Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34265395›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2021

Hyperpolarized

Leith J Rankine, Ziyi Wang, Chris R Kelsey, Elianna Bier, Bastiaan Driehuys, Lawrence B Marks, Shiva K Das

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. UltrasensitiveAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Quantifying Regional Radiation-Induced Lung Injury in Patients Using HyperpolarizedInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Lung functional imaging.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Leith J RankineDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Medical Physics Graduate Program, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. Electronic address: Leith_Rankine@med.unc.edu.
Ziyi WangDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Chris R KelseyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Elianna BierDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Bastiaan DriehuysMedical Physics Graduate Program, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Lawrence B MarksDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Shiva K DasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Duke University · USDuke Medical Center · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Early Detection of Changes in Pulmonary Gas Exchange by Hyperpolarized Xe MRIR01HL105643 · NHLBI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Bastiaan Driehuys · 2011 to 2026
$6.7M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL105643
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo present a methodology to use pulmonary gas exchange maps to guide functional avoidance treatment planning in radiation therapy (RT) and evaluate its efficacy compared with ventilation-guided treatment planning. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Before receiving conventional RT for non-small cell lung cancer, 11 patients underwent hyperpolarized

resultsCompared with DVH-based reoptimization of the clinically approved plans, gas exchange-guided functional avoidance planning more effectively reduced the gas exchange-weighted metrics fMLD (average ± SD, -78 ± 79 cGy, compared with -45 ± 34 cGy; P = .03), MLD-f33% (-135 ± 136 cGy, compared with -52 ± 47 cGy; P = .004), and MLD-f50% (-96 ± 95 cGy, compared with -47 ± 40 cGy; P = .01). Comparing the 2 functional planning types, Gas Exchange-Guided planning more effectively reduced MLD-f33% compared with ventilation-guided planning (-64 ± 95; P = .009). For some patients, Gas Exchange-Guided functional avoidance plans demonstrated clinically significant reductions in model-predicted toxicity, more so than the accompanying ventilation-guided plans and DVH-based reoptimizations.

conclusionGas Exchange-Guided planning effectively reduced dose to high gas exchanging regions of lung while maintaining clinically acceptable plan quality. In many patients, ventilation-guided planning incidentally reduced dose to higher gas exchange regions, to a lesser extent. This methodology enables future prospective trials to examine patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsHumansLungMagnetic Resonance ImagingRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedXenonXenon

Identifiers

PMID34265395
PMCPMC8530914
OpenAlexW3179277900

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.