Quality Assurance In Clinical Trials Research Articles

Development and Initial Implementation of a Clinical Monitoring Strategy in a Non-regulated Trial: a research note from the ReStOre II Trial

Background Data and Safety Monitoring is integral to quality assurance of clinical trials. Although monitoring is a core legal component of regulated clinical trials, non-regulated trials are not mandated to incorporate monitoring. Consequently, the monitoring process has been underutilised and underreported in this setting. This research report outlines the development and plans for implementing a bespoke Clinical Monitoring Strategy within the ‘Rehabilitation Strategies Following Oesophagogastric and Hepatopancreaticobiliary Cancer (ReStOre II) Trial’, a non-regulated trial comparing a 12-week multidisciplinary programme of rehabilitation to standard care in a cohort of 120 cancer survivors. Methods This research note provides a detailed overview of the ReStOre II Clinical Monitoring Strategy and describes the development of the strategy pre and post awarding of the grant. The strategy consists of the establishment and implementation of a comprehensive trial governance structure, inclusive of a Trial Management Group, Trial Steering Committee Meeting, and Independent Data Monitoring Committee. In addition, external trial monitoring by the Clinical Research Facility at St James’s Hospital. Three monitoring visits will be conducted during the trial; i) site initiation visit, ii) interim monitoring visit, and iii) close our visit. Results The Clinical Monitoring Strategy has been finalised and is currently being implemented within the ReStOre II Trial. Two site initiation visits and one interim monitoring visit have been completed to date. Conclusion This research note provides a template for implementation of a Clinical Monitoring Strategy in a non-regulated clinical trial. Registration ReStOre II Trial: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03958019

Ensuring Quality in Clinical Research: The Impact of Quality Assurance and Quality Control in the Field of Good Clinical Practice

Good Clinical Practice (GCP) compliance delivers assurance that the study participants' safety is protected and that the obtained data are legitimate and credible. One of the tools to obtain quality in clinical research is to assure robust quality assurance and quality control as part of the quality management system. This is considered essential for sponsors to assure that the data from the clinical trial have integrity and reliability. One of the purposes of this article was to provide information to allow clinical research, quality assurance professionals, academics, and members of ethics committees to stay up to date with clinical research and good practice developments. This article investigates the enormous value of quality assurance and control in clinical trials, highlighting their pivotal role in ensuring the integrity, safety, and efficacy of research findings.

The Role of Quality Assurance in Clinical Trials: Safeguarding Data Integrity and Compliance.

Clinical trials, which investigate the effects of drugs in humans, aim to determine safety and efficacy while identifying adverse reactions. Data consistency and subject safety are crucial factors that determine the quality of clinical trials, necessitating overall quality management. There is a growing emphasis on implementing quality systems during the planning stages of clinical trials. Regulatory frameworks have evolved to ensure patient protection and data reliability, underscoring the need for systematic quality management in health research. A clinical trial quality management plan (CTQMP) is essential to describe the tools and methods used to ensure study quality. Globalization has led to an increase in conducting clinical trials in developing nations, presenting challenges due to procedural and ethical disparities. To manage these complexities, outsourcing trial management has become common. Adherence to good clinical practice (GCP) principles, as defined by the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH), is critical for safeguarding participant rights and ensuring credible data. Quality by design (QbD) and quality risk management are now central to clinical trial management, as advocated by the FDA. Technological advancements and robust protocols further enhance trial processes. Effective QA activities, including monitoring and data management, are vital for maintaining compliance, participant safety, and data integrity, highlighting the indispensable role of QA in clinical trial success.

Radiotherapy Plan Quality Assurance in NRG Oncology Trials for Brain and Head/Neck Cancers: An AI-Enhanced Knowledge-Based Approach.

The quality of radiation therapy (RT) treatment plans directly affects the outcomes of clinical trials. KBP solutions have been utilized in RT plan quality assurance (QA). In this study, we evaluated the quality of RT plans for brain and head/neck cancers enrolled in multi-institutional clinical trials utilizing a KBP approach. The evaluation was conducted on 203 glioblastoma (GBM) patients enrolled in NRG-BN001 and 70 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients enrolled in NRG-HN001. For each trial, fifty high-quality photon plans were utilized to build a KBP photon model. A KBP proton model was generated using intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans generated on 50 patients originally treated with photon RT. These models were then applied to generate KBP plans for the remaining patients, which were compared against the submitted plans for quality evaluation, including in terms of protocol compliance, target coverage, and organ-at-risk (OAR) doses. RT plans generated by the KBP models were demonstrated to have superior quality compared to the submitted plans. KBP IMPT plans can decrease the variation of proton plan quality and could possibly be used as a tool for developing improved plans in the future. Additionally, the KBP tool proved to be an effective instrument for RT plan QA in multi-center clinical trials.

1812: Impact of radiotherapy clinical trial participation and quality assurance on head and neck practice

1812: Impact of radiotherapy clinical trial participation and quality assurance on head and neck practice

A digital male pelvis phantom series showing anatomical variations over the course of fractionated radiotherapy treatment.

Daily IGRT images show day-to-day anatomical variations in patients undergoing fractionated prostate radiotherapy. This is of particular importance in particle beam treatments. To develop a digital phantom series showing variation in pelvic anatomy for evaluating treatment planning and IGRT procedures in particle radiotherapy. A pelvic phantom series was developed from the planning MRI and kVCT (planning CT) images along with six of the daily serial MVCT images taken of a single patient treated with a full bladder on a Tomotherapy unit. The selected patient had clearly visible yet unexceptional internal anatomy variation. Prostate, urethra, bladder, rectum, bowel, bowel gas, bone and soft tissue were contoured and a single Hounsfield Unit was assigned to each region. Treatment plans developed on the kVCT for photon, proton and carbon beams were recalculated on each phantom to demonstrate a clinical application of the series. Proton plans were developed with and without robust optimization. Limited to axial slices with prostate, the bladder volume varied from 6 to 46 cm3, the rectal volume (excluding gas) from 22 to 52 cm3, and rectal gas volume from zero to 18 cm3. The water equivalent path length to the prostate varied by up to 1.5cm . The variations resulted in larger changes in the RBE-weighted Dose Volume Histograms of the non-robust proton plan and the carbon plan compared to the robust proton plan, the latter similar to the photon plan. The prostate coverage (V100%) decreased by an average of 18% in the carbon plan, 16% in the non-robust proton plan, 1.8% in the robust proton plan, and 4.4% in the photon plan. The volume of rectum receiving 75% of the prescription dose (V75%) increased by an average of 3.7 cm3, 4.7 cm3, 1.9 cm3, and 0.6 cm3 in those four plans, respectively. The digital pelvic phantom series provides for quantitative investigation of IGRT procedures and new methods for improving accuracy in particle therapy and may be used in cross-institutional comparisons for clinical trial quality assurance.

Development and Initial Implementation of a Clinical Monitoring Strategy in a Non-regulated Trial: a research note from the ReStOre II Trial.

Data and Safety Monitoring is integral to quality assurance of clinical trials. Although monitoring is a core legal component of regulated clinical trials, non-regulated trials are not mandated to incorporate monitoring. Consequently, the monitoring process has been underutilised and underreported in this setting. This research report outlines the development and plans for implementing a bespoke Clinical Monitoring Strategy within the ' Rehabilitation Strategies Following Oesophagogastric and Hepatopancreaticobiliary Cancer (ReStOre II) Trial', a non-regulated trial comparing a 12-week multidisciplinary programme of rehabilitation to standard care in a cohort of 120 cancer survivors. This research note provides a detailed overview of the ReStOre II Clinical Monitoring Strategy and describes the development of the strategy pre and post awarding of the grant. The strategy consists of the establishment and implementation of a comprehensive trial governance structure, inclusive of a Trial Management Group, Trial Steering Committee Meeting, and Independent Data Monitoring Committee. In addition, external trial monitoring by the Clinical Research Facility at St James's Hospital. Three monitoring visits will be conducted during the trial; i) site initiation visit, ii) interim monitoring visit, and iii) close our visit. The Clinical Monitoring Strategy has been finalised and is currently being implemented within the ReStOre II Trial. Two site initiation visits and one interim monitoring visit have been completed to date. This research note provides a template for implementation of a Clinical Monitoring Strategy in a non-regulated clinical trial. ReStOre II Trial: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03958019.

Development and Initial Implementation of a Clinical Monitoring Strategy in a Non-regulated Trial: a research note from the ReStOre II Trial

Background: Data and Safety Monitoring is integral to quality assurance of clinical trials. Although monitoring is a core legal component of regulated clinical trials, non-regulated trials are not mandated to incorporate monitoring. Consequently, the monitoring process has been underutilised and underreported in this setting. This research report outlines the development and plans for implementing a bespoke Clinical Monitoring Strategy within the ‘Rehabilitation Strategies Following Oesophagogastric and Hepatopancreaticobiliary Cancer (ReStOre II) Trial’, a non-regulated trial comparing a 12-week multidisciplinary programme of rehabilitation to standard care in a cohort of 120 cancer survivors. Methods: This research note provides a detailed overview of the ReStOre II Clinical Monitoring Strategy and describes the development of the strategy pre and post awarding of the grant. The strategy consists of the establishment and implementation of a comprehensive trial governance structure, inclusive of a Trial Management Group, Trial Steering Committee Meeting, and Independent Data Monitoring Committee. In addition, external trial monitoring by the Clinical Research Facility at St James’s Hospital. Three monitoring visits will be conducted during the trial; i) site initiation visit, ii) interim monitoring visit, and iii) close our visit. Results: The Clinical Monitoring Strategy has been finalised and is currently being implemented within the ReStOre II Trial. Two site initiation visits and one interim monitoring visit have been completed to date. Conclusion: This research note provides a template for implementation of a Clinical Monitoring Strategy in a non-regulated clinical trial. Registration: ReStOre II Trial: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03958019

Basic concepts and directions in the radiation therapy quality assurance processes of clinical trials

The radiation therapy quality assurance of clinical trials is internationally recognized as a key factor to control the quality of radiotherapy for its impact on clinical trial's goals. Quality assessment may be performed at different levels and by different means, which are now quite standardized. The optimal radiation therapy quality assurance of clinical trials trade-off to maintain accrual rates, radiotherapy quality and optimize clinical trial research processes is yet to be defined. This article addresses current definitions, processes, limitations and directions.

Role of Adverse Events Supervision in Clinical Trials in Neoadjuvant Treatment of Operable Stage III NSCLC

Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) combined with platinum containing dual drug chemotherapy is a new adjuvant treatment option for operable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and the quality assurance of clinical trials of related drugs plays a crucial role in the results of the clinical trials. This study aims to explore the impact of adverse events (AEs) supervision on reducing treatment-related AEs in patients. 66 NSCLC patients admitted to Shanghai Chest Hospital from July 2020 to October 2021 were prospectively collected. All the patients received 3 cycles of neoadjuvant treatment of Camrelizumab in combination with Docetaxel and Cisplatin. 4 weeks-6 weeks after neoadjuvant therapy, the patients accepted surgical treatment. One cycle of postoperative adjuvant treatment was given within 30 days after surgery, and 3 weeks after the completion of postoperative adjuvant treatment, Camrelizumab consolidation treatment was intiated, with a total of 13 cycles. The quality of life-C30 (QoL-C30) was used to measure patients' quality of life and the occurrence of AEs was monitored. The overall safety is good, with a total of 300 AEs occurring in 66 patients, including 282 cases of grade 1-2 AEs and 18 cases of grades 3-4 AEs. The most common grades 3-4 AEs associated with PD-1 antibodies occurred in 6 cases (9.1%). Neoadjuvant therapy supervision can lead to a decrease in patients' QOL-C30 scores (P<0.05) and an improvement in their quality of life. Camrelizumab combined with Docetaxel and Cisplatin can be used as a new adjuvant treatment for operable stage III NSCLC. Through the observation and control of AEs, treatment measures can be taken in time to reduce further complications, ensure patient' safety, and ensure the authenticity, scientificity and reliability of clinical trial data.

"The Changing Landscape of Breast Cancer – a Dialogue on Current and Future Perspectives"

"Professor Philip Poortmans is a breast cancer specialist, with radiation therapy as a tool, with an extensive experience and recognized expertise. He practiced medicine in Belgium, the Netherlands and France, and is currently active at Iridium Netwerk and University of Antwerp, Belgium. His Ph.D. thesis was focused on quality assurance in clinical trials in breast cancer and his current research focus is on FLASH-RT and different aspects of breast cancer treatment. Professor Poortmans is involved in multiple guidelines for breast cancer, serve on the editorial board of about 10 journals and published over 400 scientific articles and book chapters, co-editing 3 books. He is involved in teaching, being the course director of the of European Society for Radiation Oncology (ESTRO) Breast Courses and a faculty member of European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO) and European School of Oncology (ESO). He was the president of ESTRO and of the European CanCer Organisation (ECCO) and he was granted honorary membership of multiple scientific societies. For all his activities and contributions, he received several awards, including the Jens Overgaard and Breur Awards from ESTRO and the St.Gallen Breast Cancer Award. During this interview, he kindly shared with us his opinion on some breast cancer related hot topics."

Efforts to Optimize Clinical Trial Management by Revising Deviation Reports and Classifying Deviation Cases for Efficient Clinical Trial Quality Improvement at Asahikawa Medical University Hospital

Face-to-face communication during on-site monitoring is important for clinical trial quality assurance. However, with the coronavirus disease early 2020 pandemic, medical institutions placed restrictions on hospital visits to secure their medical systems.

Radiotherapy quality assurance in paediatric clinical trials: first report from six QUARTET-affiliated trials

Background and PurposeSIOP Europe’s QUARTET project launched in 2016; aiming to improve access to high-quality radiotherapy for children and adolescents treated within clinical trials across Europe. The aim of this report is to present the profile of institutions participating in six QUARTET-affiliated trials and a description of the initial individual case review (ICR) outcomes. MethodsThis is a two-part analysis. Firstly, using facility questionnaires, beam output audit certificates, and advanced technique credentialing records to create a profile of approved institutions, and secondly, collating trial records for ICRs submitted prior to 31/10/2022. Trials included are: SIOPEN HR-NBL1, SIOPEN-LINES, SIOPEN- VERITAS, SIOP-BTG HRMB, EpSSG-FaR-RMS, and SIOPEN HR-NBL2. ResultsBy 31/10/2022, a total of 103 institutions had commenced QUARTET site approval procedures to participate in QUARTET-affiliated trials; 66 sites across 20 countries were approved. These participating institutions were often paediatric referral sites with intensity modulated radiotherapy or proton beam therapy, designated paediatric radiation oncologists, and paediatric adapted facilities and imaging protocols available. In total, 263 patient plans were submitted for ICR, 254 ICRs from 15 countries were completed. ICRs had a rejection rate of 39.8%, taking an average of 1.4 submissions until approval was achieved. Target delineation was the most frequent reason for rejection. ConclusionThe QUARTET facility questionnaire is a valuable tool for mapping resources, personnel, and technology available to children and adolescents receiving radiotherapy. Prospective ICR is essential for paediatric oncology clinical trials and should be prioritised to reduce protocol violations.

Prioritizing clinical trial quality assurance for photons and protons: A failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) comparison

Background and PurposeThe Global Clinical Trials RTQA Harmonization Group (GHG) set out to evaluate and prioritize clinical trial quality assurance. MethodsThe GHG compiled a list of radiotherapy quality assurance (QA) tests performed for proton and photon therapy clinical trials. These tests were compared between modalities to assess whether there was a need for different types of assessments per modality. A failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) was performed to assess the risk of each QA failure. ResultsThe risk analysis showed that proton and photon therapy shared four out of five of their highest-risk failures (end-to-end anthropomorphic phantom test, phantom tests using respiratory motion, pre-treatment patient plan review of contouring/outlining, and on-treatment/post-treatment patient plan review of dosimetric coverage). While similar trends were observed, proton therapy had higher risk failures, driven by higher severity scores. A sub-analysis of occurrence × severity scores identified high-risk scores to prioritize for improvements in RTQA detectability. A novel severity scaler was introduced to account for the number of patients affected by each failure. This scaler did not substantially alter the ranking of tests, but it elevated the QA program evaluation to the top 20th percentile. This is the first FMEA performed for clinical trial quality assurance. ConclusionThe identification of high-risk errors associated with clinical trials is valuable to prioritize and reduce errors in radiotherapy and improve the quality of trial data and outcomes, and can be applied to optimize clinical radiotherapy QA.

Randomized Trials Fit for the 21st Century: A Joint Opinion From the European Society of Cardiology, American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, and the World Heart Federation.

Randomized Trials Fit for the 21st Century: A Joint Opinion From the European Society of Cardiology, American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, and the World Heart Federation.

Quality Assurance in Clinical Trials Requiring Radiation Therapy in Sub-Saharan Africa

Given the increasing availability of radiation therapy in sub-Saharan Africa, clinical trials that include radiation therapy are likely to grow. Ensuring appropriate delivery of radiation therapy through rigorous quality assurance is an important component of clinical trial execution. We reviewed the process for credentialing radiation therapy sites and radiation therapy quality assurance through the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) Houston Quality Assurance Center for AIDS Malignancy Consortium (AMC)-081, a multicenter study of cisplatin and radiation therapy for women with locally advanced cervical cancer living with HIV, conducted by the AIDS Malignancy Consortium at 2 sites in South Africa and Zimbabwe. Women living with HIV with newly diagnosed stage IB2, IIA (>4 cm), IIB-IVA cervical carcinoma (per the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics [FIGO] staging classifications) were enrolled in AMC-081. They received 3-dimensional conformal external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) to the pelvis (41.4-45 Gy) using a linear accelerator, high-dose-rate brachytherapy (6-9 Gy to point A with each fraction and up to 4 fractions), and concurrent weekly cisplatin (40 mg/m2). IROC reviewed EBRT and brachytherapy quality assurance records after treatment. All of the 38 women enrolled in AMC-081 received ±5% of the protocol-specified prescribed dose of EBRT. Geometry of brachytherapy applicator placement was scored as per protocol in all implants. Doses to points A and B, International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) bladder, or ICRU rectum required correction by IROC in >50% of the implants. In the final evaluation, 58% of participants (n=22) were treated per protocol, 40% (n=15) had minor protocol deviations, and 3% (n=1) had major protocol deviations. No records were received within 60 days of treatment completion as requested in the protocol. Major radiation therapy deviations were low, but timely submission of radiation therapy data did not occur. Future studies, especially those that include specialized radiation therapy techniques such as stereotactic or intensity-modulated radiation therapy, will require pathways to ensure timely and adequate quality assurance.

CAD-RADS™ 2.0 - 2022 Coronary Artery Disease - Reporting and Data System An Expert Consensus Document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American College of Radiology (ACR) and the North America Society of Cardiovascular Imaging (NASCI).

Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) was created to standardize reporting system for patients undergoing coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and to guide possible next steps in patient management. The goal of this updated 2022 CAD-RADS 2.0 is to improve the initial reporting system for CCTA by considering new technical developments in Cardiac CT, including data from recent clinical trials and new clinical guidelines. The updated CAD-RADS classification will follow an established framework of stenosis, plaque burden, and modifiers, which will include assessment of lesion-specific ischemia using CT fractional-flow-reserve (CT-FFR) or myocardial CT perfusion (CTP), when performed. Similar to the method used in the original CAD-RADS version, the determinant for stenosis severity classification will be the most severe coronary artery luminal stenosis on a per-patient basis, ranging from CAD-RADS 0 (zero) for absence of any plaque or stenosis to CAD-RADS 5 indicating the presence of at least one totally occluded coronary artery. Given the increasing data supporting the prognostic relevance of coronary plaque burden, this document will provide various methods to estimate and report total plaque burden. The addition of P1 to P4 descriptors are used to denote increasing categories of plaque burden. The main goal of CAD-RADS, which should always be interpreted together with the impression found in the report, remains to facilitate communication of test results with referring physicians along with suggestions for subsequent patient management. In addition, CAD-RADS will continue to provide a framework of standardization that may benefit education, research, peer-review, artificial intelligence development, clinical trial design, population health and quality assurance with the ultimate goal of improving patient care. Keywords: Coronary Artery Disease, Coronary CTA, CAD-RADS, Reporting and Data System, Stenosis Severity, Report Standardization Terminology, Plaque Burden, Ischemia Supplemental material is available for this article. This article is published synchronously in Radiology: Cardiothoracic Imaging, Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging, Journal of the American College of Radiology, and International Journal for Cardiovascular Imaging. © 2022 Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. Published by RSNA with permission.

Radiation Oncology: Future Vision for Quality Assurance and Data Management in Clinical Trials and Translational Science.

The future of radiation oncology is exceptionally strong as we are increasingly involved in nearly all oncology disease sites due to extraordinary advances in radiation oncology treatment management platforms and improvements in treatment execution. Due to our technology and consistent accuracy, compressed radiation oncology treatment strategies are becoming more commonplace secondary to our ability to successfully treat tumor targets with increased normal tissue avoidance. In many disease sites including the central nervous system, pulmonary parenchyma, liver, and other areas, our service is redefining the standards of care. Targeting of disease has improved due to advances in tumor imaging and application of integrated imaging datasets into sophisticated planning systems which can optimize volume driven plans created by talented personnel. Treatment times have significantly decreased due to volume driven arc therapy and positioning is secured by real time imaging and optical tracking. Normal tissue exclusion has permitted compressed treatment schedules making treatment more convenient for the patient. These changes require additional study to further optimize care. Because data exchange worldwide have evolved through digital platforms and prisms, images and radiation datasets worldwide can be shared/reviewed on a same day basis using established de-identification and anonymization methods. Data storage post-trial completion can co-exist with digital pathomic and radiomic information in a single database coupled with patient specific outcome information and serve to move our translational science forward with nimble query elements and artificial intelligence to ask better questions of the data we collect and collate. This will be important moving forward to validate our process improvements at an enterprise level and support our science. We have to be thorough and complete in our data acquisition processes, however if we remain disciplined in our data management plan, our field can grow further and become more successful generating new standards of care from validated datasets.

Bayesian deep learning outperforms clinical trial estimators of intracerebral and intraventricular hemorrhage volume.

Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) clinical trials rely on manual linear and semi-quantitative (LSQ) estimators like the ABC/2, modified Graeb and IVH scores for timely volumetric estimation from CT. Deep learning (DL) volumetrics of ICH have recently approached the accuracy of gold-standard planimetry. However, DL and LSQ strategies have been limited by unquantified uncertainty, in particular when ICH and IVH estimates intersect. Bayesian deep learning methods can be used to approximate uncertainty, presenting an opportunity to improve quality assurance in clinical trials. A DL model was trained to simultaneously segment ICH and IVH using diagnostic CT data from the Minimally Invasive Surgery Plus Alteplase for ICH Evacuation (MISTIE) III and Clot Lysis: Evaluating Accelerated Resolution of IVH (CLEAR) III clinical trials. Bayesian uncertainty approximation was performed using Monte-Carlo dropout. We compared the performance of our model with estimators used in the CLEAR IVH and MISTIE II trials. The reliability of planimetry, DL, and LSQ volumetrics in the setting of high ICH and IVH intersection is quantified using consensus estimates. Our DL model produced volume correlations and median Dice scores of .994 and .946 for ICH in MISTIE II, and .980 and .863 for IVH in CLEAR IVH, respectively, outperforming LSQ estimates from the clinical trials. We found significant linear relationships between ICH uncertainty, Dice scores (r=-.849), and relative volume difference (r=.735). In our validation clinical trial dataset, DL models with Bayesian uncertainty approximation provided superior volumetric estimates to LSQ methods with real-time estimates of model uncertainty.

A comparison of two methodologies for radiotherapy treatment plan optimization and QA for clinical trials.

Background and purposeThe efficacy of clinical trials and the outcome of patient treatment are dependent on the quality assurance (QA) of radiation therapy (RT) plans. There are two widely utilized approaches that include plan optimization guidance created based on patient‐specific anatomy. This study examined these two techniques for dose‐volume histogram predictions, RT plan optimizations, and prospective QA processes, namely the knowledge‐based planning (KBP) technique and another first principle (FP) technique.MethodsThis analysis included 60, 44, and 10 RT plans from three Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) multi‐institutional trials: RTOG 0631 (Spine SRS), RTOG 1308 (NSCLC), and RTOG 0522 (H&N), respectively. Both approaches were compared in terms of dose prediction and plan optimization. The dose predictions were also compared to the original plan submitted to the trials for the QA procedure.ResultsFor the RTOG 0631 (Spine SRS) and RTOG 0522 (H&N) plans, the dose predictions from both techniques have correlation coefficients of >0.9. The RT plans that were re‐optimized based on the predictions from both techniques showed similar quality, with no statistically significant differences in target coverage or organ‐at‐risk sparing. The predictions of mean lung and heart doses from both methods for RTOG1308 patients, on the other hand, have a discrepancy of up to 14 Gy.ConclusionsBoth methods are valuable tools for optimization guidance of RT plans for Spine SRS and Head and Neck cases, as well as for QA purposes. On the other hand, the findings suggest that KBP may be more feasible in the case of inoperable lung cancer patients who are treated with IMRT plans that have spatially unevenly distributed beam angles.