Rovirosa, A. (Angeles)

Filtering

2018 - 201912020 - 20241

Settings

Author search.filters.isAuthorOfPublication.4875526d-e1d7-4468-a004-2fa8136e79bf

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ENT COBRA ONTOLOGY: the covariates classification system proposed by the Head & Neck and Skin GEC-ESTRO working group for interdisciplinary standardized data collection in head and neck patient cohorts treated with interventional radiotherapy (brachytherapy)
    (Termedia Publishing, 2018) Dinapoli, N. (Nicola); Boldrini, L. (Luca); Bussu, F. (Francesco); Martinez-Monge, R. (Rafael); Kovács, G. (Gyorgy); Takácsi-Nagy, Z. (Zoltán); Gatta, R. (Roberto); Lanzotti, V. (Vito); Rovirosa, A. (Angeles); Budrukkar, A. (Ashwini); Guinot, J.L. (Jose Luis); Damiani, A. (Andrea); Soror, T. (Tamer); Valentini, V. (Vincenzo); Tagliaferri, L. (Luca); Lancellotta, V. (Valentina); Cambeiro, M. (Mauricio); Niehoff, P. (Peter); Fionda, B. (Bruno); Hildebrandt, G. (Guido); Johansson, B. (Bengt); Lenkowicz, J. (Jacopo); Meyer, J.E. (Jens E.)
    Purpose: Clinical data collecting is expensive in terms of time and human resources. Data can be collected in different ways; therefore, performing multicentric research based on previously stored data is often difficult. The primary objective of the ENT COBRA (COnsortium for BRachytherapy data Analysis) ontology is to define a specific terminological system to standardized data collection for head and neck (H&N) cancer patients treated with interventional radiotherapy. Material and methods: ENT-COBRA is a consortium for standardized data collection for H&N patients treated with interventional radiotherapy. It is linked to H&N and Skin GEC-ESTRO Working Group and includes 11 centers from 6 countries. Its ontology was firstly defined by a multicentric working group, then evaluated by the consortium followed by a multi-professional technical commission involving a mathematician, an engineer, a physician with experience in data storage, a programmer, and a software expert. Results: Two hundred and forty variables were defined on 13 input forms. There are 3 levels, each offering a specific type of analysis: 1. Registry level (epidemiology analysis); 2. Procedures level (standard oncology analysis); 3. Research level radiomics analysis). The ontology was approved by the consortium and technical commission; an ad-hoc software architecture (“broker”) remaps the data present in already existing storage systems of the various centers according to the shared terminology system. The first data sharing was successfully performed using COBRA software and the ENT COBRA Ontology, automatically collecting data directly from 3 different hospital databases (Lübeck, Navarra, and Rome) in November 2017. Conclusions: The COBRA Ontology is a good response to the multi-dimensional criticalities of data collection, retrieval, and usability. It allows to create a software for large multicentric databases with implementation of specific remapping functions wherever necessary. This approach is well-received by all involved parties, primarily because it does not change a single center’s storing technologies, procedures, and habits.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Reirradiation Practice in Gynecological Cancer: Insights from a National Survey in Spain
    (2024) Najjari‑Jamal, D. (Dina); Rovirosa, A. (Angeles); Gimeno-Morales, M. (Marta); Majercakova, K. (Katarina); Sánchez, M. (María); Garcia, S. (Sònia); Guevara, D. (Diana); Muñóz, T. (Teresa); De-la-Fuente, C. (Cristina); Micó, S. (Soraya); Stefanovic, M. (Milica); Matute, R. (Raúl); Córdoba, S. (Sofía)
    Purpose Given the lack of standardisation in gynecological cancer reirradiation, the Gyneacologial Radiation Oncology (GINECOR) working group on behalf of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR), works towards to inquire the current state of reirradiation practices among the radiation oncology departments in Spain. Methods An online 37-question survey was sent to all GINECOR members, representing most Spanish centers. The survey addressed general aspects of reirradiation, including experience, reirradiation sites, and techniques used. It included seven clinical case scenarios on reirradiation, and a fnal section on technical aspects of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy (BT) treatment. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. Results Out of 58 centers, 29 responded, with 51.7% performing≥5 reirradiation cases annually. While most centers ofer multiple techniques, only 16/29 have access to BT. For in-feld local relapse with surgery contraindicated, 79.3% performed BT in endometrial cancer, but only 27.5% treated with BT in cervical cancer recurrence. In this case, 17.2% used SBRT. For endometrial and cervical cancer, 44.8% and 65.4% of centers prescribed doses based on organ-at-risk tolerance, respectively. For pelvic wall/parametrial in-feld relapse, 46.4% of the centres reirradiated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and 32.1% with BT. In nodal reirradiation, SBRT was preferred by 90% of centers. Variability was observed in target volume defnitions for EBRT and proton therapy. Conclusions Reirradiation for gynecological cancer remains unstandardized, presenting signifcant challenges in clinical practice. To improve reirradiation protocols in gynecological cancer, the GINECOR working group is currently conducting a systematic review and formulating Delphi recommendations.