Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26311077›Full record

ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2016

The effect of slice thickness on target and organs at risk volumes, dosimetric coverage and radiobiological impact in IMRT planning.

S P Srivastava, C-W Cheng, I J Das

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Uncertainties in outcome modelling in radiation oncology.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Prevalence and Clinical Impact of Incidental Findings on Preoperative 3D Planning Computed Tomography for Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

S P SrivastavaDepartment of Health Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA. srivas10@purdue.edu.
C-W ChengDepartment of Health Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
I J DasDepartment of Health Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDose-volume histogram (DVH) has become an important tool for evaluation of radiation outcome as reflected from many clinical protocols. While dosimetric accuracy in treatment planning system (TPS) is well quantified, the variability in volume estimation is uncertain due to reconstruction algorithm that is investigated in this study. In addition, the impact of dose distribution and tumor control probability (TCP) were also investigated with CT slice thickness for IMRT planning. MATERIALS AND

methodsA water phantom containing various objects with accurately known volume ranging from 1 to 100 cm(3) was scanned with 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 mm slice thickness. The CT data sets were sent to Eclipse TPS for contour delineation and volume estimation. The data were compared with known volume for the estimation of error in the volume of each structure. IMRT Plans were generated on phantom containing four objects with different slice thickness (1-5 mm) to calculate TCP. ICRU-83-recommended dose points such as D 2%, D 50%, D 98%, as well as homogeneity and conformity index were also calculated.

resultsThe variability of volumes with CT slice thickness was significant especially for small volume structures. A maximum error of 92% was noticed for 1 cm(3) volume of object with 10 mm slice thickness, whereas it was ~19% for 1 mm slice thickness. For 2 and 3 cm(3) objects, the maximum error of 99% was noticed with 10 mm slice thickness and ~60% with 5 mm. The differences are smaller for larger volumes with a cutoff at about 20 cm(3). The calculated volume of the objects is a function of reconstruction algorithm and slice thickness. The PTV mean dose and TCP decreased with increasing slice thickness. Maximum variation of ~5% was noticed in mean dose and ~2% in TCP with change in slice thickness from 1 to 5 mm. The relative decrease in target volume receiving 95% of the prescribed dose is ~5% with change in slice thickness from 1 to 5 mm. The homogeneity index increases up to 163% and conformity index decreases by 4% between 1 and 5 mm slice thickness, producing highly inhomogeneous and least conformal treatment plan.

conclusionsEstimation of a volume is dependent on CT slice thickness and the contouring algorithm in a TPS. During commissioning of TPS and for all clinical protocols, evaluation of volume should be included to provide the limit of accuracy in DVH from TPS, especially for small objects. A smaller slice thickness provides superior dosimetry with improved TCP. Thus, the smallest possible slice thickness should be used for IMRT planning, especially when smaller structures are present.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsOrgans at RiskPhantoms, ImagingHumansNeoplasmsRadiometryRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedCT slice thicknessIMRT dosimetryNTCPTCPVolume estimation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.