ArticleThe British journal of radiology2015
Variation in patient position and impact on carbon-ion scanning beam distribution during prostate treatment.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe assessed the impact of changes in patient position on carbon-ion scanning beam distribution during treatment for prostate cancer.
methods68 patients were selected. Carbon-ion scanning dose was calculated. Two different planning target volumes (PTVs) were defined: PTV1 was the clinical target volume plus a set-up margin for the anterior/lateral sides and posterior side, while PTV2 was the same as PTV1 minus the posterior side. Total prescribed doses of 34.4 Gy [relative biological effectiveness (RBE)] and 17.2 Gy (RBE) were given to PTV1 and PTV2, respectively. To estimate the influence of geometric variations on dose distribution, the dose was recalculated on the rigidly shifted single planning CT based on two dimensional-three dimensional rigid registration of the orthogonal radiographs before and after treatment for the fraction of maximum positional changes.
resultsIntrafractional patient positional change values averaged over all patients throughout the treatment course were less than the target registration error = 2.00 mm and angular error = 1.27°. However, these maximum positional errors did not occur in all 12 treatment fractions. Even though large positional changes occurred during irradiation in all treatment fractions, lowest dose encompassing 95% of the target (D95)-PTV1 was >98% of the prescribed dose.
conclusionIntrafractional patient positional changes occurred during treatment beam irradiation and degraded carbon-ion beam dose distribution. Our evaluation did not consider non-rigid deformations, however, dose distribution was still within clinically acceptable levels. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Inter- and intrafractional changes did not affect carbon-ion beam prostate treatment accuracy.
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.