ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2013
Dosimetric impact of inter-observer variability for 3D conformal radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy: the rectal tumor target definition case.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep Learning-based Non-rigid Image Registration for High-dose Rate Brachytherapy in Inter-fraction Cervical Cancer.Journal of digital imaging · 2023Trial
- Improving CT-CBCT deformable image registration for cervical cancer adaptive radiotherapy using a deep learning approach.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Experience and uncertainty analysis of CT-based adaptive radiotherapy for abdominal treatments.Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB) · 2025Article
- On the trail of CBCT-guided adaptive rectal boost radiotherapy, does daily delineation require a radiation oncologist?Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Interobserver Variability in a Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR) Head and Neck Course. Is Current Contouring Training Sufficient?Advances in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Internal Guidelines for Reducing Lymph Node Contour Variability in Total Marrow and Lymph Node Irradiation.Cancers · 2023Article
- Clinical evaluation on automatic segmentation results of convolutional neural networks in rectal cancer radiotherapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Impact of random outliers in auto-segmented targets on radiotherapy treatment plans for glioblastoma.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2022Article
- Combining inter-observer variability, range and setup uncertainty in a variance-based sensitivity analysis for proton therapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2021Article
- Variability of clinical target volume delineation for rectal cancer patients planned for neoadjuvant radiotherapy with the aid of the platform Anatom-e.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2018Article
- Preoperative Intensity-modulated Chemoradiation Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost in Rectal Cancer: 2-year Follow-up Results of Phase II Study.Radiology and oncology · 2018Article
- Challenges for Quality Assurance of Target Volume Delineation in Clinical Trials.Frontiers in oncology · 2017Review
- Interobserver Variations in Target Delineation in Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma and its Impact on Target Dose Coverage.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess the dosimetric effect induced by inter-observer variability in target definition for 3D-conformal RT (3DCRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy by RapidArc (RA) techniques for rectal cancer treatment.
methodsTen patients with rectal cancer subjected to neo-adjuvant RT were randomly selected from the internal database. Four radiation oncologists independently contoured the clinical target volume (CTV) in blind mode. Planning target volume (PTV) was defined as CTV + 7 mm in the three directions. Afterwards, shared guidelines between radiation oncologists were introduced to give general criteria for the contouring of rectal target and the four radiation oncologists defined new CTV following the guidelines. For each patient, six intersections (I) and unions (U) volumes were calculated coupling the contours of the various oncologists. This was repeated for the contours drawn after the guidelines. Agreement Index (AI = I/U) was calculated pre and post guidelines. Two RT plans (one with 3DCRT technique using 3-4 fields and one with RA using a single modulated arc) were optimized on each radiation oncologist's PTV. For each plan the PTV volume receiving at least 95% of the prescribed dose (PTV V95%) was calculated for both target and non-target PTVs.
resultsThe inter-operator AI pre-guidelines was 0.57 and was increased up to 0.69 post-guidelines. The maximum volume difference between the various CTV couples, drawn for each patient, passed from 380 ± 147 cm³ to 137 ± 83 cm³ after the introduction of guidelines. The mean percentage for the non-target PTV V95% was 93.7 ± 9.2% before and 96.6 ± 4.9%after the introduction of guidelines for the 3DCRT, for RA the increase was more relevant, passing from 86.5 ± 13.8% (pre) to 94.5 ± 7.5% (post). The OARs were maximally spared with VMAT technique while the variability between pre and post guidelines was not relevant in both techniques.
conclusionsThe contouring inter-observer variability has dosimetric effects in the PTV coverage. The introduction of guidelines increases the dosimetric consistency for both techniques, with greater improvements for RA technique.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.