Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28567503›Full record

ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2017

Planning benchmark study for SBRT of early stage NSCLC : Results of the DEGRO Working Group Stereotactic Radiotherapy.

Christos Moustakis, Oliver Blanck, Fatemeh Ebrahimi Tazehmahalleh, Mark Ka Heng Chan, Iris Ernst, Thomas Krieger, Marciana-Nona Duma, Markus Oechsner, Ute Ganswindt, Christian Heinz and 22 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The role of EPID in vivo dosimetry in the risk management of stereotactic lung treatments.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2023
    Article
  6. Dose prescription and reporting in stereotactic body radiotherapy: A multi-institutional study.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2023
    Article
  7. Head and neck radiotherapy on the MR linac: a multicenter planning challenge amongst MRIdian platform users.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2021
    Article
  8. SEOR SBRT-SG survey on SRS/SBRT dose prescription criteria in Spain.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Stereotactic body radiotherapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in a multimodal treatment setting.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Stereotactic body radiotherapy for ventricular tachycardia (cardiac radiosurgery) : First-in-patient treatment in Germany.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2020
    Article
  16. Results of a multicenter intensity modulated radiation therapy treatment planning comparison study for a sample prostate cancer case.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. SBRT planning for spinal metastasis: indications from a large multicentric study.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2019
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

32 authors.

Christos MoustakisDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Muenster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Gebäude A1, 48149, Münster, Germany. christos.moustakis@ukmuenster.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8879-2350
Oliver BlanckDepartment of Radiation Oncology, UKSH Universitätsklinikum Schleswig Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Fatemeh Ebrahimi TazehmahallehDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Muenster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Gebäude A1, 48149, Münster, Germany.
Mark Ka Heng ChanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, UKSH Universitätsklinikum Schleswig Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Iris ErnstDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Muenster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Gebäude A1, 48149, Münster, Germany.
Thomas KriegerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany.
Marciana-Nona DumaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Markus OechsnerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Ute GanswindtDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.
Christian HeinzDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.
Horst AlheitRadiationtherapy Distler, Bautzen, Germany.
Hilbert BlankRadiationtherapy Distler, Bautzen, Germany.
Ursula NestleDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Rolf WiehleDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Christine KornhuberDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Halle, Halle, Germany.
Christian OstheimerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Halle, Halle, Germany.
Cordula PetersenUniversity Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Gerhard PollulDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Wolfgang BausUniversity Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Georg AltensteinUniversity Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Eric BeckersGamma Knife Center Krefeld, Krefeld, Germany.
Katrin JurianzGamma Knife Center Krefeld, Krefeld, Germany.
Florian SterzingUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Matthias KretschmerRadiologische Allianz Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Heinrich SeegenschmiedtRadiationtherapy and Cyberknife Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Torsten MaassRadiationtherapy and Cyberknife Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Stefan DroegeLung Clinic Hemer, Hemer, Germany.
Ulrich WolfDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Juergen SchoefflerRadiationtherapy Department Boeblingen, Boeblingen, Germany.
Uwe HaverkampDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Muenster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Gebäude A1, 48149, Münster, Germany.
Hans Theodor EichDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Muenster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Gebäude A1, 48149, Münster, Germany.
Matthias GuckenbergerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim was to evaluate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) treatment planning variability for early stage nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with respect to the published guidelines of the Stereotactic Radiotherapy Working Group of the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). MATERIALS AND

methodsPlanning computed tomography (CT) scan and the structure sets (planning target volume, PTV; organs at risk, OARs) of 3 patients with early stage NSCLC were sent to 22 radiotherapy departments with SBRT experience: each department was asked to prepare a treatment plan according to the DEGRO guidelines. The prescription dose was 3 fractions of 15 Gy to the 65% isodose.

resultsIn all, 87 plans were generated: 36 used intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT), 21 used three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), 6 used static field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SF-IMRT), 9 used helical radiotherapy and 15 used robotic radiosurgery. PTV dose coverage and simultaneously kept OARs doses were within the clinical limits published in the DEGRO guidelines. However, mean PTV dose (mean 58.0 Gy, range 52.8-66.4 Gy) and dose conformity indices (mean 0.75, range 0.60-1.00) varied between institutions and techniques (p ≤ 0.02). OARs doses varied substantially between institutions, but appeared to be technique independent (p = 0.21).

conclusionAll studied treatment techniques are well suited for SBRT of early stage NSCLC according to the DEGRO guidelines. Homogenization of SBRT practice in Germany is possible through the guidelines; however, detailed treatment plan characteristics varied between techniques and institutions and further homogenization is warranted in future studies and recommendations. Optimized treatment planning should always follow the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungGermanyGuideline AdherenceHumansLung NeoplasmsNeoplasm StagingPrevalenceRadiosurgeryRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityTreatment OutcomeNonsmall cell lung cancerOrgans at riskPlanning benchmark studyQuality assuranceStereotactic radiation therapy

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.