Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33898777›Full record

ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2021

Comparison of beam segment versus full plan re-optimization in daily magnetic resonance imaging-guided online-adaptive radiotherapy.

Janita E van Timmeren, Madalyne Chamberlain, Jérôme Krayenbuehl, Lotte Wilke, Stefanie Ehrbar, Marta Bogowicz, Mariangela Zamburlini, Helena Garcia Schüler, Matea Pavic, Panagiotis Balermpas and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

14 authors.

Janita E van TimmerenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Madalyne ChamberlainDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Jérôme KrayenbuehlDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Lotte WilkeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Stefanie EhrbarDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Marta BogowiczDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Mariangela ZamburliniDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Helena Garcia SchülerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Matea PavicDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Panagiotis BalermpasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Chaehee RyuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Matthias GuckenbergerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Nicolaus AndratschkeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Stephanie Tanadini-LangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zürich and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The optimal approach for magnetic resonance imaging-guided online adaptive radiotherapy is currently unknown and needs to consider patient on-couch time constraints. The aim of this study was to compare two different plan optimization approaches. The comparison was performed in 238 clinically applied online-adapted treatment plans from 55 patients, in which the approach of re-optimization was selected based on the physician's choice. For 33 patients where both optimization approaches were used at least once, the median treatment planning dose metrics of both target and organ at risk differed less than 1%. Therefore, we concluded that beam segment weight optimization was chosen adequately for most patients without compromising plan quality.

Indexed as

Image-guided radiotherapyMR-guidedMRI-linacOnline-adaptive radiotherapyOptimizationSBRT

Identifiers

PMID33898777
PMCPMC8058019

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.