ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Adaptive dose painting for prostate cancer.
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 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of hybrid DIR performance using controlling structures and points of interest in MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy for prostate cancer patients.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Lanthanide Nanotheranostics in Radiotherapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Microstructural modelling based on diffusion weighted imaging to guide dose painting in carbon ions for large sacral chordomas.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Technical development and In Silico implementation of SyntheticMR in head and neck adaptive radiation therapy: A prospective R-IDEAL stage 0/1 technology development report.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Comparison of different dose accumulation strategies to estimate organ doses after stereotactic magnetic resonance-guided adaptive radiotherapy.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
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
Purpose: Dose painting (DP) is a radiation therapy (RT) strategy for patients with heterogeneous tumors delivering higher dose to radiation resistant regions and less to sensitive ones, thus aiming to maximize tumor control with limited side effects. The success of DP treatments is influenced by the spatial accuracy in dose delivery. Adaptive RT (ART) workflows can reduce the overall geometric dose delivery uncertainty. The purpose of this study is to dosimetrically compare ART and non-adaptive conventional RT workflows for delivery of DP prescriptions in the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa). Materials and methods: We performed a planning and treatment simulation study of four study arms. Adaptive and conventional workflows were tested in combination with DP and Homogeneous dose. We used image data from 5 PCa patients that had been treated on the Elekta Unity MR linac; the patients had been imaged in treatment position before each treatment fraction (7 in total). The local radiation sensitivity from apparent diffusion coefficient maps of 15 high-risk PCa patients was modelled in a previous study. these maps were used as input for optimization of DP plans aiming for maximization of tumor control probability (TCP) under rectum dose constraints. A range of prostate doses were planned for the homogeneous arms. Adaptive plans were replanned based on the anatomy-of-the-day, whereas conventional plans were planned using a pre-treatment image and subsequently recalculated on the anatomy-of-the-day. The dose from 7 fractions was accumulated using dose mapping. The endpoints studied were the TCP and dose-volume histogram metrics for organs at risk. Results: Accumulated DP doses (adaptive and conventional) resulted in high TCP, between 96-99%. The largest difference between adaptive and conventional DP was 2.6 percentage points (in favor of adaptive DP). An analysis of the dose per fraction revealed substantial target misses for one patient in the conventional workflow that-if systematic-could jeopardize the TCP. Compared to homogeneous prescriptions with equal mean prostate dose, DP resulted in slightly higher TCP. Conclusion: Compared to homogeneous dose, DP maintains or marginally increases the TCP. Adaptive DP workflows could avoid target misses compared to conventional workflows.
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.