Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36316805›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2022

Clinical commissioning of an adaptive radiotherapy platform: Results and recommendations.

Kelly Kisling, Timothy D Keiper, Daniela Branco, Grace Gwe-Ya Kim, Kevin L Moore, Xenia Ray

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Quality of density deformations in patient anatomy during synthetic CT guided online adaptive radiation therapy for pelvic cancer.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Kelly KislingDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
Timothy D KeiperDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
Daniela BrancoDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
Grace Gwe-Ya KimDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
Kevin L MooreDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
Xenia RayDepartment of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Online adaptive radiotherapy platforms present a unique challenge for commissioning as guidance is lacking and specialized adaptive equipment, such as deformable phantoms, are rare. We designed a novel adaptive commissioning process consisting of end-to-end tests using standard clinical resources. These tests were designed to simulate anatomical changes regularly observed at patient treatments. The test results will inform users of the magnitude of uncertainty from on-treatment changes during the adaptive workflow and the limitations of their systems. We implemented these tests for the cone-beam computed tomography (CT)-based Varian Ethos online adaptive platform. Many adaptive platforms perform online dose calculation on a synthetic CT (synCT). To assess the impact of the synCT generation and online dose calculation on dosimetric accuracy, we conducted end-to-end tests using commonly available equipment: a CIRS IMRT Thorax phantom, PinPoint ionization chamber, Gafchromic film, and bolus. Four clinical scenarios were evaluated: weight gain and weight loss were simulated by adding and removing bolus, internal target shifts were simulated by editing the CTV during the adaptive workflow to displace it, and changes in gas were simulated by removing and reinserting rods in varying phantom locations. The effect of overriding gas pockets during planning was also assessed. All point dose measurements agreed within 2.7% of the calculated dose, with one exception: a scenario simulating gas present in the planning CT, not overridden during planning, and dissipating at treatment. Relative film measurements passed gamma analysis (3%/3 mm criteria) for all scenarios. Our process validated the Ethos dose calculation for online adapted treatment plans. Based on our results, we made several recommendations for our clinical adaptive workflow. This commissioning process used commonly available equipment and, therefore, can be applied in other clinics for their respective online adaptive platforms.

Indexed as

Radiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedCone-Beam Computed TomographyHumansPhantoms, ImagingRadiometryRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray Computedadaptive radiotherapyCBCTethoson-table adaptationquality assurancesynthetic CTworkflow

Identifiers

PMID36316805
PMCPMC9797177

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.