Trial reportStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2019
A density assignment method for dose monitoring in head-and-neck radiotherapy.
Trial report in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Generating synthetic images from cone beam computed tomography using self-attention residual UNet for head and neck radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2023Article
- Dosimetric comparison of deformable image registration and synthetic CT generation based on CBCT images for organs at risk in cervical cancer radiotherapy.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
- Dose difference between anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and Acuros XB (AXB) caused by target's air content for volumetric modulated arc therapy of head and neck cancer.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2023Article
- A Deep Unsupervised Learning Model for Artifact Correction of Pelvis Cone-Beam CT.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeDuring head-and-neck (H&N) radiotherapy, the parotid glands (PGs) may be overdosed; thus, a tool is required to monitor the delivered dose. This study aimed to assess the dose accuracy of a patient-specific density assignment method (DAM) for dose calculation to monitor the dose to PGs during treatment. PATIENTS AND
methodsForty patients with H&N cancer received an intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), among whom 15 had weekly CTs. Dose distributions were calculated either on the CTs (CT
resultsThe mean (maximum) inter-patient DAM dose uncertainties for the PGs (in cGy) were 23 (75) using 1C-CTs and 12 (50) using 3C-CTs (p ≤ 0.001). For the spinal cord, these uncertainties were 118 (245) and 15 (67; p ≤ 0.001). The mean (maximum) DAM dose uncertainty between cumulated doses calculated on CTs and 3C-CTs was 7 cGy (45 cGy) for the PGs. Considering the difference between the planned and cumulated doses, 53% of the ipsilateral and 80% of the contralateral PGs were overdosed by +3.6 Gy (up to 8.2 Gy) and +1.9 Gy (up to 5.2 Gy), respectively.
conclusionThe uncertainty of the three-class DAM appears to be clinically non-significant (<0.5 Gy) compared with the PG overdose (up to 8.2 Gy). This DAM could therefore be used to monitor PG doses and trigger replanning.
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.