Plan quality association between dummy run and individual case review in a prospective multi-institutional clinical trial of postoperative cervical cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy: Japan clinical Oncology Group study (JCOG1402)

• A prospective confirmatory clinical trial of post-hysterectomy IMRT for cervical cancer. • The individual case review (ICR) and the dummy run (DR) were used as the same QA program. • The deviation number regarding the nodal and vaginal cuff CTV in the DR and the ICR was higher. • Approximately 1.4 events per plan were observed in the ICR, which was lower than that in the DR. • Specific face-to-face meetings might affect plan quality positively in the post-treatment ICR. The Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) 1402 conducted a multicenter clinical trial of postoperative intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for high-risk uterine cervical cancer patients. We assess effectiveness of the quality assurance (QA) program in central review through dummy runs (DRs) performed before patient enrollment and post-treatment individual case review (ICR), and clarify the pitfalls in treatment planning. The ICRs were conducted using the same QA program as the DR for 214 plans. The deviations were compared with those demonstrated in the DRs, and the pitfalls were clarified. Fifteen face-to-face meetings were held with physicians at participating institutions to provide feedback. Two-hundred and eighty-eight deviations and nine violations were detected in the 214 plans. The patterns of the deviations observed in the ICRs were similar to that in the DR. Frequent deviations were observed in clinical target volume (CTV) delineations, 50% in the DRs and 37% in the ICRs, respectively. In the ICRs, approximately 1.4 deviations/violations were observed per plan, which was lower than DR. Nine violations included inaccurate CTV delineation and improper PTV (planning target volume) margin, which had risks in loco-regional failures by inadequate dose coverage. Our developed QA program commonly used in DR and ICR clarified the pitfalls in treatment plans. Although the frequent deviations in CTV delineations were observed in the ICR, the deviations decreased compared to that in the DR. More specified face-to-face meetings with participating institutions will be necessary to maintain the quality of IMRT in the clinical protocol. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]