ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2016
On correlations in IMRT planning aims.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- A Risk-Adjusted Control Chart to Evaluate Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Plan Quality.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose was to study correlations amongst IMRT DVH evaluation points and how their relaxation impacts the overall plan. 100 head-and-neck cancer cases, using the Eclipse treatment planning system with the same protocol, are statisti-cally analyzed for PTV, brainstem, and spinal cord. To measure variations amongst the plans, we use (i) interquartile range (IQR) of volume as a function of dose, (ii) interquartile range of dose as a function of volume, and (iii) dose falloff. To determine correlations for institutional and ICRU goals, conditional probabilities and medians are computed. We observe that most plans exceed the median PTV dose (average D50 = 104% prescribed dose). Furthermore, satisfying D50 reduced the probability of also satisfying D98, constituting a negative correlation of these goals. On the other hand, satisfying D50 increased the probability of satisfying D2, suggesting a positive correlation. A positive correlation is also observed between the PTV V105 and V110. Similarly, a positive correlation between the brainstem V45 and V50 is measured by an increase in the conditional median of V45, when V50 is violated. Despite the imposed institutional and international recommenda-tions, significant variations amongst DVH points can occur. Even though DVH aims are evaluated independently, sizable correlations amongst them are possible, indicating that some goals cannot be satisfied concurrently, calling for unbiased plan criteria.
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.