ArticleCureus2020
Preliminary Clinical Evaluation of Intrafraction Prostate Displacements for Two Immobilization Systems.
Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immobilization systems and their corresponding set-up errors influence the clinical target volume to the planning target volume (CTV-PTV) margins, which is critical for hypofractionated prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). This preliminary study evaluates intrafraction prostate displacement for two immobilization systems (A and B). Six consecutive patients having localized prostate cancer and implanted prostate marker seeds were studied. Planar X-ray images were acquired pre- and post-treatment to find the intrafraction prostate displacement. The average absolute displacements (lateral, longitudinal, vertical) were 0.9 ± 0.4 mm, 1.7 ± 0.1 mm, 1.3 ± 0.3 mm (system A), and 0.5 ± 0.2 mm, 0.6 ± 0.1 mm, 0.8 ± 0.3 mm (system B), with average three-dimensional displacements of 2.6 ± 0.2 mm (system A) and 1.3 ± 0.2 mm (system B). The computed CTV-PTV margins (lateral, longitudinal, vertical) were 2.5 mm, 2.5 mm, 3.6 mm and 1.4 mm, 1.6 mm, 2.4 mm for systems A and B, respectively. This suggests that the immobilization system influences intrafraction prostate displacement and, therefore, the margins applied. However, the margins found for both systems are comparable to the margins used for hypofractionated prostate SBRT.
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.