ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2016
Target dose conversion modeling from pencil beam (PB) to Monte Carlo (MC) for lung SBRT.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2016. 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.
- Dosimetric evaluation in Helical TomoTherapy for lung SBRT using Monte Carlo-based independent dose verification software.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Comparison of Ray Tracing and Monte Carlo Calculation Algorithms for Spine Lesions Treated With CyberKnife.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Comparison of 2 dynamic conformal arc plans based on high-dose rate flattening filter free beams for peripheral lung cancer.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2021Article
- A plan template-based automation solution using a commercial treatment planning system.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2020Article
- ICRU report 91 on prescribing, recording, and reporting of stereotactic treatments with small photon beams : Statement from the DEGRO/DGMP working group stereotactic radiotherapy and radiosurgery.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2019Review
- Dosimetric comparison of different algorithms in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) plan for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).OncoTargets and therapy · 2019Article
- Does intensity modulation increase target dose calculation errors of conventional algorithms for lung SBRT?Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2018Article
- Breathing-motion-compensated robotic guided stereotactic body radiation therapy : Patterns of failure analysis.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2018Article
- Planning benchmark study for SBRT of early stage NSCLC : Results of the DEGRO Working Group Stereotactic Radiotherapy.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2017Article
- A comprehensive dosimetric study on switching from a Type-B to a Type-C dose algorithm for modern lung SBRT.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA challenge preventing routine clinical implementation of Monte Carlo (MC)-based lung SBRT is the difficulty of reinterpreting historical outcome data calculated with inaccurate dose algorithms, because the target dose was found to decrease to varying degrees when recalculated with MC. The large variability was previously found to be affected by factors such as tumour size, location, and lung density, usually through sub-group comparisons. We hereby conducted a pilot study to systematically and quantitatively analyze these patient factors and explore accurate target dose conversion models, so that large-scale historical outcome data can be correlated with more accurate MC dose without recalculation.
methodsTwenty-one patients that underwent SBRT for early-stage lung cancer were replanned with 6MV 360° dynamic conformal arcs using pencil-beam (PB) and recalculated with MC. The percent D95 difference (PB-MC) was calculated for the PTV and GTV. Using single linear regression, this difference was correlated with the following quantitative patient indices: maximum tumour diameter (MaxD); PTV and GTV volumes; minimum distance from tumour to soft tissue (dmin); and mean density and standard deviation of the PTV, GTV, PTV margin, lung, and 2 mm, 15 mm, 50 mm shells outside the PTV. Multiple linear regression and artificial neural network (ANN) were employed to model multiple factors and improve dose conversion accuracy.
resultsSingle linear regression with PTV D95 deficiency identified the strongest correlation on mean-density (location) indices, weaker on lung density, and the weakest on size indices, with the following R(2) values in decreasing orders: shell2mm (0.71), PTV (0.68), PTV margin (0.65), shell15mm (0.62), shell50mm (0.49), lung (0.40), dmin (0.22), GTV (0.19), MaxD (0.17), PTV volume (0.15), and GTV volume (0.08). A multiple linear regression model yielded the significance factor of 3.0E-7 using two independent features: mean density of shell2mm (P = 1.6E-7) and PTV volume (P = 0.006). A 4-feature ANN model slightly improved the modeling accuracy.
conclusionQuantifiable density features were proposed, replacing simple central/peripheral location designation, which showed strong correlations with PB-to-MC target dose conversion magnitude, followed by lung density and target size. Density in the immediate outer and inner areas of the PTV showed the strongest correlations. A multiple linear regression model with one such feature and PTV volume established a high significance factor, improving dose conversion 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.