Advanced Technology QA Center Our plan is to capitalize on the infrastructure and strengths of the nation's existing quality assurance (QA) programs that comprise our Advanced Technology QA Consortium (ATC), including the Image-Guided Therapy Center (ITC), Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG), Radiological Physics Center (RPC), and the Quality Assurance Review Center (QARC) to maintain/develop an advanced medical informatics infrastructure that provides an environment in which institutions can submit, and QA Centers can receive, share, and analyze volumetric multimodality imaging/treatment planning/verification (ITPV) digital data. Specifically, we will (1) maintain/manage (and make incremental improvements as required to) the current electronic data submission of advanced technology (3DCRT, IMRT, SBRT, and brachytherapy) protocol credentialing and case data, archival storage, and remote QA review process utilizing ATC Method-1 (now referred to as the QuASAR-1 (Quality Assurance Submission, Analysis, and Review-1) system);(2) develop novel web-based remote-review tools that will enhance the efficient and effective review of protocols utilizing advanced technologies. The design infrastructure of these tools will assist the development of future protocol processes such as image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) and adaptive radiation therapy (ART). The proposed system is referred to as QuASAR-2 and will be modular in design to promote efficient tools and subsystems development that achieve compatibility with existing software standards, including the Cancer Bioinformatics Grid (caBIG) and DICOM RT, and maintain/develop archival ITPV, credentialing/QA databases that can be linked with the cooperative group's clinical outcomes database;(3) assist cooperative groups in the development and management of advanced technology clinical trials protocols including (a) tumor/target volume and organ at risk definitions;(b) credentialing requirements and evaluation criteria;(c) electronic data submission requirements/instructions;(d) QA review procedures;and (4) serve as an educational resource to the nation's clinical trial cooperative groups and participating institutions for support of advanced technology radiation therapy clinical trials. Our ATC QA consortium approach will help avoid duplication of service/developmental efforts and promote development of uniform credentialing/QA criteria for clinical trials throughout all Cooperative Groups.

Agency
National Institute of Health (NIH)
Institute
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Type
Resource-Related Research Projects--Cooperative Agreements (U24)
Project #
3U24CA081647-13S2
Application #
8690240
Study Section
Special Emphasis Panel (ZCA1-SRRB-9 (M2))
Program Officer
Deye, James
Project Start
1999-07-22
Project End
2014-02-28
Budget Start
2013-07-01
Budget End
2014-02-28
Support Year
13
Fiscal Year
2013
Total Cost
$1,287,846
Indirect Cost
$273,886
Name
Washington University
Department
Radiation-Diagnostic/Oncology
Type
Schools of Medicine
DUNS #
068552207
City
Saint Louis
State
MO
Country
United States
Zip Code
63130
Davidson, Scott E; Cui, Jing; Kry, Stephen et al. (2016) Modification and validation of an analytical source model for external beam radiotherapy Monte Carlo dose calculations. Med Phys 43:4842
Lee, W Robert; Dignam, James J; Amin, Mahul B et al. (2016) Randomized Phase III Noninferiority Study Comparing Two Radiotherapy Fractionation Schedules in Patients With Low-Risk Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol 34:2325-32
Baumann, Brian C; Bosch, Walter R; Bahl, Amit et al. (2016) Development and Validation of Consensus Contouring Guidelines for Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Bladder Cancer After Radical Cystectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 96:78-86
Taylor, Paige A; Kry, Stephen F; Alvarez, Paola et al. (2016) Results From the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core Houston's Anthropomorphic Phantoms Used for Proton Therapy Clinical Trial Credentialing. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 95:242-8
Lim, Karen; Erickson, Beth; Jürgenliemk-Schulz, Ina M et al. (2015) Variability in clinical target volume delineation for intensity modulated radiation therapy in 3 challenging cervix cancer scenarios. Pract Radiat Oncol 5:e557-65
Baldini, Elizabeth H; Abrams, Ross A; Bosch, Walter et al. (2015) Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Target Volume and Organ at Risk Contour Delineation Agreement Among NRG Sarcoma Radiation Oncologists. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 92:1053-9
Wu, Abraham J; Bosch, Walter R; Chang, Daniel T et al. (2015) Expert Consensus Contouring Guidelines for Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy in Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 92:911-20
Moore, Kevin L; Schmidt, Rachel; Moiseenko, Vitali et al. (2015) Quantifying Unnecessary Normal Tissue Complication Risks due to Suboptimal Planning: A Secondary Study of RTOG 0126. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 92:228-35
Bradley, Jeffrey D; Paulus, Rebecca; Komaki, Ritsuko et al. (2015) Standard-dose versus high-dose conformal radiotherapy with concurrent and consolidation carboplatin plus paclitaxel with or without cetuximab for patients with stage IIIA or IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer (RTOG 0617): a randomised, two-by-two factorial p Lancet Oncol 16:187-99
Bruner, Deborah W; Hunt, Daniel; Michalski, Jeff M et al. (2015) Preliminary patient-reported outcomes analysis of 3-dimensional radiation therapy versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy on the high-dose arm of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0126 prostate cancer trial. Cancer 121:2422-30

Showing the most recent 10 out of 79 publications