Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30845263›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Impact of nominal photon energies on normal tissue sparing in knowledge-based radiotherapy treatment planning for rectal cancer patients.

Yuliang Huang, Sha Li, Haizhen Yue, Meijiao Wang, Qiaoqiao Hu, Haiyang Wang, Tian Li, Chenguang Li, Hao Wu, Yibao Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Comparison of the dose distribution of the VMAT radiotherapy technique depending on the beam used: FFF-X10MV and FFF-X15MV.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Knowledge-based radiation treatment planning: A data-driven method survey.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2021
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yuliang HuangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Sha LiDepartment of Medical Physics, Institute of Medical Humanities, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Haizhen YueKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Meijiao WangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Qiaoqiao HuKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Haiyang WangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Tian LiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Chenguang LiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Hao WuKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Yibao ZhangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3658-0687
Peking University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The interactive adjustment of the optimization objectives during the treatment planning process has made it difficult to evaluate the impact of beam quality exclusively in radiotherapy. Without consensus in the published results, the arbitrary selection of photon energies increased the probability of suboptimal plans. This work aims to evaluate the dosimetric impact of various photon energies on the sparing of normal tissues by applying a preconfigured knowledge-based planning (RapidPlan) model to various clinically available photon energies for rectal cancer patients, based on model-generated optimization objectives, which provide a comparison basis with less human interference. A RapidPlan model based on 81 historical VMAT plans for pre-surgical rectal cancer patients using 10MV flattened beam (10X) was used to generate patient-specific objectives for the automated optimization of other 20 patients using 6X, 8X, 10X (reference), 6MV flattening-filter-free (6F) and 10F beams respectively on a TrueBeam accelerator. It was observed that flattened beams produced very comparable target dose coverage yet the conformity index using 6F and 10F were clinically unacceptable (>1.29). Therefore, dose to organs-at-risk (OARs) and normal tissues were only evaluated for flattened beams. RapidPlan-generated objectives for 6X and 8X beams can achieve comparable target dose coverage as that of 10X, yet the dose to normal tissues increased monotonically with decreased energies. Differences were statistically significant except femoral heads. From the radiological perspective of view, higher beam energy is still preferable for deep seated tumors, even if multiple field entries such as VMAT technique can accumulate enough dose to the target using lower energies, as reported in the literature. In conclusion, RapidPlan model configured for flattened beams cannot optimize un-flattened beams before adjusting the target objectives, yet works for flattened beams of other energies. For the investigated 10X, 8X and 6X photons, higher energies provide better normal tissue sparing.

Indexed as

Knowledge BasesOrgan Sparing TreatmentsPhotonsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOrgans at RiskRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedRectal NeoplasmsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID30845263
PMCPMC6405245
OpenAlexW2921615558

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.