ESTRO 37 Abstract book

S902

ESTRO 37

2 University of Alberta, Cancer Biostatistics, Edmonton, Canada 3 Donetsk Cancer Centre, Radiotherapy Department, Donetsk, Ukraine 4 Alexandrov Research Institute of Oncology and Medical Radiology, Radiotherapy Department, Minsk, Belarus 5 Kazakhstan Research Institute of Oncology and Radiology, Radiotherapy Department, Almaty, Kazakhstan 6 National Center of Oncology, Radiotherapy Department, Yerevan, Armenia 7 National Center of Oncology, Radiotherapy Department, Baku, Azerbaijan 8 High Technology Medical Centre, Radiotherapy Department, Tbilisi, Georgia 9 National Centre of Oncology, Radiotherapy Department, Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic 10 National Centre of Oncology-, Radiotherapy Department, Chisinau, Moldova Republic of 11 Republican Clinical Oncology Centre, Radiotherapy Department, Dushanbe, Tajikistan 12 N.N. Blokhin Cancer Research Centre, Radiotherapy Department, Moscow, Russian Federation 13 National Research Center of Oncology, Radiotherapy Department, Tashkent, Uzbekistan 14 Clinical Hospital Feofaniya, Radiotherapy Department, Kiev, Ukraine 15 Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Sydney, Australia 16 Queen's University, Division of Cancer Care & Epidemiology-, Kingston, Canada Purpose or Objective The quality of radiotherapy services in post-Soviet countries has not been studied following a formal methodology. The IAEA conducted a survey using two sets of validated radiation oncology quality indicators (ROI). The purpose was to assess the quality of radiotherapy services provided in order to identify areas of weakness for further improvement and support. Material and Methods 11 countries were assessed: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. A country coordinator was identified for each country and acted as the liaison between the country and the IAEA providing the required data. The methodology was a cross-sectional one-time study survey using a 58-question tool in Russian which was sent to all participating centres. The questionnaire was based on two previously validated sets of ROI: for data on radiotherapy centres, the set of indicators proposed by Cionini et al. (R&O 2007), and for data at the country level, the Australasian ROI (2011). Results The overall response ratio was 66.3%, but for the Russian Federation, it was 24%. Analysis of the results provided an update of current infrastructure in terms of radiotherapy and supporting equipment in each country. There are 246 RT centres operating 262 linear accelerators and 343 cobalt-60 units. 61% of teletherapy machines are older than 10 years. The concept of multidisciplinary decision making usually involves successive patient referrals and consultations as opposed to multidisciplinary tumour board meetings. 56% of patients are discussed in multidisciplinary meetings. The ratio of curative/palliative treatments is 2.7. CT- based treatment planning is performed in 42.5% of

treated between 2000-2004, this proportion was 55.1%, 60.5% in 2005-2009 and 70.5% in 2010. Comparing with the European data, more than 70% of OS was achieved according to EUROCARE-5 in 2000-2007 only in eight European countries. In conclusion, the introduction of screening tests had a significant positive impact on the population of Lower Silesian women, despite the low percentage of the population covered by this program. Further action should be directed towards increasing women's awareness so that they can participate in the screening program. EP-1677 Failure to publish Radiotherapy Clinical Trials results: Is the number of participants relevant? J. Perez-Alija 1 , P. Gallego 1 , I. Linares 2 , E. Ambroa 3 , A. Pedro 4 1 Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Medical Physics, Barcelona, Spain 2 Institut Català d'Oncologia, Radiation Oncology Department, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain 3 Consorci Sanitari de Terrasa, Radiation Oncology Department, Terrasa, Spain 4 Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Radiation Oncology, Barcelona, Spain Purpose or Objective To determine the rate of non-publication of interventional phase 3&4 clinical trials in radiotherapy. To compare publication rates by number of trial participants. Our hypothesis is that rates of publication would rise significantly as soon as two different institutions are participating in the trial. Material and Methods A query on ClinicalTrials.gov for completed trials in radiotherapy was conducted. We allowed a minimum of 24 months for editorial process until the trial was finally published in a peer-reviewed journal (PRJ). We compare publications rates in a PRJ between trials grouped by number of participants. Results Overall, 387 clinical trials met the criteria for searching a publication in a PRJ. A total of 171 (44.2%) remained unpublished. When the trial was conducted by only one institution rates of non-publication increased up to 58.4%. When trials had more than one participant, non- publication rates decreased significantly (for more than 50 participants, only 12% of trials did not published their results). Conclusion All medical evidence should be both published and available. We found that clinical trials involving more than one institution were associated with a better publication rate. Trials funding in radiotherapy should take this result into account to better optimize human and economic resources. Non-publication means a poor use of financial resources, a loss of knowledge through hidden data, and poses an ethical issue with our patient community. EP-1678 Quality of radiotherapy services in post- Soviet countries: an IAEA survey E. Rosenblatt 1 , E. Fidarova 1 , S. Ghosh 2 , O. Unterkirhere 1 , N. Semikoz 3 , V. Sinaika 4 , V. Kim 5 , N. Karamyan 6 , I. Isayev 7 , K. Akbarov 7 , D. Lomidze 8 , O. Bondareva 9 , P. Tuzlucov 10 , M. Zardodkhonova 11 , S. Tkachev 12 , M. Kisliakova 12 , J. Alimov 13 , T. Pidlubna 14 , M. Barton 15 , W. Mackillop 16 1 IAEA - International Atomic Energy Agency, Applied Radiation Biology and Radiotherapy-, Wien, Austria