ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology
Clinical Development and Evaluation of Megavoltage Topogram for Fast Patient Alignment on Helical Tomotherapy.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo develop and evaluate a fast patient localization tool using megavoltage (MV)-topogram on helical tomotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eighty-one MV-topogram pairs for 18 pelvis patients undergoing radiation were acquired weekly under an institutional review board-approved clinical trial. The MV-topogram imaging protocol requires 2 orthogonal acquisitions at static gantry angles of 0 degrees and 90 degrees for a programed scan length. A MATLAB based in-house software was developed to reconstruct the MV-topograms offline. Reference images (digitally reconstructed topograms, digitally reconstructed topograms) were generated using the planning computed tomography and tomotherapy geometry. The MV-topogram based alignment was determined by registering the MV-topograms to the digitally reconstructed topogram using bony landmark on commercial MIM software. The daily shifts in 3 translational directions determined from MV-topograms were compared with the megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) based patient shifts. Linear-regression and two one-sided tests equivalence tests were performed to investigate the relation and equivalence between the 2 techniques. Seventy-eight MV-topogram pairs for 19 head and neck patients were included to validate the finding.
resultsThe magnitudes of alignment differences of (MVCT - MV-topogram) (and standard deviations) were -0.3 ± 2.1, -0.8 ± 2.4, and 1.6 ± 1.7 mm for pelvis and 0.6 ± 1.2, 0.8 ± 4.2, 1.6 ± 2.6 mm for head and neck; the linear-regression coefficients between 2 imaging techniques were 1.18, 1.10, 0.94, and 0.86, 0.63, 0.38 in the lateral, longitudinal, vertical directions for pelvis and head and neck, respectively. The acquisition time for a pair of MV-topograms was up to 12.7 times less than MVCT scans (coarse scan mode) while covering longer longitudinal length.
conclusionsMV-topograms showed equivalent clinical performance to the standard MVCT with significantly less acquisition time for pelvis and H&N patients. The MV-topogram can be used as an alternative or complimentary tool for bony landmark-based patient alignment on tomotherapy.
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.