ArticleTechnology in cancer research & treatment
Setup Error Assessment and Correction in Planar kV Image- Versus Cone Beam CT Image-Guided Radiation Therapy: A Clinical Study of Early Breast Cancer Treated With External Beam Partial Breast Irradiation.
Article in Technology in cancer research & treatment. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of orthogonal image-guided frequency on positioning error correction and dose in postoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Article
- Does deformation of immobilization devices impact treatment accuracy in thoracic cancer radiotherapy?Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Planning Automation for Treatment Techniques Comparison and Robustness Analysis: Tangential Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Whole Breast Irradiation.Advances in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Generating missing patient anatomy from partially acquired cone-beam computed tomography images using deep learning: a proof of concept.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2023Article
- Robustness of hypofractionated breast radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery with free breathing.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Robustness of VMAT to setup errors in postmastectomy radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer: Impact of bolus thickness.PloS one · 2023Article
- Comparing treatment uncertainty for ultra- vs. standard-hypofractionated breast radiation therapy based on in-vivo dosimetry.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare differences in setup error assessment and correction between planar kilovolt images and cone beam computed tomography images for external beam partial breast irradiation during free breathing.
methodsNineteen patients who received external beam partial breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery were recruited. Interfraction setup error was acquired using planar kilovolt images and cone beam computed tomography. After online setup correction, the residual error was calculated, and the setup error was compared. The residual error and setup margin were quantified for planar kilovolt and cone beam computed tomography images.
resultsThe largest setup error was observed in the anteroposterior direction for both cone beam computed tomography and planar kilovolt imaging (-1.45 mm, 1.74 mm). The cone beam computed tomography-based setup error (systematic error [Σ]) was less than the planar kilovolt images based on Σ in the anteroposterior direction (-1.2 mm vs 2.00 mm; P = .005), and no significant differences were observed for random error (σ) in 3 dimensions ( P = .948, .376, .314). After online setup correction, cone beam computed tomography significantly reduced the residual setup error compared with planar kilovolt images in the anteroposterior direction (Σ: -0.20 mm vs 0.50 mm, P = .008; σ: 0.45 mm vs 1.34 mm, P = .002). The cone beam computed tomography-based setup margin was smaller than the planar kilovolt image-based setup margin in the anteroposterior direction (-1.39 mm vs 5.57 mm, P = .003; 0.00 mm vs 3.20 mm, P = .003).
conclusionsDiscrepancy between the setup errors observed with planar kilovolt and cone beam computed tomography was obvious in the anteroposterior direction. Compared to cone beam computed tomography, the elapsed treatment time was smaller when the initial alignment used kilovolt planar imaging. Whether using planar kilovolt or cone beam computed tomography, residual errors can be reduced to 1.5 mm for external beam partial breast irradiation procedures.
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.