Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33662576›Full record

ArticlePractical radiation oncology

Rigid and Deformable Image Registration for Radiation Therapy: A Self-Study Evaluation Guide for NRG Oncology Clinical Trial Participation.

Yi Rong, Mihaela Rosu-Bubulac, Stanley H Benedict, Yunfeng Cui, Russell Ruo, Tanner Connell, Rojano Kashani, Kujtim Latifi, Quan Chen, Huaizhi Geng and 2 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Practical radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
8.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Dosimetry Software for Theranostic Applications: Current Capabilities and Future Prospects.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Applicability and usage of dose mapping/accumulation in radiotherapy.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2023
    Review
  20. 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

12 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.

Yi RongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, California; Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona. Electronic address: rong.yi@mayo.edu.
Mihaela Rosu-BubulacDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.
Stanley H BenedictDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California Davis Cancer Center, Sacramento, California.
Yunfeng CuiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Russell RuoDepartment of Medical Physics, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Tanner ConnellDepartment of Medical Physics, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Rojano KashaniDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Kujtim LatifiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida.
Quan ChenDepartment of Radiation Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky.
Huaizhi GengDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Jason SohnDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Ying XiaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
McGill University Health Centre · CAUniversity of Pennsylvania · USAllegheny Health Network · USDuke Medical Center · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USMoffitt Cancer Center · USUniversity of California Davis Medical Center · USUniversity of Kentucky · USUniversity of Michigan · USVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

NRG Oncology Network Group Operations Center - GY9 BIQSFP Reports/BudgetsU10CA180868 · NCI · NRG ONCOLOGY FOUNDATION, INC. · PI NORMAN WOLMARK · 2014 to 2026
$206.8M
IROC: Enhancing local enrolling site radiological data capture capabilities for NCTN trialsU24CA180803 · NCI · AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY · PI Thomas J. FitzGerald, MICHAEL V KNOPP · 2014 to 2026
$116.2M
Automatic Organ Segmentation Tool for Radiation Treatment Planning of CancersR44CA254844 · NCI · CARINA MEDICAL, LLC · PI FENG, XUE · 2020 to 2022
$2.0M
Automatic Thoracic Organ Segmentation Tool for Radiation Treatment Planning of Cancers in Thoracic RegionR43EB027523 · NIBIB · CARINA MEDICAL, LLC · PI FENG, XUE · 2019 to 2019
$299k
NCI NIH HHS R44 CA254844NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180868NCI NIH HHS U24 CA180803NIBIB NIH HHS R43 EB027523
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe registration of multiple imaging studies to radiation therapy computed tomography simulation, including magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography-computed tomography, etc. is a widely used strategy in radiation oncology treatment planning, and these registrations have valuable roles in image guidance, dose composition/accumulation, and treatment delivery adaptation. The NRG Oncology Medical Physics subcommittee formed a working group to investigate feasible workflows for a self-study credentialing process of image registration commissioning. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 132 (TG132) report on the use of image registration and fusion algorithms in radiation therapy provides basic guidelines for quality assurance and quality control of the image registration algorithms and the overall clinical process. The report recommends a series of tests and the corresponding metrics that should be evaluated and reported during commissioning and routine quality assurance, as well as a set of recommendations for vendors. The NRG Oncology medical physics subcommittee working group found incompatibility of some digital phantoms with commercial systems. Thus, there is still a need to provide further recommendations in terms of compatible digital phantoms, clinical feasible workflow, and achievable thresholds, especially for future clinical trials involving deformable image registration algorithms. Nine institutions participated and evaluated 4 commonly used commercial imaging registration software and various versions in the field of radiation oncology. RESULTS AND

conclusionsThe NRG Oncology Working Group on image registration commissioning herein provides recommendations on the use of digital phantom/data sets and analytical software access for institutions and clinics to perform their own self-study evaluation of commercial imaging systems that might be employed for coregistration in radiation therapy treatment planning and image guidance procedures. Evaluation metrics and their corresponding values were given as guidelines to establish practical tolerances. Vendor compliance for image registration commissioning was evaluated, and recommendations were given for future development.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsRadiation OncologyAlgorithmsHumansPhantoms, ImagingRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

PMID33662576
PMCPMC8406084
OpenAlexW3135392493

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.