Biostatistical analysis of results from clinical trials in radiation oncology

Author(s):  
John M. Krall ◽  
Thomas F. Pajak
2014 ◽  
Vol 90 (1) ◽  
pp. S581-S582 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Cihoric ◽  
A. Tsikkinis ◽  
D.M. Aebersold ◽  
K. Lössl ◽  
K. Zaugg

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 77
Author(s):  
Swathi Chidambaram ◽  
Sergio W. Guadix ◽  
John Kwon ◽  
Justin Tang ◽  
Amanda Rivera ◽  
...  

Background: As the field of brain and spine stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) continues to grow, so will the need for a comprehensive evidence base. However, it is unclear to what degree trainees feel properly equipped to use SRS. We assess the perceptions and comfort level reported by neurosurgery and radiation oncology residents concerning the evidence-based practice of SRS. Methods: A continuing medical education (CME) course provided peer-reviewed updates regarding treatment with intracranial and spinal SRS. Presentations were given by neurosurgery and radiation oncology residents with mentorship by senior faculty. To gauge perceptions regarding SRS, attendees were surveyed. Responses before and after the course were analyzed using the Fisher’s exact test in R statistical software. Results: Participants reported the greatest knowledge improvements concerning data registries (P < 0.001) and clinical trials (P = 0.026). About 82% of all (n = 17) radiation oncology and neurosurgery residents either agreed or strongly agreed that a brain and spine SRS rotation would be beneficial in their training. However, only 47% agreed or strongly agreed that one was currently part of their training. In addition, knowledge gains in SRS indications (P = 0.084) and ability to seek collaboration with colleagues (P = 0.084) showed notable trends. Conclusion: There are clear knowledge gaps shared by potential future practitioners of SRS. Specifically, knowledge regarding SRS data registries, indications, and clinical trials offer potential areas for increased educational focus. Furthermore, the gap between enthusiasm for increased SRS training and the current availability of such training at medical institutions must be addressed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 131 ◽  
pp. 76-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gillian Thomas ◽  
Elizabeth Eisenhauer ◽  
Robert G. Bristow ◽  
Cai Grau ◽  
Coen Hurkmans ◽  
...  

BJR|Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 20180035 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yevgeniy Vinogradskiy

A form of lung function imaging is emerging that uses phase-resolved four-dimensional CT (4DCT or breath-hold CT) images along with image processing techniques to generate lung function maps that provide a surrogate of lung ventilation. CT-based ventilation (referred to as CT-ventilation) research has gained momentum in Radiation Oncology because many lung cancer patients undergo four-dimensional CT simulation as part of the standard treatment planning process. Therefore, generating CT-ventilation images provides functional information without burdening the patient with an extra imaging procedure. CT-ventilation has progressed from an image processing calculation methodology, to validation efforts, to retrospective demonstration of clinical utility in Radiation Oncology. In particular, CT-ventilation has been proposed for two main clinical applications: functional avoidance radiation therapy and thoracic dose–response assessment. The idea of functional avoidance radiation therapy is to preferentially spare functional portions of the lung (as measured by CT-ventilation) during radiation therapy with the hypothesis that reducing dose to functional portions of the lung will lead to reduced rates of radiation-related thoracic toxicity. The idea of imaging-based dose–response assessment is to evaluate pre- to post-treatment CT-ventilation-based imaging changes. The hypothesis is that early, imaging-change-based response can be an early predictor of subsequent thoracic toxicity. Based on the retrospective evidence, the clinical applications of CT-ventilation have progressed from the retrospective setting to on-going prospective clinical trials. This review will cover basic CT-ventilation calculation methodologies, validation efforts, presentation of clinical applications, summarize on-going clinical trials, review potential uncertainties and shortcomings of CT-ventilation, and discuss future directions of CT-ventilation research.


2014 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 490-492
Author(s):  
Mitchell Machtay ◽  
Jeffrey D. Bradley ◽  
Walter J. Curran

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document