Observational studyRadiation oncology (London, England)2014
Inter-observer variability of clinical target volume delineation in radiotherapy treatment of pancreatic cancer: a multi-institutional contouring experience.
Observational study 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 30 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
30 citing papers in PubMed.
- A dummy-run evaluation of postoperative hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (POHIM-RT) trials for cervical cancer.Journal of radiation research · 2021Trial
- Considerable interobserver variation in delineation of pancreatic cancer on 3DCT and 4DCT: a multi-institutional study.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2017Trial
- Artificial intelligence in radiation treatment planning: a narrative review from automation to clinical decision support.Translational cancer research · 2026Review
- A Comparative, Multiobserver Analysis of Nodal Contouring Methods in Pelvic Online Cone Beam-Based Adaptive Radiation Therapy.Advances in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Inter-Observer variability in organs at risk contouring among radiation therapy students and qualified radiation therapists.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- A multi-institutional dummy run on segmentation variability and plan quality of stereotactic body radiotherapy for oligometastatic disease.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Deep learning for autosegmentation for radiotherapy treatment planning: State-of-the-art and novel perspectives.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025Review
- Impact of motion management strategies on abdominal organ at risk delineation for magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Contouring aid tools in radiotherapy. Smoothing: the false friend.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024Article
- NRG Oncology Assessment of Artificial Intelligence Deep Learning-Based Auto-segmentation for Radiation Therapy: Current Developments, Clinical Considerations, and Future Directions.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2024Article
- Evaluating contouring accuracy and dosimetry impact of current MRI-guided adaptive radiation therapy for brain metastases: a retrospective study.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2024Article
- Analysis of Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance in NRG Oncology RTOG 0848.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2024Article
- Contouring of emerging organs-at-risk (OARS) of the female pelvis and interobserver variability: A study by the Italian association of radiotherapy and clinical oncology (AIRO).Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2023Article
- Clinical target volume and organs at risk segmentation for rectal cancer radiotherapy using the Flex U-Net network.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Comparison of postmortem whole-body contrast-enhanced microfocus computed tomography and high-field magnetic resonance imaging of human fetuses.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2022Article
- Knowledge-based quality control of organ delineations in radiation therapy.Medical physics · 2022Article
- Improving radiation physics, tumor visualisation, and treatment quantification in radiotherapy with spectral or dual-energy CT.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Review
- RefineNet-based automatic delineation of the clinical target volume and organs at risk for three-dimensional brachytherapy for cervical cancer.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Article
- Effects of interobserver and interdisciplinary segmentation variabilities on CT-based radiomics for pancreatic cancer.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn observational multi-institutional study has been conducted aimed to evaluate the inter-observer variability in clinical target volume (CTV) delineation among different radiation oncologists in radiotherapy treatment of pancreatic cancer.
methodsA multi-institutional contouring dummy-run of two different cases of pancreatic cancer treated by postoperative and preoperative radiotherapy (RT) was performed. Clinical history, diagnostics, and planning CT imaging were available on AIRO website (http://www.radioterapiaitalia.it). Participants were requested to delineate CTVs according to their skills and knowledge. Aiming to quantify interobserver variability of CTVs delineations, the total volume, craniocaudal, laterolateral, and anteroposterior diameters were calculated. Descriptive statistic was calculated. The 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) for coefficient of variation (CV) was estimated. The Dice Similarity Index (DSI) was used to evaluate the spatial overlap accuracy of the different CTVs compared with the CTVs of a national reference Centre considered as a benchmark. The mean DSI (mDSI) was calculated and reported.
resultsA total of 18 radiation oncologists from different Institutes submitted the targets. Less variability was observed for the Elective CTV rather than the Boost CTV, in both cases. The estimated CV were 28.8% (95% CI: 21.2-45.0%) and 20.0% (95% CI: 14.9-30.6%) for the Elective CTV, in adjuvant (Case 1) and neoadjuvant (Case 2) case, respectively. The mDSI value was 0.68 for the Elective CTVs in both cases (range 0.19-0.79 in postoperative vs range 0.35-0.79 in preoperative case). The mDSI was increased to 0.71 (Case 1) and 0.72 (Case 2) if the observers with a worse agreement have been excluded. On the other hand, a CV of 42.4% (95% CI: 30.1-72.4%) and 63.8% (95% CI: 43.9-119.2%) with a mDSI value of 0.44 and 0.52, were calculated for the Boost CTV in Case 1 and Case 2, respectively.
conclusionsThe CV and mDSI obtained values for Elective CTVs showed an acceptable agreement among participants either in postoperative as well in preoperative setting. Additional strategies to reduce the variability in Boost CTV delineation need to be found and promoted.
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.