Evidence Hub

Radiation Quality and Workflow in NRG GY017: Anti-PD-L1 (Atezolizumab) as an Immune Primer or Concurrently With Radiation Therapy for Node-Positive Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer

Mayadev J, Deng W, Kim H, Xiao Y, Chino JP, Kamrava MR, Leif J, Ghamande S et al.

International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2026

36 participants

Abstract

Objectives: Advances in radiation (RT) treatment planning enhance the need for uniform quality oversight on clinical trials. NRG GY-017 was a randomized trial of the anti-program ligand death 1 (PD-L1) antibody, atezolizumab, before and concurrent (arm A) or concurrent with chemoradiaton (arm B) for locally advanced cervical cancer. We describe the prospectively collected pretreatment RT quality and workflow.

Methods: Forty patients were consented and randomized. Thirty-seven patients submitted pretreatment RT plans for central review, and 36 patients ultimately received protocol therapy. Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) contouring guidelines and dose specifics were outlined in the protocol, with volume and dose deviations specified as per protocol, minor and major variation. Each site had to pass a standardized IMRT credentialing process. Sites were required to submit an IMRT plan for physician expert contour target and organ-at-risk review in a rapid pretreatment manner. An expert physician then scored the contours and plan as per protocol or as a deviation. For major deviations, the sites were required to revise and resubmit the plans, which were then re-reviewed prior to protocol start.

Results: The median follow-up time was 20 months. Thirty-seven participants had a central expert review of the pretreatment external beam radiation therapy plan. Thirteen plans (35%) were scored as a major deviation requiring revision: 11 secondary to contours (5 bowel and 6…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 36 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free