Research
Epitranscriptomics & Cancer Adaptation : A.David

Activities

Our research work focuses on the contribution of post-transcriptional mechanisms on cancer cell adaptation, in particular RNA epigenetic & translational control.

More..

Zotero public

Added by André Pèlegrin
Group name EquipeAP
Item Type Journal Article
Title A "Wake-Up Call" For Routine Morbidity And Mortality Review Meetings Procedure As Part Of A Quality Governance Program In Radiotherapy Departments: Results Of The Proust Survey
Creator Belkacemi et al.
Author Yazid Belkacemi
Author Laurianne Colson-Durand
Author Maryse Fayolle-Campana
Author Pascale Pons
Author Amandine Rialland
Author Sylvie Bastuji-Garin
Author Quy Nguyen Hoang
Author Delphine Lerouge
Author Françoise Jaffré
Author Marc Bollet
Author David Azria
Abstract PURPOSE: Morbidity and mortality review (MMR) meetings in Radiotherapy (RT) departments aim to monitor radiation-induced toxicities and identify potential factors that may be correlated with their development and severity, particularly treatment planning errors. The aim of the PROUST Survey was to make an inventory of existing MMR procedures and to describe their procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The link to the web-questionnaire of the PROUST survey was sent to 351 radiation oncologists working in 172 centers. The questionnaire included items of organization, frequency, membership, governance, reasons for non-implementation of MMR and interest in its creation. RESULTS: As of July 2017, we had received 108 responses from the 172 centers, 107 of which were completed for analyses. All centers declared that they had initiated a quality assurance program in the department, including implementation of feedback committees (FBC) dedicated to the registration, analysis and correction of precursor events. Less than half the centers (47%) had implemented MMR procedures. However, there was significant confusion with FBC in the large majority of them. MMR were organized every six and 12 months in 21% and 15% of the centers, respectively. In 60% of the centers, toxicity >/= grade 3 was the main reason for the MMR initiation. In routine practice, contouring and dosimetry files were reviewed by 66% and 83% of centers practicing MMR, respectively. However, only 40% enrolled the data in a registry dedicated to the surveillance. Finally, 78% expressed interest in initiating a consensual procedure. CONCLUSION: MMRs are not systematically implemented in the worldwide RT departments. In xxxxxx and Europe, few departments with quality assurance programs have implemented MMRs. This survey showed that a large majority of the centers are interested in implementing an MMR with a formalized procedure. Our project could help to increase interest of the worldwide RT community in this topic.
Publication Practical Radiation Oncology
Date Sep 27, 2018
Journal Abbr Pract Radiat Oncol
Language eng
DOI 10.1016/j.prro.2018.09.004
ISSN 1879-8519
Short Title A "Wake-Up Call" For Routine Morbidity And Mortality Review Meetings Procedure As Part Of A Quality Governance Program In Radiotherapy Departments
Library Catalog PubMed
Extra PMID: 30268430
Tags cancer, Equipe, morbidity review, nonvisible, organization, review, Revue
Date Added 2018/10/25 - 18:20:08
Date Modified 2019/12/11 - 18:22:50


© Institut de Recherche en Cancérologie de Montpellier - 2011 - Tous droits réservés - Mentions légales - Connexion - Conception : ID Alizés