Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31925465›Full record

ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2020

A novel approach to SBRT patient quality assurance using EPID-based real-time transit dosimetry : A step to QA with in vivo EPID dosimetry.

Christos Moustakis, Fatemeh Ebrahimi Tazehmahalleh, Khaled Elsayad, Francis Fezeu, Sergiu Scobioala

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Improving dose delivery accuracy with EPID in vivo dosimetry: results from a multicenter study.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2021
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Christos MoustakisDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany. christos.moustakis@ukmuenster.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8879-2350
Fatemeh Ebrahimi TazehmahallehDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Khaled ElsayadDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
Francis FezeuDepartment of Neurology, Mittelmosel Clinic, Zell, Germany.
Sergiu ScobioalaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
University Hospital Münster · DEUniversity Hospital Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIntra- and inter-fraction organ motion is a major concern in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). It may cause substantial differences between the planned and delivered dose distribution. Such delivery errors may lead to medical harm and reduce life expectancy for patients. The project presented here investigates and improves a rapid method to detect such errors by performing online dose verification through the analysis of electronic portal imaging device (EPID) images.

methodsTo validate the method, a respiratory phantom with inhomogeneous insert was examined under various scenarios: no-error and error-simulated measurements. Simulation of respiratory motions was practiced for target ranges up to 2 cm. Three types of treatment planning technique - 3DCRT (three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy), IMRT (intensity modulated radiation therapy), and VMAT (volumetric modulated arc therapy - were generated for lung SBRT. A total of 54 plans were generated to assess the influence of techniques on the performance of portal dose images. Subsequently, EPID images of 52 SBRT patients were verified. Both for phantom and patient cases, dose distributions were compared using the gamma index method according to analysis protocols in the target volume.

resultsThe comparison of error-introduced EPID-measured images to reference images showed no significant differences with 3%/3 mm gamma evaluation, though target coverage was strongly underestimated. Gamma tolerance of 2%/2 mm reported noticeable detection in EPID sensitivity for simulated errors in 3DCRT and IMRT techniques. The passing rates for 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT with 1%/1 mm in open field were 84.86%, 92.91%, and 98.75%, and by considering MLC-CIAO + 1 cm (threshold 5%), were 68.25%, 83.19%, and 95.29%, respectively.

conclusionThis study demonstrates the feasibility of EPID for detecting the interplay effects. We recommend using thin computed tomography slices and adding sufficient tumor margin in order to limit the dosimetric organ motion in hypofractionated irradiation with preserved plan quality. In the presence of respiratory and gastrointestinal motion, tighter criteria and consequently using local gamma evaluation should be considered, especially for VMAT. This methodology offers a substantial step forward in in vivo dosimetry and the potential to distinguish errors depending on the gamma tolerances. Thus, the approach/prototype provides a fast and easy quality assurance procedure for treatment delivery verification.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedPhantoms, ImagingQuality Assurance, Health CareRadiometryRadiotherapy, ConformalRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedElectronic portal imaging deviceIn vivo dosimetryQuality assuranceReal time transit dosimetryStereotactic body radiation therapy

Identifiers

PMID31925465
OpenAlexW2998843075

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.