BackgroundThere is a clear link between irregular breathing and errors in medical imaging and radiation treatment. The audiovisual biofeedback system is an advanced form of respiratory guidance that has previously demonstrated to facilitate regular patient breathing. The clinical benefits of audiovisual biofeedback will be investigated in an upcoming multi-institutional, randomised, and stratified clinical trial recruiting a total of 75 lung cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy.Methods/DesignTo comprehensively perform a clinical evaluation of the audiovisual biofeedback system, a multi-institutional study will be performed. Our methodological framework will be based on the widely used Technology Acceptance Model, which gives qualitative scales for two specific variables, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, which are fundamental determinants for user acceptance. A total of 75 lung cancer patients will be recruited across seven radiation oncology departments across Australia. Patients will be randomised in a 2:1 ratio, with 2/3 of the patients being recruited into the intervention arm and 1/3 in the control arm. 2:1 randomisation is appropriate as within the interventional arm there is a screening procedure where only patients whose breathing is more regular with audiovisual biofeedback will continue to use this system for their imaging and treatment procedures. Patients within the intervention arm whose free breathing is more regular than audiovisual biofeedback in the screen procedure will remain in the intervention arm of the study but their imaging and treatment procedures will be performed without audiovisual biofeedback. Patients will also be stratified by treating institution and for treatment intent (palliative vs. radical) to ensure similar balance in the arms across the sites. Patients and hospital staff operating the audiovisual biofeedback system will complete questionnaires to assess their experience with audiovisual biofeedback. The objectives of this clinical trial is to assess the impact of audiovisual biofeedback on breathing motion, the patient experience and clinical confidence in the system, clinical workflow, treatment margins, and toxicity outcomes.DiscussionThis clinical trial marks an important milestone in breathing guidance studies as it will be the first randomised, controlled trial providing the most comprehensive evaluation of the clinical impact of breathing guidance on cancer radiation therapy to date. This study is powered to determine the impact of AV biofeedback on breathing regularity and medical image quality. Objectives such as determining the indications and contra-indications for the use of AV biofeedback, evaluation of patient experience, radiation toxicity occurrence and severity, and clinician confidence will shed light on the design of future phase III clinical trials.Trial registrationThis trial has been registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), its trial ID is ACTRN12613001177741.

Treatment-related toxicity is an important component in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) management decision-making. Our aim was to evaluate and compare the toxicity rates of curative and palliative radiotherapy with and without chemotherapy. This meta-analysis provides better quantitative estimates of the toxicities compared to individual trials. A systematic review of randomised trials with > 50 unresectable NSCLC patients, treated with curative or palliative conventional radiotherapy (RT) with or without chemotherapy. Data was extracted for oesophagitis, pneumonitis, cardiac events, pulmonary fibrosis, myelopathy and neutropenia by any grade, grade ≥ 3 and treatment-related deaths. Mantel–Haenszel fixed-effect method was used to obtain pooled risk ratio. Forty-nine trials with 8609 evaluable patients were included. There was significantly less grade ≥ 3 acute oesophagitis (6.4 vs 22.2%, p < 0.0001) and any grade oesophagitis (70.4 vs 79.0%, p = 0.04) for sequential CRT compared to concurrent CRT, with no difference in pneumonitis (grade ≥ 3 or any grade), neutropenia (grade ≥ 3), cardiac events (grade ≥ 3) or treatment-related deaths. Although the rate of toxicity increased with intensification of treatment with RT, the only significant difference between treatment regimens was the rate of oesophagitis between the use of concurrent and sequential CRT. This can aid clinicians in radiotherapy decision making for NSCLC.

No abstract

No abstract