ESTRO 2025 - Abstract Book

S2182

Interdisciplinary – Education in radiation oncology

ESTRO 2025

referred to RTQA Global Harmonisation Group (GHG) definitions of acceptability by protocol (3). All trials had RTQA guidelines, in addition to the protocol, documenting description and naming of structures, with 6/24 (25%) having additional trial-specific, pre-defined criteria for acceptability to reflect clinical impact of any variation.

Conclusion: We demonstrate consistency in contouring QA for pre-accrual and during-accrual activity, provision of RTQA-specific guidelines, standardised case review reporting and adherence to GHG guidance. However, disparity in training of reviewers, criteria for clinical impact and approaches to managing inter-reviewer variation were observed, which may reflect lack of consensus/guidelines in these areas. Competency requirements have since been introduced for new reviewers with mandatory completion of benchmark case and co-review of two cases and criteria to reflect clinical impact are being developed in conjunction with the GHG. Next steps include sharing examples of best practice, standardising education and training for new reviewers and developing strategies to mitigate for inter-reviewer variation.

Keywords: Quality assurance, contouring, variation

References: 1. Impact of deviations in target volume delineation – Time for a new RTQA approach? S Cox, A Cleves, Enrico Clementel et al. Radiotherapy and Oncology 2019 137:1-8 2. Dose escalation in oesophageal cancer: comparing inter-reviewer variation within the UK SCOPE2 trial. J Helbrow,

T Crosby, O Nicholas et al. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 2024 194:S5871-S5873 3 Available at: https://rtqaharmonization.org/resources/. Accessed November 2024.