ArticleScientific reports2018
Computational delineation and quantitative heterogeneity analysis of lung tumor on 18F-FDG PET for radiation dose-escalation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- An exploratory study on whole-lung radiomics features from computed tomography for prognostic prediction in non-small cell lung cancer with concurrent chemoradiotherapy.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Personalized mid-course FDG-PET based adaptive treatment planning for non-small cell lung cancer using machine learning and optimization.Physics in medicine and biology · 2022Article
- Potential advantages of FDG-PET radiomic feature map for target volume delineation in lung cancer radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
- Joint EANM/SNMMI/ESTRO practice recommendations for the use of 2-[European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Review
- Radiomics: an overview in lung cancer management-a narrative review.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Review
- Spatial heterogeneity of radiolabeled choline positron emission tomography in tumors of patients with non-small cell lung cancer: first-in-patient evaluation of [Theranostics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Quantitative measurement and analysis of tumor metabolic activities could provide a more optimal solution to personalized accurate dose painting. We collected PET images of 58 lung cancer patients, in which the tumor exhibits heterogeneous FDG uptake. We design an automated delineation and quantitative heterogeneity measurement of the lung tumor for dose-escalation. For tumor delineation, our algorithm firstly separates the tumor from its adjacent high-uptake tissues using 3D projection masks; then the tumor boundary is delineated with our stopping criterion of joint gradient and intensity affinities. For dose-escalation, tumor sub-volumes with low, moderate and high metabolic activities are extracted and measured. Based on our quantitative heterogeneity measurement, a sub-volume oriented dose-escalation plan is implemented in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning system. With respect to manual tumor delineations by two radiation oncologists, the paired t-test demonstrated our model outperformed the other computational methods in comparison (p < 0.05) and reduced the variability between inter-observers. Compared to standard uniform dose prescription, the dosimetry results demonstrated that the dose-escalation plan statistically boosted the dose delivered to high metabolic tumor sub-volumes (p < 0.05). Meanwhile, the doses received by organs-at-risk (OAR) including the heart, ipsilateral lung and contralateral lung were not statistically different (p > 0.05).
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.