Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32522233›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2020

Residual positioning errors and uncertainties for pediatric craniospinal irradiation and the impact of image guidance.

Daniel Gram, André Haraldsson, N Patrik Brodin, Karsten Nysom, Thomas Björk-Eriksson, Per Munck Af Rosenschöld

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Daniel GramDepartment of Oncology - Section of Radiotherapy, Rigshospitalet, Belgdamsvej 9, DK-2100, Copenhagen, Denmark. dgas0002@regionh.dk.
André HaraldssonRadiation Physics - Department of Hematology, Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
N Patrik BrodinInstitute for Onco-Physics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA.
Karsten NysomDepartment of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, The Juliane Marie Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Thomas Björk-ErikssonDepartment of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Per Munck Af RosenschöldNiels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Rigshospitalet · DKLund University · SEMontefiore Medical Center · USRegion Västra Götaland · SESkåne University Hospital · SE

Funding

Barncancerfonden PR2018-0166Børnecancerfonden 2016-0225Børnecancerfonden 2019-5993
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOptimal alignment is of utmost importance when treating pediatric patients with craniospinal irradiation (CSI), especially with regards to field junctions and multiple isocenters and techniques applying high dose gradients. Here, we investigated the setup errors and uncertainties for pediatric CSI using different setup verification protocols.

methodsA total of 38 pediatric patients treated with CSI were identified for whom treatment records and setup images were available. The setup images were registered retrospectively to the reference image using an automated tool and matching on bony anatomy, subsequently, the impact of different correction protocols was simulated.

resultsFor an action-level (AL)-protocol and a non-action level (NAL)-protocol, the translational residual setup error can be as large as 24 mm for an individual patient during a single fraction, and the rotational error as large as 6.1°. With daily IGRT, the maximum setup errors were reduced to 1 mm translational and 5.4° rotational versus 1 mm translational and 2.4° rotational for 3- and 6- degrees of freedom (DoF) couch shifts, respectively. With a daily 6-DoF IGRT protocol for a wide field junction irradiation technique, the residual positioning uncertainty was below 1 mm and 1° for translational and rotational directions, respectively. The largest rotational uncertainty was found for the patients' roll even though this was the least common type of rotational error, while the largest translational uncertainty was found in the patients' anterior-posterior-axis.

conclusionsThese results allow for informed margin calculation and robust optimization of treatments. Daily IGRT is the superior choice for setup of pediatric patients treated with CSI, although centers that do not have this option could use the results presented here to improve their margins and uncertainty estimates for a more accurate treatment alignment.

Indexed as

Radiotherapy Setup ErrorsAdolescentCentral Nervous System NeoplasmsChildChild, PreschoolCraniospinal IrradiationFemaleHumansMalePatient PositioningRadiotherapy, Image-GuidedUncertaintyYoung AdultCraniospinal irradiationImage guidancePositioning errorsPositioning uncertaintiesResidual setup errors

Identifiers

PMID32522233
PMCPMC7285717
OpenAlexW3033050044

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.