ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2021
Automated algorithm for calculation of setup corrections and planning target volume margins for offline image-guided radiotherapy protocols.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using Artificial Intelligence for Optimization of the Processes and Resource Utilization in Radiotherapy.JCO global oncology · 2022Review
- Comparing treatment uncertainty for ultra- vs. standard-hypofractionated breast radiation therapy based on in-vivo dosimetry.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeEach radiotherapy center should have a site-specific planning target volume (PTV) margins and image-guided (IG) radiotherapy (IGRT) correction protocols to compensate for the geometric errors that can occur during treatment. This study developed an automated algorithm for the calculation and evaluation of these parameters from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based IG-intensity modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT) treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A MATLAB algorithm was developed to extract the setup errors in three translational directions (x, y, and z) from the data logged by the CBCT system during treatment delivery. The algorithm also calculates the resulted population setup error and PTV margin based on the van Herk margin recipe and subsequently estimates their respective values for no action level (NAL) and extended no action level (eNAL) offline correction protocols. The algorithm was tested on 25 head and neck cancer (HNC) patients treated using IG-IMRT.
resultsThe algorithms calculated that the HNC patients require a PTV margin of 3.1, 2.7, and 3.2 mm in the x-, y-, and z-direction, respectively, without IGRT. The margin can be reduced to 2.0, 2.2, and 3.0 mm in the x-, y-, and z-direction, respectively, with NAL and 1.6, 1.7, and 2.2 mm in the x-, y-, and z-direction, respectively, with eNAL protocol. The results obtained were verified to be the same with the margins calculated using an Excel spreadsheet. The algorithm calculates the weekly offline setup error correction values automatically and reduces the risk of input data error observed in the spreadsheet.
conclusionsIn conclusion, the algorithm provides an automated method for optimization and reduction of PTV margin using logged setup errors from CBCT-based IGRT.
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.