A Quality Control Study on Involved Node Radiation Therapy in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Lymphoma Study Association/Fondazione Italiana Linfomi H10 Trial on Stages I and II Hodgkin Lymphoma: Lessons Learned

PURPOSE: Involved node radiation therapy (INRT) was introduced in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Lymphoma Study Association/Fondazione Italiana Linfomi H10 trial, a large multicenter trial in early-stage Hodgkin Lymphoma. The present study aimed to evaluate the quality of INRT in this trial.

METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective, descriptive study was initiated to evaluate INRT in a representative sample encompassing approximately 10% of all irradiated patients in the H10 trial. Sampling was stratified by academic group, year of treatment, size of the treatment center, and treatment arm, and it was done proportional to the size of the strata. The sample was completed for all patients with known recurrences to enable future research on relapse patterns. Radiation therapy principle, target volume delineation and coverage, and applied technique and dose were evaluated using the EORTC Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance platform. Each case was reviewed by 2 reviewers and, in case of disagreement also by an adjudicator for a consensus evaluation.

RESULTS: Data were retrieved for 66 of 1294 irradiated patients (5.1%). Data collection and analysis were hampered more than anticipated by changes in archiving of diagnostic imaging and treatment planning systems during the running period of the trial. A review could be performed on 61 patients. The INRT principle was applied in 86.6%. Overall, 88.5% of cases were treated according to protocol. Unacceptable variations were predominately due to geographic misses of the target volume delineations. The rate of unacceptable variations decreased during trial recruitment.

CONCLUSIONS: The principle of INRT was applied in most of the reviewed patients. Almost 90% of the evaluated patients were treated according to the protocol. The present results should, however, be interpreted with caution because the number of patients evaluated was limited. Individual case reviews should be done in a prospective fashion in future trials. Radiation therapy Quality Assurance tailored to the clinical trial objectives is strongly recommended.