胸椎常规、每日两次和立体定向放射治疗的剂量规划和辐射优化:来自全国从业者调查的德尔菲共识。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Practical Radiation Oncology Pub Date : 2024-11-29 DOI:10.1016/j.prro.2024.11.006
Julius Weng, Jeff Ryckman, Matthew S Katz, Hina Saeed, Christopher Estes, Issam El Naqa, Amy Moreno, Sue S Yom
{"title":"胸椎常规、每日两次和立体定向放射治疗的剂量规划和辐射优化:来自全国从业者调查的德尔菲共识。","authors":"Julius Weng, Jeff Ryckman, Matthew S Katz, Hina Saeed, Christopher Estes, Issam El Naqa, Amy Moreno, Sue S Yom","doi":"10.1016/j.prro.2024.11.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We sent surveys to a large number of radiation oncologists with active thoracic cancer practices and applied the Delphi method over 3 rounds to generate consensus dose-volume histogram metrics. We used these results to create consensus-based organs-at-risk dose constraints and target goal templates for practical implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods and materials: </strong>In this institutional review board-approved study, data were collected using REDCap electronic data capture on a secure server. Radiation oncologists identified from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited departments' websites were asked to confirm their self-identification as thoracic radiation oncologists and nominate other respondents. All invitees were asked to complete 3 rounds of questions related to normal tissue constraints, target coverage metrics, prescribing practices, and other planning considerations. Preliminary consensus statements were presented in the second round of surveys for voting on a 5-point Likert scale. The third and last round of surveys presented the iterated consensus statements and target coverage metric statements for final voting. The high consensus was predefined as ≥ 75% agreement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-three (42.8%) of 194 invitees completed at least 1 round of surveys. The group included a diversity of gender, geography, and clinical settings. Response rates were 83%, 57%, and 55%, respectively, for the 3 rounds. By the end of the process, 48 of 96 (50%) originally proposed normal tissue dose constraint statements were iterated to consensus, and 5 of 7 (71%) proposed target coverage metric statements achieved consensus. These were used to create crowdsourced treatment planning templates.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study achieved broad-based consensus-building on ideal and acceptable dose constraints for conventional, twice-daily, and stereotactic thoracic radiation therapy. Future directions could include extending this approach to other disease sites, studying the influence of widespread implementation on treatment planning, or facilitating the development of community consensus around emergent or controversial questions.</p>","PeriodicalId":54245,"journal":{"name":"Practical Radiation Oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dose Planning and Radiation Optimization for Thoracic Conventional, Twice Daily, and Stereotactic Radiation Therapy: A Delphi Consensus From a National Survey of Practitioners.\",\"authors\":\"Julius Weng, Jeff Ryckman, Matthew S Katz, Hina Saeed, Christopher Estes, Issam El Naqa, Amy Moreno, Sue S Yom\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.prro.2024.11.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We sent surveys to a large number of radiation oncologists with active thoracic cancer practices and applied the Delphi method over 3 rounds to generate consensus dose-volume histogram metrics. We used these results to create consensus-based organs-at-risk dose constraints and target goal templates for practical implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods and materials: </strong>In this institutional review board-approved study, data were collected using REDCap electronic data capture on a secure server. Radiation oncologists identified from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited departments' websites were asked to confirm their self-identification as thoracic radiation oncologists and nominate other respondents. All invitees were asked to complete 3 rounds of questions related to normal tissue constraints, target coverage metrics, prescribing practices, and other planning considerations. Preliminary consensus statements were presented in the second round of surveys for voting on a 5-point Likert scale. The third and last round of surveys presented the iterated consensus statements and target coverage metric statements for final voting. The high consensus was predefined as ≥ 75% agreement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-three (42.8%) of 194 invitees completed at least 1 round of surveys. The group included a diversity of gender, geography, and clinical settings. Response rates were 83%, 57%, and 55%, respectively, for the 3 rounds. By the end of the process, 48 of 96 (50%) originally proposed normal tissue dose constraint statements were iterated to consensus, and 5 of 7 (71%) proposed target coverage metric statements achieved consensus. These were used to create crowdsourced treatment planning templates.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study achieved broad-based consensus-building on ideal and acceptable dose constraints for conventional, twice-daily, and stereotactic thoracic radiation therapy. Future directions could include extending this approach to other disease sites, studying the influence of widespread implementation on treatment planning, or facilitating the development of community consensus around emergent or controversial questions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54245,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Practical Radiation Oncology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Practical Radiation Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prro.2024.11.006\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Practical Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prro.2024.11.006","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导论:我们向大量从事胸部肿瘤治疗的放射肿瘤学家发送了调查问卷,并在3轮中应用德尔菲法来产生共识的DVH指标。我们利用这些结果创建了基于共识的OAR剂量限制和实际实施的目标目标模板。方法:在这项irb批准的研究中,数据通过安全服务器上的REDCap电子数据采集收集。从acgme认可的部门网站上确定的放射肿瘤学家被要求确认他们的自我认同是胸部放射肿瘤学家,并提名其他受访者。所有受邀者都被要求完成3轮有关正常组织约束、目标覆盖指标、处方实践和其他计划考虑因素的问题。初步共识声明是在第二轮调查中提出的,以5分的李克特量表投票。第三轮也是最后一轮调查提出了迭代的共识声明和目标覆盖度量声明,以供最终投票。高一致性被预先定义为≥75%的一致性。结果:194名被邀请者中有83人(42.8%)完成了至少一轮调查。该小组包括性别,地理和诊所设置的多样性。三轮治疗的有效率分别为83%、57%和55%。到研究过程结束时,96个最初提出的正常组织剂量限制声明中有48个(50%)得到了共识,7个提议的目标覆盖度量声明中有5个(71%)获得了共识。这些数据被用来创建众包治疗计划模板。结论:本研究对常规、每日两次和立体定向胸部放疗的理想和可接受剂量限制达成了广泛的共识。未来的方向可能包括将这种方法扩展到其他疾病地点,研究广泛实施对治疗计划的影响,或促进围绕新出现的或有争议的问题形成社区共识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dose Planning and Radiation Optimization for Thoracic Conventional, Twice Daily, and Stereotactic Radiation Therapy: A Delphi Consensus From a National Survey of Practitioners.

Purpose: We sent surveys to a large number of radiation oncologists with active thoracic cancer practices and applied the Delphi method over 3 rounds to generate consensus dose-volume histogram metrics. We used these results to create consensus-based organs-at-risk dose constraints and target goal templates for practical implementation.

Methods and materials: In this institutional review board-approved study, data were collected using REDCap electronic data capture on a secure server. Radiation oncologists identified from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited departments' websites were asked to confirm their self-identification as thoracic radiation oncologists and nominate other respondents. All invitees were asked to complete 3 rounds of questions related to normal tissue constraints, target coverage metrics, prescribing practices, and other planning considerations. Preliminary consensus statements were presented in the second round of surveys for voting on a 5-point Likert scale. The third and last round of surveys presented the iterated consensus statements and target coverage metric statements for final voting. The high consensus was predefined as ≥ 75% agreement.

Results: Eighty-three (42.8%) of 194 invitees completed at least 1 round of surveys. The group included a diversity of gender, geography, and clinical settings. Response rates were 83%, 57%, and 55%, respectively, for the 3 rounds. By the end of the process, 48 of 96 (50%) originally proposed normal tissue dose constraint statements were iterated to consensus, and 5 of 7 (71%) proposed target coverage metric statements achieved consensus. These were used to create crowdsourced treatment planning templates.

Conclusion: This study achieved broad-based consensus-building on ideal and acceptable dose constraints for conventional, twice-daily, and stereotactic thoracic radiation therapy. Future directions could include extending this approach to other disease sites, studying the influence of widespread implementation on treatment planning, or facilitating the development of community consensus around emergent or controversial questions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Practical Radiation Oncology
Practical Radiation Oncology Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
6.10%
发文量
177
审稿时长
34 days
期刊介绍: The overarching mission of Practical Radiation Oncology is to improve the quality of radiation oncology practice. PRO''s purpose is to document the state of current practice, providing background for those in training and continuing education for practitioners, through discussion and illustration of new techniques, evaluation of current practices, and publication of case reports. PRO strives to provide its readers content that emphasizes knowledge "with a purpose." The content of PRO includes: Original articles focusing on patient safety, quality measurement, or quality improvement initiatives Original articles focusing on imaging, contouring, target delineation, simulation, treatment planning, immobilization, organ motion, and other practical issues ASTRO guidelines, position papers, and consensus statements Essays that highlight enriching personal experiences in caring for cancer patients and their families.
期刊最新文献
Variations in radiotherapy delineation of the lateral compartments in patients with rectal cancer: results after an updated national guideline. The Impact of Margin Expansions on Local Control and Radionecrosis Following Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. ONLINE ADAPTIVE FIVE-FRACTION ABLATIVE RADIOTHERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER USING A CONVENTIONAL LINEAR ACCELERATOR. Radiation Reflection Rounds: A Departmental Initiative for Staff Well-being. Neoadjuvant SBRT plus Elective Nodal Irradiation with Concurrent Capecitabine for Patients with Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Survival Analysis of a Prospective Phase 1 Trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1