Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36106119›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022

Improving the clinical workflow of a MR-Linac by dosimetric evaluation of synthetic CT.

Bin Tang, Min Liu, Bingjie Wang, Peng Diao, Jie Li, Xi Feng, Fan Wu, Xinghong Yao, Xiongfei Liao, Qing Hou and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Quality evaluation of synthetic CT using a gamma analysis for prostate cancer MR-only radiotherapy.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 2 countries.

Bin TangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, affiliated to University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (UESTC), Chengdu, China.
Min LiuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, affiliated to University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (UESTC), Chengdu, China.
Bingjie WangFaculty of Arts and Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Peng DiaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, affiliated to University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (UESTC), Chengdu, China.
Jie LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, affiliated to University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (UESTC), Chengdu, China.
Xi FengDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, affiliated to University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (UESTC), Chengdu, China.
Fan WuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, affiliated to University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (UESTC), Chengdu, China.
Xinghong YaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, affiliated to University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (UESTC), Chengdu, China.
Xiongfei LiaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, affiliated to University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (UESTC), Chengdu, China.
Qing HouKey Laboratory of Radiation Physics and Technology of the Ministry of Education, Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Lucia Clara OrlandiniDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, affiliated to University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (UESTC), Chengdu, China.
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CNSichuan Cancer Hospital · CNSichuan University · CNUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adaptive radiotherapy performed on the daily magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an option to improve the treatment quality. In the adapt-to-shape workflow of 1.5-T MR-Linac, the contours of structures are adjusted on the basis of patient daily MRI, and the adapted plan is recalculated on the MRI-based synthetic computed tomography (syCT) generated by bulk density assignment. Because dosimetric accuracy of this strategy is a priority and requires evaluation, this study aims to explore the usefulness of adding an assessment of dosimetric errors associated with recalculation on syCT to the clinical workflow. Sixty-one patients, with various tumor sites, treated using a 1.5-T MR-Linac were included in this study. In Monaco V5.4, the target and organs at risk (OARs) were contoured, and a reference CT plan that contains information about the outlined contours, their average electron density (ED), and the priority of ED assignment was generated. To evaluate the dosimetric error of syCT caused by the inherent approximation within bulk density assignment, the reference CT plan was recalculated on the syCT obtained from the reference CT by forcing all contoured structures to their mean ED defined on the reference plan. The dose-volume histogram (DVH) and dose distribution of the CT and syCT plan were compared. The causes of dosimetric discrepancies were investigated, and the reference plan was reworked to minimize errors if needed. For 54 patients, gamma analysis of the dose distribution on syCT and CT show a median pass rate of 99.7% and 98.5% with the criteria of 3%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm, respectively. DVH difference of targets and OARs remained less than 1.5% or 1 Gy. For the remaining patients, factors (i.e., inappropriate ED assignments) influenced the dosimetric agreement of the syCT vs. CT reference DVH by up to 21%. The causes of the errors were promptly identified, and the DVH dosimetry was realigned except for two lung treatments for which a significant discrepancy remained. The recalculation on the syCT obtained from the planning CT is a powerful tool to assess and decrease the minimal error committed during the adaptive plan on the MRI-based syCT.

Indexed as

clinical workflowdosimetryMR-Linacradiotherapysynthetic CT

Identifiers

PMID36106119
PMCPMC9464932
OpenAlexW4293663410

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.