Dear Radiation Oncology Insider,
How accurate are the radiation treatments your department delivers? How good is your quality assurance program at catching mistakes? How will I know that I'm getting the appropriate treatment?
Don't be surprised if some of your cancer patients or their families start asking these questions. If some of my cancer-surviving friends are representative, the front-page coverage last week by the New York Times of radiation therapy treatment errors and the inconsistency of regulatory oversight in the U.S. thoroughly spooked its readers. Click here and here to learn more.
So how can quality assurance programs be improved? A study by an Italian hospital on its use of criticality analysis to improve QA is the subject of this edition's Insider Exclusive, which you, as an Insider subscriber, have access to before our general readership. Also, most timely, check out ASTRO's newly launched six-point patient protection plan aimed at improving safety and quality and reducing the chances of medical errors.
Over the past six weeks, there has been a lot of positive news in your Radiation Oncology Digital Community as well. Cancer mortality rates are declining in Europe -- click here for the details. And Japanese researchers who conducted the first major test of the new proposed T classification system for lung cancer reported positive results.
In addition, senior editor Erik L. Ridley describes the findings of an ACRIN study on the successful use of RF ablation to reduce pain. And quality of life is reasonably acceptable for patients who receive radiation therapy for anal cancer, with one big exception. You'll want to read about this survey conducted by M. D. Anderson Cancer Center.
Finally, AuntMinnie.com wraps up coverage of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) annual meeting with an exclusive report from Tami Freeman, editor of MedicalPhysicsWeb, about the latest research using adaptive radiation therapy to monitor tumor change.
