Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30756456›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2019

Improving fiducial and prostate capsule visualization for radiotherapy planning using MRI.

Angela U Pathmanathan, Maria A Schmidt, Douglas H Brand, Evanthia Kousi, Nicholas J van As, Alison C Tree

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01584258 (International Randomised Study of Prostatectomy vs Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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.

NCT01584258 phase3active not recruitingnot on this map

International Randomised Study of Prostatectomy vs Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) and Conventionally Fractionated Radiotherapy vs SBRT for Organ-Confined Prostate Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustRan2012 to 2027Enrolled2,205ConditionsProstate CancerArmsProstatectomy, Conventionally Fractionated Prostate Radiotherapy, Prostate SBRT
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. MR-Guided Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2020
    Review
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

6 authors.

Angela U PathmanathanThe Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Maria A SchmidtThe Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Douglas H BrandThe Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Evanthia KousiThe Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Nicholas J van AsThe Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Alison C TreeThe Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK C33589/A19727ElektaNational Institute for Health ResearchNational Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeIntraprostatic fiducial markers (FM) improve the accuracy of radiotherapy (RT) delivery. Here we assess geometric integrity and contouring consistency using a T2*-weighted (T2*W) sequence alone, which allows visualization of the FM. MATERIAL AND

methodsTen patients scanned within the Prostate Advances in Comparative Evidence (PACE) trial (NCT01584258) had prostate images acquired with computed tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance (MR) Imaging: T2-weighted (T2W) and T2*W sequences. The prostate was contoured independently on each imaging dataset by three clinicians. Interobserver variability was assessed using comparison indices with Monaco ADMIRE (research version 2.0, Elekta AB) and examined for statistical differences between imaging sets. CT and MR images of two test objects were acquired to assess geometric distortion and accuracy of marker positioning. The first was a linear test object comprising straight tubes in three orthogonal directions, the second was a smaller test object with markers suspended in gel.

resultsInterobserver variability for prostate contouring was lower for both T2W and T2*W compared to CT, this was statistically significant when comparing CT and T2*W images. All markers are visible in T2*W images with 29/30 correctly identified, only 3/30 are visible in T2W images. Assessment of geometric distortion revealed in-plane displacements were under 0.375 mm in MRI, and through plane displacements could not be detected. The signal loss in the MR images is symmetric in relation to the true marker position shown in CT images.

conclusionProstate T2*W images are geometrically accurate, and yield consistent prostate contours. This single sequence can be used to identify FM and for prostate delineation in a mixed MR-CT workflow.

Indexed as

Fiducial MarkersBiomarkersHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleObserver VariationProstatic NeoplasmsRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Image-GuidedRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedBiomarkersgeometric distortionMR-guided RTMRIprostatesegmentation

Identifiers

PMID30756456
PMCPMC6414142

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.