707-8

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Pretreatment central quality control for craniospinal irradiation in non-metastatic medulloblastoma

First experiences of the German radiotherapy quality control panel in the SIOP PNET5 MB trial

Abstract

Purpose

Methods and patients

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods and patients

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2021

Total body irradiation of bone marrow transplant using helical TomoTherapy with a focus on the quality of dose contribution at junction target volumes

The risk of late effects following pediatric and adult radiotherapy regimens in Hodgkin lymphoma

Long-term follow-up of children with neuroblastoma receiving radiotherapy to metastatic lesions within the German Neuroblastoma Trials NB97 and NB 2004

Morbidität und Letalität einer COVID-19-Erkrankung bei Tumorpatienten: eine gematchte Kohortenstudie

Pattern of relapse in pediatric localized extremity rhabdomyosarcomas correlated with locoregional therapies administered

Peer review analysis in the field of radiation oncology: results from a web-based survey of the Young DEGRO working group