Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34395275›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Computed Tomography-Based Evaluation of Volume and Position Changes of the Target Region and Organs at Risk During Radiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer: A Pilot Study.

Yi-Mei Liu, Ying-Lin Peng, Qi-Wen Li, Guanzhu Shen, Ya-Ru Ma, Mei-Ning Chen, Jun Zhang, Li-Rong Fu, Bo Qiu, Hui Liu and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Yi-Mei LiuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Ying-Lin PengDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Qi-Wen LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Guanzhu ShenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Ya-Ru MaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Mei-Ning ChenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Jun ZhangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Li-Rong FuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen, China.
Bo QiuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Hui LiuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Xiao-Wu DengDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Sun Yat-sen University · CNSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University · CNSouthern Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo analyze changes in volume and position of target regions and organs at risk (OARs) during radiotherapy for esophageal cancer patients.

methodsOverall, 16 esophageal cancer patients who underwent radiotherapy, including 10 cases of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and six of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), were enrolled. The prescription doses for the planning target volumes (PTVs) were as follows: PTV1, 64 Gy/32 fractions; and PTV2, 46 Gy/23 fractions. Repeat computed tomography (CT) was performed for patients after the 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th, and 25th fractions. Delineation of the gross tumor volume (GTV) and OAR volume was determined using five repeat CTs performed by the same physician. The target and OAR volumes and centroid positions were recorded and used to analyze volume change ratio (VCR), center displacement (ΔD), and changes in the distance from the OAR centroid positions to the planned radiotherapy isocenter (distance to isocenter, DTI) during treatment.

resultsNo patient showed significant changes in target volume (TV) after the first week of radiotherapy (five fractions). However, TV gradually decreased over the following weeks, with the rate slowing after the fourth week (40 Gy). The comparison of TV from baseline to 40 Gy (20 fractions) showed that average GTVs decreased from 130.7 ± 63.1 cc to 92.1 ± 47.2 cc, with a VCR of -29.21 ± 13.96% (

conclusionDuring radiotherapy for esophageal cancer, Targets and OARs change significantly in volume and position during the 2

Indexed as

adaptive radiotherapyesophageal cancergeometric center deviationtarget retractionvolume changed ratio

Identifiers

PMID34395275
PMCPMC8355816
OpenAlexW3185463017

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.