ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2020
Quantifying the impact of optical surface guidance in the treatment of cancers of the head and neck.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Maskless head and neck radiotherapy using surface-guided radiation therapy: initial clinical feasibility of real-time setup, intrafraction monitoring, and automatic beam-hold.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Correction of image-guided radiotherapy and intrafraction motion using ExacTrac dynamic for head and neck cancer patients.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Feasibility of transitioning to marker-less immobilisation using optical surface guidance in head and neck cancer treatment: a study at territory state cancer centre in a developing country.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Accuracy of Patient Setup Using Surface Guided Radiotherapy (SGRT) for Abdominal Malignancies.Methods and protocols · 2025Article
- Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Oral Cancer: A Scoping Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Preliminary study of feasibility of surface-guided radiotherapy with concurrent tumor treating fields for glioblastoma: region of interest.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Surface guided radiation therapy with an innovative open-face mask and mouth bite: patient motion management in brain stereotactic radiotherapy.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024Article
- Setup and intra-fractional motion measurements using surface scanning in head and neck cancer radiotherapy- A feasibility study.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Surface-Guided Radiotherapy: Can We Move on from the Era of Three-Point Markers to the New Era of Thousands of Points?Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Advances and potential of optical surface imaging in radiotherapy.Physics in medicine and biology · 2022Review
- Article
- Augmented reality-guided positioning system for radiotherapy patients.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
- Optimizing the Patient Positioning Workflow of Patients with Pelvis, Limb, and Chest/Spine Tumors at an Ion-Beam Gantry based on Optical Surface Guidance.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
- Feasibility of a Novel Surface-Guided Setup Technique to Reproduce Neck Curvature Using two Regions of Interest.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surface guided radiation therapy (SGRT) is increasingly being adopted for use in radiation treatment delivery for Head and Neck (H&N) cancer patients. This study investigated the improvement of patient setup accuracy and reduction of setup time for SGRT compared to a conventional setup. A total of 60 H&N cancer patients were retrospectively included. Patients were categorized into three groups: oral cavity, oropharynx and nasopharynx/sinonasal sites with 20 patients in each group. They were further separated into two (2) subgroups, depending on whether they were set up with the aid of SGRT. The Align-RT™ system was used for SGRT in this work. Positioning was confirmed by daily kV-kV imaging in conjunction with weekly CBCT scans. Translational and rotational couch shifts along with patient setup times were recorded. Imaging setup time, which was defined as the elapsed time from the acquisition of the first image set to the end of the last image set, was recorded. Average translational shifts were larger in the non-SGRT group. Vertical shifts showed the most significant reduction in the SGRT group for both oropharynx and oral cavity groups. Pitch corrections were significantly higher in the SGRT group for oropharynx patients and higher pitch corrections were also observed in the SGRT groups of oral cavity and nasopharynx/sinonasal patients. The average setup time when SGRT guidance was employed was shorter for all three treatment sites although this did not reach statistical significance. The largest time reduction between the SGRT and non-SGRT groups was seen in the nasopharynx/sinonasal group. This study suggests that the use of SGRT decreases the magnitude of translational couch shifts during patient setup. However, the rotational corrections needed were generally higher with SGRT group. When SGRT was employed, a definite reduction in patient setup time was observed for nasopharynx/sinonasal and hypopharynx cancer patients.
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.