As radiotherapy practice and processes become more complex, the need to assure quality control becomes ever greater. At present, no international consensus exists with regards to the optimal quality control indicators for radiotherapy; moreover, few clinical audits have been conducted in the field of radiotherapy. The present article describes the aims and current status of the international IROCA "Improving Radiation Oncology Through Clinical Audits" project. The project has several important aims, including the selection of key quality indicators, the design and implementation of an international audit, and the harmonization of key aspects of radiotherapy processes among participating institutions. The primary aim is to improve the processes that directly impact clinical outcomes for patients. The experience gained from this initiative may serve as the basis for an internationally accepted clinical audit model for radiotherapy.

No abstract

Purpose: To perform a clinical audit to assess adherence to standard clinical practice for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients undergoing radiotherapy for rectal cancer treatment in four European countries. Materials and methods: Multi-institutional, retrospective cohort study of 221 patients treated for rectal cancer in 2015 at six European cancer centres. Clinical indicators applicable to general radiotherapy processes were evaluated. All data were obtained from electronic medical records. Results: The audits were performed in the year 2017. We found substantial inter-centre variability in adherence to standard clinical practices: 1) presentation of cases at departmental clinical sessions (range, 0-100%) or multidisciplinary tumour board (50-95%); 2) pretreatment MRI (61.5-100%) and thoracoabdominal CT (15.0-100%). Large inter-centre differences were observed in the mean interval between biopsy and first visit to the radiotherapy department (range, 21.6-58.6 days) and between the first visit and start of treatment (15.1-38.8 days). Treatment interruptions ≥ 1 day occurred in 43.9% (2.5-90%) of cases overall. Treatment compensation was performed in 2.1% of cases. Treatment was completed in the prescribed time in 55.7% of cases. Conclusions: This multi-institutional clinical audit revealed that most centres adhered to standard clinical practices for most of the radiotherapy processes-related variables assessed. However, the audit revealed marked inter-centre variability for certain quality indicators, particularly inconsistent record keeping. Multiple targets for improvement and/or harmonisation were identified, confirming the value of routine clinical audits to detect potential deviations from standard clinical practice.

Novel mechanistic insights are discussed herein that link a single, nontoxic, low-dose radiotherapy (LDRT) treatment (0.5-1.0 Gy) to (1) beneficial subcellular effects mediated by the activation of nuclear factor erythroid 2-related transcription factor (Nrf2) and to (2) favorable clinical outcomes for COVID-19 pneumonia patients displaying symptoms of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We posit that the favorable clinical outcomes following LDRT result from potent Nrf2-mediated antioxidant responses that rebalance the oxidatively skewed redox states of immunological cells, driving them toward antiinflammatory phenotypes. Activation of Nrf2 by ionizing radiation is highly dose dependent and conforms to the features of a biphasic (hormetic) dose-response. At the cellular and subcellular levels, hormetic doses of <1.0 Gy induce polarization shifts in the predominant population of lung macrophages, from an M1 pro-inflammatory to an M2 anti-inflammatory phenotype. Together, the Nrf2-mediated antioxidant responses and the subsequent shifts to anti-inflammatory phenotypes have the capacity to suppress cytokine storms, resolve inflammation, promote tissue repair, and prevent COVID-19-related mortality. Given these mechanistic considerations-and the historical clinical success of LDRT early in the 20th century-we opine that LDRT should be regarded as safe and effective for use at almost any stage of COVID-19 infection. In theory, however, optimal life-saving potential is thought to occur when LDRT is applied prior to the cytokine storms and before the patients are placed on mechanical oxygen ventilators. The administration of LDRT either as an intervention of last resort or too early in the disease progression may be far less effective in saving the lives of ARDS patients.

Introduction: Colorectal cancer treatment requires a complex, multidisciplinary approach. Because of the potential variability, monitoring through clinical audits is advisable. This study assesses the effects of a quality improvement action plan in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and treated with radiotherapy. Methods: Comparative, multicentre study in two cohorts of 120 patients each, selected randomly from patients diagnosed with rectal cancer who had initiated radiotherapy with a curative intent. Based on the results from a baseline clinical audit in 2013, a quality improvement action plan was designed and implemented; a second audit in 2017 evaluated its impact. Results: Standardised information was present on 77.5% of the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) staging reports. Treatment strategies were similar in all three study centres. Of the patients whose treatment was interrupted, just 9.7% received a compensation dose. There was an increase in MRI re-staging from 32.5 to 61.5%, and a significant decrease in unreported circumferential resection margins following neoadjuvant therapy (ypCRM), from 34.5 to 5.6% (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The comparison between two clinical audits showed improvements in neoadjuvant radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients. Some indicators reveal areas in need of additional efforts, for example to reduce the overall treatment time.