ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2014
IMRT credentialing for prospective trials using institutional virtual phantoms: results of a joint European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer and Radiological Physics Center project.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Credentialing of radiotherapy centres in Australasia for TROG 09.02 (Chisel), a Phase III clinical trial on stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy of early stage lung cancer.The British journal of radiology · 2018Trial
- A virtual audit system for intensity-modulated radiation therapy credentialing in Japan Clinical Oncology Group clinical trials: A pilot study.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- An overview of the medical-physics-related verification system for radiotherapy multicenter clinical trials by the Medical Physics Working Group in the Japan Clinical Oncology Group-Radiation Therapy Study Group.Journal of radiation research · 2020Article
- Remote dosimetric auditing of clinical trials: The need for vendor specific models to convert images to dose.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2019Article
- The role of dosimetry audit in achieving high quality radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2018Article
- Novel methodologies for dosimetry audits: Adapting to advanced radiotherapy techniques.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2018Review
- On the sensitivity of TG-119 and IROC credentialing to TPS commissioning errors.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeIntensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) credentialing for a EORTC study was performed using an anthropomorphic head phantom from the Radiological Physics Center (RPC; RPC(PH)). Institutions were retrospectively requested to irradiate their institutional phantom (INST(PH)) using the same treatment plan in the framework of a Virtual Phantom Project (VPP) for IMRT credentialing. MATERIALS AND
methodsCT data set of the institutional phantom and measured 2D dose matrices were requested from centers and sent to a dedicated secure EORTC uploader. Data from the RPC(PH) and INST(PH) were thereafter centrally analyzed and inter-compared by the QA team using commercially available software (RIT; ver.5.2; Colorado Springs, USA).
resultsEighteen institutions participated to the VPP. The measurements of 6 (33%) institutions could not be analyzed centrally. All other centers passed both the VPP and the RPC ±7%/4 mm credentialing criteria. At the 5%/5 mm gamma criteria (90% of pixels passing), 11(92%) as compared to 12 (100%) centers pass the credentialing process with RPC(PH) and INST(PH) (p = 0.29), respectively. The corresponding pass rate for the 3%/3 mm gamma criteria (90% of pixels passing) was 2 (17%) and 9 (75%; p = 0.01), respectively.
conclusionsIMRT dosimetry gamma evaluations in a single plane for a H&N prospective trial using the INST(PH) measurements showed agreement at the gamma index criteria of ±5%/5 mm (90% of pixels passing) for a small number of VPP measurements. Using more stringent, criteria, the RPC(PH) and INST(PH) comparison showed disagreement. More data is warranted and urgently required within the framework of prospective studies.
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.