ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2023
Evaluation of dose accumulation methods and workflows utilising cone beam computed tomography images.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An efficient automated approach for accumulated dose estimation in prostate cancer radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVarious adaptive radiation therapy (ART) methods have emerged, with little consensus amongst the literature as to which is most appropriate. This study aimed to compare dose mapping (DM) versus Monte Carlo recalculation (MCR), using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images when utilised in automated ART dose accumulation workflows in the MIM Maestro software package.
methodsThe treatment plans for 38 cancer patients (19 prostate and 19 head and neck cases) were used to perform DM or MCR retrospectively upon CBCTs acquired during treatment, which were then deformably registered to the planning CT (DR-pCT) to facilitate dose accumulation. Dose-volume and region-of-interest data were extracted for the planning target volumes and organs at risk. Intraclass correlation (ICC) values and Bland-Altman plots were utilised to compare DM versus MCR doses on the CBCT images as well as CBCT versus DR-pCT doses.
resultsWhen comparing DM and MCR on CBCTs, the differences across dose level mean dose differences were mostly within a ±5% level of agreement based on the Bland-Altman plots, with over 67% of ICC values over 0.9 and indicative of good correlation. When these distributions were deformed back to the planning CT, the agreement was reduced considerably, with larger differences (exceeding ±5%) resulting from workflow-related issues.
conclusionThe results emphasise the need to consider and make adaptations to minimise the effect of workflows on algorithm performance. Manual user intervention, refined departmental protocols and further developments to the MIM Maestro software will enhance the use of this tool.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.