skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-F-T-243: Major Risks in Radiotherapy. A Review Based On Risk Analysis Literature

Abstract

Purpose: We present a literature review of risk analyses in radiotherapy to highlight the most reported risks and facilitate the spread of this valuable information so that professionals can be aware of these major threats before performing their own studies. Methods: We considered studies with at least an estimation of the probability of occurrence of an adverse event (O) and its associated severity (S). They cover external beam radiotherapy, brachytherapy, intraoperative radiotherapy, and stereotactic techniques. We selected only the works containing a detailed ranked series of elements or failure modes and focused on the first fully reported quartile as much. Afterward, we sorted the risk elements according to a regular radiotherapy procedure so that the resulting groups were cited in several works and be ranked in this way. Results: 29 references published between 2007 and February 2016 were studied. Publication trend has been generally rising. The most employed analysis has been the Failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA). Among references, we selected 20 works listing 258 ranked risk elements. They were sorted into 31 groups appearing at least in two different works. 11 groups appeared in at least 5 references and 5 groups did it in 7 or more papers.more » These last sets of risks where choosing another set of images or plan for planning or treating, errors related with contours, errors in patient positioning for treatment, human mistakes when programming treatments, and planning errors. Conclusion: There is a sufficient amount and variety of references for identifying which failure modes or elements should be addressed in a radiotherapy department before attempting a specific analysis. FMEA prevailed, but other studies such as “risk matrix” or “occurrence × severity” analyses can also lead professionals’ efforts. Risk associated with human actions ranks very high; therefore, they should be automated or at least peer-reviewed.« less

Authors:
; ; ;  [1]; ; ;  [2]
  1. Servicio de Radiofísica y Protección Radiológica, Consorcio Hospitalario Provincial de Castellón, Castellón de la Plana, España/Spain (Spain)
  2. Servicio de Oncología Radioterápica, Consorcio Hospitalario Provincial de Castellón, Castellón de la Plana, España/Spain (Spain)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22648859
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; BRACHYTHERAPY; ERRORS; HAZARDS; PLANNING; REVIEWS; RISK ASSESSMENT

Citation Formats

López-Tarjuelo, J, Guasp-Tortajada, M, Iglesias-Montenegro, N, Monasor-Denia, P, Bouché-Babiloni, A, Morillo-Macías, V, and Ferrer-Albiach, C. SU-F-T-243: Major Risks in Radiotherapy. A Review Based On Risk Analysis Literature. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956383.
López-Tarjuelo, J, Guasp-Tortajada, M, Iglesias-Montenegro, N, Monasor-Denia, P, Bouché-Babiloni, A, Morillo-Macías, V, & Ferrer-Albiach, C. SU-F-T-243: Major Risks in Radiotherapy. A Review Based On Risk Analysis Literature. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956383.
López-Tarjuelo, J, Guasp-Tortajada, M, Iglesias-Montenegro, N, Monasor-Denia, P, Bouché-Babiloni, A, Morillo-Macías, V, and Ferrer-Albiach, C. 2016. "SU-F-T-243: Major Risks in Radiotherapy. A Review Based On Risk Analysis Literature". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956383.
@article{osti_22648859,
title = {SU-F-T-243: Major Risks in Radiotherapy. A Review Based On Risk Analysis Literature},
author = {López-Tarjuelo, J and Guasp-Tortajada, M and Iglesias-Montenegro, N and Monasor-Denia, P and Bouché-Babiloni, A and Morillo-Macías, V and Ferrer-Albiach, C},
abstractNote = {Purpose: We present a literature review of risk analyses in radiotherapy to highlight the most reported risks and facilitate the spread of this valuable information so that professionals can be aware of these major threats before performing their own studies. Methods: We considered studies with at least an estimation of the probability of occurrence of an adverse event (O) and its associated severity (S). They cover external beam radiotherapy, brachytherapy, intraoperative radiotherapy, and stereotactic techniques. We selected only the works containing a detailed ranked series of elements or failure modes and focused on the first fully reported quartile as much. Afterward, we sorted the risk elements according to a regular radiotherapy procedure so that the resulting groups were cited in several works and be ranked in this way. Results: 29 references published between 2007 and February 2016 were studied. Publication trend has been generally rising. The most employed analysis has been the Failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA). Among references, we selected 20 works listing 258 ranked risk elements. They were sorted into 31 groups appearing at least in two different works. 11 groups appeared in at least 5 references and 5 groups did it in 7 or more papers. These last sets of risks where choosing another set of images or plan for planning or treating, errors related with contours, errors in patient positioning for treatment, human mistakes when programming treatments, and planning errors. Conclusion: There is a sufficient amount and variety of references for identifying which failure modes or elements should be addressed in a radiotherapy department before attempting a specific analysis. FMEA prevailed, but other studies such as “risk matrix” or “occurrence × severity” analyses can also lead professionals’ efforts. Risk associated with human actions ranks very high; therefore, they should be automated or at least peer-reviewed.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956383},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • An analysis of the role of radiotherapy in the management of gallbladder (GB) and extra-hepatic bile duct (EHBD) cancer is based upon thirteen patients irradiated in our hospital and a review of the literature. These patients were treated as part of curative or palliative management in conjunction with surgery, after surgical failure or recurrence, and as the only palliative modality. Doses ranged from 3800 to 7225 rad. Significant palliation was obtained in 92 percent of the patients; average total bilirubin value decreased from 9.1 mg. percent before to 1.7 mg. percent after radiotherapy. The mean survival of all patients wasmore » 12.7 months after surgery (7.1 in GB, 16.1 in EHBD), and was 7.3 months after initiation of radiotherapy (6.3 in GB, 8.0 in EHBD). Two patients were alive and well with no evidence of disease 12 and 16 months after radiotherapy, and local tumor control was achieved in two. Complications included possible biliary fibrosis. Based upon a critical review of the surgical, chemotherapeutic, and radiotherapeutic literature, it is concluded that present surgical therapy fails because of extensive regional disease in which local recurrences follow various simple and radical surgical maneuvers; palliative surgery often fails. Survival rates have been poor following any therapy at present, although encouraging results are seen with carefully planned megavoltage radiotherapy. A proposal is made to evaluate the role of radiotherapy systematically: as part of curative therapy post-operatively to decrease local recurrences and to increase the length and quality of survival; to treat incisional recurrences; as part of advanced disease management to increase the effectiveness and length of palliation; and in conjunction with chemotherapy to further consolidate therapeutic gains made with radiotherapy alone.« less
  • Purpose: To identify haplotypes of single nucleotide polymorphism markers associated with the risk of early adverse skin reactions (EASRs) after radiotherapy in breast cancer patients. Methods and Materials: DNA was sampled from 399 Japanese breast cancer patients who qualified for breast-conserving radiotherapy. Using the National Cancer Institute-Common Toxicity Criteria scoring system, version 2, the patients were grouped according to EASRs, defined as those occurring within 3 months of starting radiotherapy (Grade 1 or less, n = 290; Grade 2 or greater, n = 109). A total of 999 single nucleotide polymorphisms from 137 candidate genes for radiation susceptibility were genotyped,more » and the haplotype associations between groups were assessed. Results: The global haplotype association analysis (p < 0.05 and false discovery rate < 0.05) indicated that estimated haplotypes in six loci were associated with EASR risk. A comparison of the risk haplotype with the most frequent haplotype in each locus showed haplotype GGTT in CD44 (odds ratio [OR] = 2.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-4.43) resulted in a significantly greater EASR risk. Five haplotypes, CG in MAD2L2 (OR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35-0.87), GTTG in PTTG1 (OR = 0.48; 95% CI, 0.24-0.96), TCC (OR = 0.48; 95% CI, 0.26-0.89) and CCG (OR = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.27-0.92) in RAD9A, and GCT in LIG3 (OR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.22-0.93) were associated with a reduced EASR risk. No significant risk haplotype was observed in REV3L. Conclusion: Individual radiosensitivity can be partly determined by these haplotypes in multiple loci. Our findings may lead to a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying the genetic variation in radiation sensitivity and resistance among breast cancer patients.« less
  • Purpose: A fully heterogeneous population averaged mechanistic tumor control probability (TCP) model is appropriate for the analysis of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). This has been accomplished for EBRT photon treatment of intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Extending the TCP model for low and high-risk patients would be beneficial in terms of overall decision making. Furthermore, different radiation treatment modalities such as protons and carbon-ions are becoming increasingly available. Consequently, there is a need for a complete TCP model. Methods: A TCP model was fitted and validated to a primary endpoint of 5-year biological no evidence of disease clinical outcome data obtained frommore » a review of the literature for low, intermediate, and high-risk prostate cancer patients (5218 patients fitted, 1088 patients validated), treated by photons, protons, or carbon-ions. The review followed the preferred reporting item for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement. Treatment regimens include standard fractionation and hypofractionation treatments. Residual analysis and goodness of fit statistics were applied. Results: The TCP model achieves a good level of fit overall, linear regression results in a p-value of <0.000 01 with an adjusted-weighted-R{sup 2} value of 0.77 and a weighted root mean squared error (wRMSE) of 1.2%, to the fitted clinical outcome data. Validation of the model utilizing three independent datasets obtained from the literature resulted in an adjusted-weighted-R{sup 2} value of 0.78 and a wRMSE of less than 1.8%, to the validation clinical outcome data. The weighted mean absolute residual across the entire dataset is found to be 5.4%. Conclusions: This TCP model fitted and validated to clinical outcome data, appears to be an appropriate model for the inclusion of all clinical prostate cancer risk categories, and allows evaluation of current EBRT modalities with regard to tumor control prediction.« less
  • In response to rising concern about technological risks, a concerted effort is being made to improve risk analysis methods and risk management approaches. As part of this effort, behavioral and social scientists have produced a substantial body of knowledge of value to risk analysts and decision makers. This paper focuses on behavioral and social science studies of human intellectual limitations in thinking about risk, factors influencing risk attitudes and perceptions, and factors contributing to social conflicts and disputes about technological activities. A basic assumption of the paper is that analysts and decision makers can benefit from a better understanding ofmore » how experts and nonexperts think and make decisions about technological risks. Without such understanding, well-intended policies may be ineffective or even counterproductive.« less
  • Short communication.