The Global Quality Assurance of Radiation Therapy Clinical Trials Harmonization Group (GHG) is a collaborative group of Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance (RTQA) Groups harmonizing and improving RTQA for multi-institutional clinical trials. The objective of the GHG OAR Working Group was to unify OAR contouring guidance across RTQA groups by compiling a single reference list of OARs in line with AAPM TG 263 and ASTRO, together with peer-reviewed, anatomically defined contouring guidance for integration into clinical trial protocols independent of the radiation therapy delivery technique. The GHG OAR multi-professional Working Group comprised of 22 members from 6 international RTQA Groups and affiliated organizations conducted the work in 3 stages: 1) Clinical trial documentation review and identification of structures of interest 2) Review of existing contouring guidance and survey of proposed OAR contouring guidance 3) Review of survey feedback with recommendations for contouring guidance with standardized OAR nomenclature. 157 clinical trials were examined; 222 OAR structures were identified. Duplicates, non-anatomical, non-specific, structures with more specific alternative nomenclature, and structures identified by one RTQA group were excluded leaving 58 structures of interest. 6 OAR descriptions were accepted with no amendments, 41 required minor amendments, 6 major amendments, 20 developed as a result of feedback, and 5 structures excluded in response to feedback. The final GHG consensus guidance includes 73 OARs with peer-reviewed descriptions (appendix A). We provide OAR descriptions with nomenclature for use in clinical trials. A more uniform dataset supports the delivery of clinically relevant and valid conclusions from clinical trials.

The use of deep learning (DL) to improve cone‐beam CT (CBCT) image quality has gained popularity as computational resources and algorithmic sophistication have advanced in tandem. CBCT imaging has the potential to facilitate online adaptive radiation therapy (ART) by utilizing up‐to‐date patient anatomy to modify treatment parameters before irradiation. Poor CBCT image quality has been an impediment to realizing ART due to the increased scatter conditions inherent to cone‐beam acquisitions. Given the recent interest in DL applications in radiation oncology, and specifically DL for CBCT correction, we provide a systematic theoretical and literature review for future stakeholders. The review encompasses DL approaches for synthetic CT generation, as well as projection domain methods employed in the CBCT correction literature. We review trends pertaining to publications from January 2018 to April 2022 and condense their major findings—with emphasis on study design and DL techniques. Clinically relevant endpoints relating to image quality and dosimetric accuracy are summarized, highlighting gaps in the literature. Finally, we make recommendations for both clinicians and DL practitioners based on literature trends and the current DL state‐of‐the‐art methods utilized in radiation oncology.

Cell survival following exposure to spatially modulated beams, as created by intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), is investigated. In vitro experiments were performed using malignant melanoma cells (MM576) exposed to a therapeutic megavoltage photon beam. We compared cell survival in modulated fields with cell survival in uniform control fields. Three different spatial modulations of the field were used: a control 'uniform' field in which all cells in a flask were uniformly exposed; a 'quarter' field in which 25% of cells at one end of the flask were exposed and a 'striped' field in which 25% of cells were exposed in three parallel stripes. The cell survival in both the shielded and unshielded regions of the modulated fields, as determined by a clonogenic assay, were compared to the cell survival in the uniform field. We have distinguished three ways in which cell survival is influenced by the fate of neighbouring cells. The first of these (type I effect) is the previously reported classical Bystander effect, where cell survival is reduced when communicating with irradiated cells. We find two new types of Bystander effect. The type II effect is an observed increase in cell survival when nearby cells receive a lethal dose. The type III effect is an increase in the survival of cells receiving a high dose of radiation, when nearby cells receive a low dose. These observations of the Bystander effects emphasize the need for improved radiobiological models, which include communicated effects and account for the effects of modulated dose distribution.

This study examines differences in tumour cellular response using clonogenic cell survival between uniform and non-uniform irradiation. Cells were irradiated with a 6 MV x-ray intensity-modulated beam, in a single large flask (i.e. intercellular communication is possible) or in three small flasks (i.e. intercellular communication is inhibited across the dose gradient). For non-small-cell lung cancer and melanoma cell lines, the dose response over the entire cell culture was significantly different between freely communicating cell cultures and those with inhibited communication across the dose non-uniformity. Communicating cells exhibited poorer survival in the low dose region of the field but improved survival in the high dose region. In general, the response to non-uniform irradiation appeared to 'average out' over the entire cell culture. This was not seen when intercellular communication was inhibited. The results add strength to the body of evidence regarding bystander effects and the inter-dependence of cellular response.