ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology
Factors Affecting Isocenter Displacement and Planning Target Volume Margin for Patients With Rectal Cancer Receiving Radiation Therapy.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Setup Error Differences and Margin Expansion Among Rectal Cancer Segments: Consistency Evaluation Between EPID and iSCOUT.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Setup and target volume shape variation in rectal cancer radiotherapy: a systematic literature review.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Review
- Impact of belly board immobilization devices and body mass factor on setup displacement using daily cone-beam CT in rectal cancer radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Comparative impact of supine vs prone positioning on dose distribution, acute toxicity, and setup error in postoperative radiotherapy for cervical cancer: a multidimensional propensity-matched cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Setup errors are inherent in the process of daily radiation therapy (RT) delivery. Pelvic RT for rectal cancer is one of the body sites associated with the largest shift among other body sites. This study aimed to evaluate interfraction random and systematic errors and hence propose the optimum planning target volume (PTV) in patients with rectal cancer. Methods and Materials: Translational and angular isocenter displacements were retrospectively collected for 189 patients. Random and systematic errors were determined, and then the PTV margin was computed. Effect of positioning, body mass index (BMI), and type of immobilization were studied. Portal images before and after online correction were used to define PTV for no-daily image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) and daily IGRT respectively. Results: Before the online correction, the systematic errors were 2.5, 2.8, and 3.0 mm for superior-inferior (SI), right-left (RL), and anterior-posterior (AP) directions, respectively, compared with 2.1, 1.7, and 1.8 mm after online correction. The random errors were 6.2, 7.4, and 8.2 mm in SI, RL, and AP, respectively, before online correction, compared with 4, 4.2, and 4.5 mm after online correction. The recommended PTV margin was 0.7 and 1.0 cm for daily IGRT and no-daily IGRT, respectively. The prone position and BMI >30 kg/m Conclusions: The prone position, BMI >30 kg/m
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.