ArticleJournal of radiation research2015
Development of fast patient position verification software using 2D-3D image registration and its clinical experience.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Carbon-ions, protons or photons for head and neck cancer radiotherapy-an in silico planning study.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026Article
- Inter-fractional error and intra-fractional motion of prostate and dosimetry comparisons of patient position registrations with versus without fiducial markers during treatment with carbon-ion radiotherapy.Radiological physics and technology · 2024Article
- Shortening image registration time using a deep neural network for patient positional verification in radiotherapy.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2023Article
- Planning strategies for robust carbon-ion scanning radiotherapy for stage I esophageal cancer: a retrospective study.Journal of radiation research · 2023Article
- Deep neural network-based synthetic image digital fluoroscopy using digitally reconstructed tomography.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2023Article
- Real-time deep neural network-based automatic bowel gas segmentation on X-ray images for particle beam treatment.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2023Article
- Optimizing 3DCT image registration for interfractional changes in carbon-ion prostate radiotherapy.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Robust treatment planning in scanned carbon-ion radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer: Clinical verification using in-room computed tomography images.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Clinical experience of craniospinal intensity-modulated spot-scanning proton therapy using large fields for central nervous system medulloblastomas and germ cell tumors in children, adolescents, and young adults.Journal of radiation research · 2019Article
- Evaluation of the accuracy and clinical practicality of a calculation system for patient positional displacement in carbon ion radiotherapy at five sites.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To improve treatment workflow, we developed a graphic processing unit (GPU)-based patient positional verification software application and integrated it into carbon-ion scanning beam treatment. Here, we evaluated the basic performance of the software. The algorithm provides 2D/3D registration matching using CT and orthogonal X-ray flat panel detector (FPD) images. The participants were 53 patients with tumors of the head and neck, prostate or lung receiving carbon-ion beam treatment. 2D/3D-ITchi-Gime (ITG) calculation accuracy was evaluated in terms of computation time and registration accuracy. Registration calculation was determined using the similarity measurement metrics gradient difference (GD), normalized mutual information (NMI), zero-mean normalized cross-correlation (ZNCC), and their combination. Registration accuracy was dependent on the particular metric used. Representative examples were determined to have target registration error (TRE) = 0.45 ± 0.23 mm and angular error (AE) = 0.35 ± 0.18° with ZNCC + GD for a head and neck tumor; TRE = 0.12 ± 0.07 mm and AE = 0.16 ± 0.07° with ZNCC for a pelvic tumor; and TRE = 1.19 ± 0.78 mm and AE = 0.83 ± 0.61° with ZNCC for lung tumor. Calculation time was less than 7.26 s.The new registration software has been successfully installed and implemented in our treatment process. We expect that it will improve both treatment workflow and 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.