Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30782085›Full record

Trial reportTechnology in cancer research & treatment2019

Does Interfraction Cone Beam Computed Tomography Improve Target Localization in Prostate Bed Radiotherapy?

Sara Elakshar, James Man Git Tsui, Michael Jonathan Kucharczyk, Nada Tomic, Ziad Simon Fawaz, Boris Bahoric, Joseph Papayanatos, Ahmad Chaddad, Tamim Niazi

Erratum issuedAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase II
In one paragraph

Trial report in Technology in cancer research & treatment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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. Evaluation of the XVI dual registration tool for image-guided radiotherapy in prostate cancer.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2021
    Article
  3. Salvage radiation therapy in prostate cancer: relationship between rectal dose and long-term, self-reported rectal bleeding.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sara Elakshar1 McGill University, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8462-2621
James Man Git Tsui2 McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Michael Jonathan Kucharczyk3 Sir Mortimer B Davis Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2857-6840
Nada Tomic4 Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Ziad Simon Fawaz2 McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9319-0186
Boris Bahoric5 McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Joseph Papayanatos4 Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Ahmad Chaddad2 McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Tamim Niazi1 McGill University, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIn this prospective phase II study, we investigated whether cone beam computed tomography scan was a superior method of image-guided radiotherapy relative to 2D orthogonal kilovoltage images in the post-radical prostatectomy setting.

methodsA total of 419 treatment fractions were included in this analysis. The shifts required to align the patient for each treatment were performed using 3D matching between cone beam computed tomography scans and the corresponding computed tomography images used for planning. This was compared with the shifts obtained from 2D orthogonal kilovoltage images, matching with the corresponding digitally reconstructed radiographs. Patients did not have fiducials inserted to assist with localization. Interfractional changes in the bladder and rectal volumes were subsequently measured on the cone beam computed tomography images for each fraction and compared to the shift differences between orthogonal kilovoltage and cone beam computed tomography scans. The proportion of treatment fractions with a shift difference exceeding the planning target volume of 7 mm, between orthogonal kilovoltage and cone beam computed tomography scans, was calculated.

resultsThe mean vertical, lateral, and longitudinal shifts resulted from 2D match between orthogonal kilovoltage images and corresponding digitally reconstructed radiographs were 0.353 cm (interquartile range: 0.1-0.5), 0.346 cm (interquartile range: 0.1-0.5), and 0.289 cm (interquartile range: 0.1-0.4), compared to 0.388 cm (interquartile range: 0.1-0.5), 0.342 cm (interquartile range: 0.1-0.5), and 0.291 cm (interquartile range: 0.1-0.4) obtained from 3D match between cone beam computed tomography and planning computed tomography scan, respectively. Our results show a significant difference between the kilovoltage and cone beam computed tomography shifts in the anterior-posterior direction ( P = .01). The proportion of treatment fractions in which the differences in kilovoltage and cone beam computed tomography shifts between exceeded the 7 mm planning target volume margin was 6%, 2%, and 3% in the anterior-posterior, lateral, and superior-inferior directions, respectively.

conclusionWe prospectively demonstrated that the daily use of volumetric cone beam computed tomography for treatment localization in post-radical prostatectomy patients demonstrated an increased need for a shift in patient position. This suggests that in post-radical prostatectomy patients the daily cone beam computed tomography imaging improved localization of the prostate bed and may have prevented a limited number of geographic misses, compared to daily kilovoltage imaging that was not assisted with fiducials.

Indexed as

Cone-Beam Computed TomographyHumansMaleOrgans at RiskProspective StudiesProstatic NeoplasmsRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Image-GuidedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedRectumUrinary Bladdercone beam CTimage-guided radiotherapykV imagingprostate cancerprostatectomy

Identifiers

PMID30782085
PMCPMC6383090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.