Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28149762›Full record

ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2016

Statistic and dosimetric criteria to assess the shift of the prescribed dose for lung radiotherapy plans when integrating point kernel models in medical physics: are we ready?

Abdulhamid Chaikh, Jacques Balosso

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Abdulhamid ChaikhDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Medical Physics, University Hospital of Grenoble (CHU-GA), Grenoble, France; ; France HADRON National Research Infrastructure, IPNL, Lyon, France.
Jacques BalossoDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Medical Physics, University Hospital of Grenoble (CHU-GA), Grenoble, France; ; France HADRON National Research Infrastructure, IPNL, Lyon, France; ; Department of Radiation Oncology and Medical Physics, University Grenoble, Alpes, Grenoble, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo apply the statistical bootstrap analysis and dosimetric criteria's to assess the change of prescribed dose (PD) for lung cancer to maintain the same clinical results when using new generations of dose calculation algorithms.

methodsNine lung cancer cases were studied. For each patient, three treatment plans were generated using exactly the same beams arrangements. In plan 1, the dose was calculated using pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm turning on heterogeneity correction with modified batho (PBC-MB). In plan 2, the dose was calculated using anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and the same PD, as plan 1. In plan 3, the dose was calculated using AAA with monitor units (MUs) obtained from PBC-MB, as input. The dosimetric criteria's include MUs, delivered dose at isocentre (Diso) and calculated dose to 95% of the target volume (D95). The bootstrap method was used to assess the significance of the dose differences and to accurately estimate the 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Wilcoxon and Spearman's rank tests were used to calculate P values and the correlation coefficient (ρ).

resultsStatistically significant for dose difference was found using point kernel model. A good correlation was observed between both algorithms types, with ρ>0.9. Using AAA instead of PBC-MB, an adjustment of the PD in the isocentre is suggested.

conclusionsFor a given set of patients, we assessed the need to readjust the PD for lung cancer using dosimetric indices and bootstrap statistical method. Thus, if the goal is to keep on with the same clinical results, the PD for lung tumors has to be adjusted with AAA. According to our simulation we suggest to readjust the PD by 5% and an optimization for beam arrangements to better protect the organs at risks (OARs).

Indexed as

anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA)bootstrapPencil kernelpoint kernelprescribed dose (PD)

Identifiers

PMID28149762
PMCPMC5233876

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.