Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35521072›Full record

ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology

Prostate-Centric Versus Bony-Centric Registration in the Definitive Treatment of Node-Positive Prostate Cancer with Simultaneous Integrated Boost: A Dosimetric Comparison.

Trudy C Wu, Michael Xiang, Nicholas G Nickols, Stephen Tenn, Nzhde Agazaryan, John V Hegde, Michael L Steinberg, Minsong Cao, Amar U Kishan

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

Article in Advances in radiation oncology. 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
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Trudy C WuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Michael XiangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Nicholas G NickolsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Stephen TennDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Nzhde AgazaryanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
John V HegdeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Michael L SteinbergDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Minsong CaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Amar U KishanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
University of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the effect of daily shifts based on rigid registration to intraprostatic markers on coverage of boost doses delivered to gross nodal disease for prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: Seventy-five cone beam computed tomographies (CBCTs) from 15 patients treated with definitive radiation for clinically node-positive prostate cancer underwent fiducial-based and pelvic bony-based registration to the initial planning scans. Gross tumor volumes of nodal boost targets were contoured directly on each CBCT registration. The nodal displacement (3-dimensional translation from the node centroid on planning CT to node centroid on registered CBCT) and dose coverage (minimum dose [Dmin], mean dose [Dmean], dose delivered to 95% of the gross tumor volumes [D95]) were calculated for each registration on all nodal targets. All doses for each node were normalized to its intended prescription dose (dose covering 95% of a 3 mm planning target volume [PTV] expansion). Results: Forty-one gross nodal targets were analyzed. Most boosted nodes (80.5%, 33/41) were treated with conventional fractionation using volumetric-arc radiation therapy, and 19.5% (8/41) underwent stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Dmin, Dmean, and D95 were all significantly lower with fiducial-based registration compared with bony-based registration ( Conclusions: Large and anisotropic PTV margins are likely needed to adequately dose gross nodal targets when patient setup is based on rigid registration to intraprostatic markers. Alternative approaches such as adaptive replanning may be required to overcome these limitations.

Identifiers

PMID35521072
PMCPMC9061255
OpenAlexW4220654970

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.