Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33764663›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2021

Assessing the performance of an automated breast treatment planning software.

Irena Dragojević, Jeremy D P Hoisak, Gina J Mansy, Douglas A Rahn, Ryan P Manger

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 44% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Development of automated whole breast 3D planning with tangential fields.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Irena DragojevićDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California - San Diego, 3855 Health Sciences Dr., La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA.
Jeremy D P HoisakDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California - San Diego, 3855 Health Sciences Dr., La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA.
Gina J MansyDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California - San Diego, 3855 Health Sciences Dr., La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA.
Douglas A RahnDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California - San Diego, 3855 Health Sciences Dr., La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA.
Ryan P MangerDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California - San Diego, 3855 Health Sciences Dr., La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA.
University of California, San Diego · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the dosimetric performance of an automated breast planning software.

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 15 breast cancer patients treated with tangent fields according to the RTOG 1005 protocol and 30 patients treated off-protocol. Planning with electronic compensators (eComps) via manual, iterative fluence editing was compared to an automated planning program called EZFluence (EZF) (Radformation, Inc.). We compared the minimum dose received by 95% of the volume (D95%), D90%, the volume receiving at least 105% of prescription (V105%), V95%, the conformity index of the V95% and PTV volumes (CI95%), and total monitor units (MUs). The PTV_Eval structure generated by EZF was compared to the RTOG 1005 breast PTV_Eval structure.

resultsThe average D95% was significantly greater for the EZF plans, 95.0%, vs. the original plans 93.2% (P = 0.022). CI95% was less for the EZF plans, 1.18, than the original plans, 1.48 (P = 0.09). D90% was only slightly greater for EZF, averaging at 98.3% for EZF plans and 97.3% for the original plans (P = 0.0483). V105% (cc) was, on average, 27.8cc less in the EZF breast plans, which was significantly less than for those manually planned. The average number of MUs for the EZF plans, 453, was significantly less than original protocol plans, 500 (P = 8 × 10

conclusionEZF improved dose homogeneity, coverage, and MU efficiency vs. manually produced eComp plans. The EZF-generated PTV eval is based on the volume encompassed by the tangents, and is not appropriate for dosimetric comparison to constraints for RTOG 1005 PTV eval. EZF produced dosimetrically similar or superior plans to manual, iteratively derived plans and may also offer time and efficiency benefits.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedBreastFemaleHumansKruppel-Like Factor 4Radiotherapy DosageRetrospective StudiesSoftwareKruppel-Like Factor 4automated planningautomationbreast cancerbreast radiotherapydosimetrytreatment planning

Identifiers

PMID33764663
PMCPMC8035560
OpenAlexW3138467380

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.