Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31767472›Full record

ArticleRadiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology2020

Variation in current prescription practice of stereotactic body radiotherapy for peripherally located early stage non-small cell lung cancer: Recommendations for prescribing and recording according to the ACROP guideline and ICRU report 91.

Evelyn E C de Jong, Matthias Guckenberger, Nicolaus Andratschke, Karin Dieckmann, Mischa S Hoogeman, Maaike Milder, Ditte Sloth Møller, Tine Bisballe Nyeng, Stephanie Tanadini-Lang, Eric Lartigau and 6 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Dose prescription and reporting in stereotactic body radiotherapy: A multi-institutional study.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Doses, fractionations, constraints for stereotactic radiotherapy.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. SEOR SBRT-SG survey on SRS/SBRT dose prescription criteria in Spain.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Evelyn E C de JongCatharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands. Electronic address: evelyn.d.jong@catharinaziekenhuis.nl.
Matthias GuckenbergerUniversity Hospital Zürich, Switzerland. Electronic address: Matthias.Guckenberger@usz.ch.
Nicolaus AndratschkeUniversity Hospital Zürich, Switzerland. Electronic address: Nicolaus.Andratschke@usz.ch.
Karin DieckmannMedical University of Vienna, Austria. Electronic address: karin.dieckmann@akhwien.at.
Mischa S HoogemanErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: m.hoogeman@erasmusmc.nl.
Maaike MilderErasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: m.milder@erasmusmc.nl.
Ditte Sloth MøllerAarhus University Hospital, Denmark. Electronic address: dittmoel@rm.dk.
Tine Bisballe NyengAarhus University Hospital, Denmark. Electronic address: tine.bisballe.nyeng@aarhus.rm.dk.
Stephanie Tanadini-LangUniversity Hospital Zürich, Switzerland. Electronic address: Stephanie.Tanadini-Lang@usz.ch.
Eric LartigauCentre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France. Electronic address: E-Lartigau@o-lambret.fr.
Thomas LacornerieCentre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France. Electronic address: t-lacornerie@o-lambret.fr.
Suresh SenanAmsterdam University Medical Center, the Netherlands. Electronic address: s.senan@amsterdamumc.nl.
Wilko VerbakelAmsterdam University Medical Center, the Netherlands. Electronic address: w.verbakel@amsterdamumc.nl.
Dirk VerellenIridium Kankernetwerk, Antwerp University, Antwerp, Belgium. Electronic address: Dirk.Verellen@gza.be.
Geert De KerfIridium Kankernetwerk, Antwerp University, Antwerp, Belgium. Electronic address: Geert.DeKerf@gza.be.
Coen HurkmansCatharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands. Electronic address: coen.hurkmans@catharinaziekenhuis.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeIn 2017 the ACROP guideline on SBRT for peripherally located early stage NSCLC was published. Later that year ICRU-91 about prescribing, recording and reporting was published. The purpose of this study is to quantify the current variation in prescription practice in the institutions that contributed to the ACROP guideline and to establish the link between the ACROP and ICRU-91 recommendations. MATERIAL AND

methodsFrom each of the eight participating centres, 15 SBRT plans for stage I NSCLC were analyzed. Plans were generated following the institutional protocol, centres prescribed 3 × 13.5 Gy, 3 × 15 Gy, 3 × 17 Gy or 3 × 18 Gy. Dose parameters of the target volumes were reported as recommended by ICRU-91 and also converted to BED

resultsThe intra-institutional variance in D98%, Dmean and D2% of the PTV and GTV/ITV is substantially smaller than the inter-institutional spread, indicating well protocollised planning procedures are followed. The median values per centre ranged from 56.1 Gy to 73.1 Gy (D2%), 50.4 Gy to 63.3 Gy (Dmean) and 40.5 Gy to 53.6 Gy (D98%) for the PTV and from 57.1 Gy to 73.6 Gy (D2%), 53.7 Gy to 68.7 Gy (Dmean) and 48.5 Gy to 62.3 Gy (D98%) for the GTV/ITV. Comparing the variance in PTV D98% with the variance in GTV Dmean per centre, using an F-test, shows that four centres have a larger variance in GTV Dmean, while one centre has a larger variance in PTV D98% (p values <0.01). This shows some centres focus on achieving a constant PTV coverage while others aim at a constant GTV coverage.

conclusionMore detailed recommendations for dose planning and reporting of lung SBRT in line with ICRU-91 were formulated, including a minimum PTV D98% of 100 Gy BED

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungGuideline AdherenceHumansLung NeoplasmsPractice Guidelines as TopicRadiosurgeryRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedACROPHarmonisationICRULungRecommendationSBRT

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.