ArticleFrontiers in oncology2020
Impact of Positioning Errors on the Dosimetry of Breath-Hold-Based Volumetric Arc Modulated and Tangential Field-in-Field Left-Sided Breast Treatments.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Dosimetric effects of internal margin, auto flash, and virtual bolus in VMAT-based whole-breast radiotherapy under motion variations.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Signal-aware deep learning-based respiratory motion prediction for lung tumor management.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- The impact of positioning errors on the dose distribution of hypofractionated radiotherapy for left-sided radical breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Impact of breast size on dosimetry and radiobiology of VMAT left-sided breast-conserving conventional fractionation radiotherapy under setup errors.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Sequential or simultaneous-integrated boost in early-stage breast cancer patients: trade-offs between skin toxicity and risk of compromised coverage.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Reproducibility and stability of voluntary deep inspiration breath hold and free breath in breast radiotherapy based on real-time 3-dimensional optical surface imaging system.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Interfractional variation in whole-breast VMAT irradiation: a dosimetric study with complementary SGRT and CBCT patient setup.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Comparing breath hold versus free breathing irradiation for left-sided breast radiotherapy by PlanIQ™.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
- Robustness of VMAT to setup errors in postmastectomy radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer: Impact of bolus thickness.PloS one · 2023Article
- Article
- Evaluation of Plan Robustness Using Hybrid Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) and Volumetric Arc Modulation Radiotherapy (VMAT) for Left-Sided Breast Cancer.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A Beam Angle Selection Method to Improve Plan Robustness Against Position Error in Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Left-Sided Breast Cancer.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
- Retrospective Study on Left-Sided Breast Radiotherapy: Dosimetric Results and Correlation with Physical Factors for Free Breathing and Breath Hold Irradiation Techniques.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
- Evaluation of DIBH and VMAT in Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Left-Sided Breast Cancers After Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Planning Study.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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heart diseases and cardiovascular events are well-known side effects in left-sided breast irradiation. Deep inspiration breath hold (BH) combined with fast delivery techniques such as volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) or tangential field-in-field (TFiF) can serve as a valuable solution to reduce the dose to the heart. This study aims to compare the impact of positioning errors in VMAT and TFiF plans for BH left-sided breast treatments. Fifteen left-sided breast patients treated in BH with TFiF technique were included in this retrospective study. For each patient, a second plan with VMAT technique was optimized. Eighteen setup variations were introduced in each of these VMAT and TFiF reference plans, shifting the isocenter along six different directions by 3, 5, and 10 mm. A total of 540 perturbed plans, 270 for each technique, were recalculated and analyzed. The dose distributions on the target and organs at risk obtained in the different perturbed scenarios were compared with the reference scenarios, using as dosimetric endpoints the dose-volume histograms (DVH). The results were compared using the Wilcoxon test. Comparable plan quality was obtained for the reference VMAT and TFiF plans, except for low doses to organs at risk for which higher values (p < 0.05) were obtained for VMAT plans. For TFiF plans, perturbations of the isocenter position of 3, 5, or 10 mm produced mean deviations of the target DVH dosimetric parameters up to -0.5, -1.0, and -5.2%, respectively; VMAT plans were more sensitive to positioning errors resulting in mean deviations up to -0.5, -4.9, and -13.9%, respectively, for the same magnitude of the above mentioned perturbations. For organs at risk, only perturbations along the left, posterior, and inferior directions resulted in dose increase with a maximum deviation of +2% in the DVH dosimetric parameters. A notable exception were low doses to the left lung and heart for 10 mm isocenter shifts for which the mean differences ranged between +2.7 and +4.1%. Objective information on how external stresses affect the dosimetry of the treatment is the first step towards personalized radiotherapy.
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.