Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36083223›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2022

Pre-treatment analysis of non-rigid variations can assist robust intensity-modulated proton therapy plan selection for head and neck patients.

Ying Zhang, Jailan Alshaikhi, Richard A Amos, Wenyong Tan, Virginia Marin Anaya, Yaru Pang, Gary Royle, Esther Bär

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2022. 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

8 authors.

Ying ZhangDepartment of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, UK.
Jailan AlshaikhiSaudi Proton Therapy Center, King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Richard A AmosDepartment of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, UK.
Wenyong TanDepartment of Oncology, Shenzhen Hospital of Southern Medical University Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.
Virginia Marin AnayaUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Radiotherapy Physics, London, UK.
Yaru PangDepartment of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, UK.
Gary RoyleDepartment of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, UK.
Esther BärDepartment of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK A21993Cancer Research UK C7893/A28990China Scholarship Council 201809150003National Natural Science Funding of China 81974462
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo incorporate small non-rigid variations of head and neck patients into the robust evaluation of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for the selection of robust treatment plans.

methodsA cohort of 20 nasopharynx cancer patients with weekly kilovoltage CT (kVCT) and 15 oropharynx cancer patients with weekly cone-beam CT (CBCT) were retrospectively included. Anatomical variations between week 0/week 1 of treatment were acquired using deformable image registration (DIR) for all 35 patients and then applied to the planning CT of four patients who have kVCT scanned each week to simulate potential small non-rigid variations (sNRVs). The robust evaluations were conducted on IMPT plans with: (1) different number of beam fields from 3-field to 5-field; (2) different beam angles. The robust evaluation before treatment, including the sNRVs and setup uncertainty, referred to as sNRV+R evaluation was compared with the conventional evaluation (without sNRVs) in terms of robustness consistency with the gold standard evaluation based on weekly CT.

resultsAmong four patients (490 scenarios), we observed a maximum difference in the sNRV+R evaluation to the nominal dose of: 9.37% dose degradation on D

conclusionThis study demonstrated the additional dose discrepancy that sNRVs can make. The inclusion of sNRVs can be beneficial to robust evaluation, providing information on clinical uncertainties additional to the conventional rigid isocenter shift.

Indexed as

Head and Neck NeoplasmsProton TherapyRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedHumansOrgans at RiskRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedRetrospective Studiesanatomical uncertaintyhead and neck cancerintensity-modulated proton therapyrobust evaluation

Identifiers

PMID36083223
PMCPMC10092578

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.