Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36691450›Full record

ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology

Phantom-based Quality Assurance of a Clinical Dose Accumulation Technique Used in an Online Adaptive Radiation Therapy Platform.

Borna Maraghechi, Thomas Mazur, Dao Lam, Alex Price, Lauren Henke, Hyun Kim, Geoffrey D Hugo, Bin Cai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. First dosimetric evaluation of deformable dose accumulation in human individuals.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Deformable dose accumulation is required for adaptive radiotherapy practice.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors.

Borna MaraghechiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St Louis, Missouri.
Thomas MazurDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St Louis, Missouri.
Dao LamDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St Louis, Missouri.
Alex PriceDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St Louis, Missouri.
Lauren HenkeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St Louis, Missouri.
Hyun KimDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St Louis, Missouri.
Geoffrey D HugoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St Louis, Missouri.
Bin CaiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University, St Louis, Missouri.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to develop a routine quality assurance method for a dose accumulation technique provided by a radiation therapy platform for online treatment adaptation. Methods and Materials: Two commonly used phantoms were selected for the dose accumulation QA: Electron density and anthropomorphic pelvis. On a computed tomography (CT) scan of the electron density phantom, 1 target (gross tumor volume [GTV]; insert at 6 o'clock), a subvolume within this target, and 7 organs at risk (OARs; other inserts) were contoured in the treatment planning system (TPS). Two adaptation sessions were performed in which the GTV was recontoured, first at 7 o'clock and then at 5 o'clock. The accumulated dose was exported from the TPS after delivery. Deformable vector fields were also exported to manually accumulate doses for comparison. For the pelvis phantom, synthetic Gaussian deformations were applied to the planning CT image to simulate organ changes. Two single-fraction adaptive plans were created based on the deformed planning CT and cone beam CT images acquired onboard the radiation therapy platform. A manual dose accumulation was performed after delivery using the exported deformable vector fields for comparison with the system-generated result. Results: All plans were successfully delivered, and the accumulated dose was both manually calculated and derived from the TPS. For the electron density phantom, the average mean dose differences in the GTV, boost volume, and OARs 1 to 7 were 0.0%, -0.2%, 92.0%, 78.4%, 1.8%, 1.9%, 0.0%, 0.0%, and 2.3%, respectively, between the manually summed and platform-accumulated doses. The gamma passing rates for the 3-dimensional dose comparison between the manually generated and TPS-provided dose accumulations were >99% for both phantoms. Conclusions: This study demonstrated agreement between manually obtained and TPS-generated accumulated doses in terms of both mean structure doses and local 3-dimensional dose distributions. Large disagreements were observed for OAR1 and OAR2 defined on the electron density phantom due to OARs having lower deformation priority over the target in addition to artificially large changes in position induced for these structures fraction-by-fraction. The tests applied in this study to a commercial platform provide a straightforward approach toward the development of routine quality assurance of dose accumulation in online adaptation.

Identifiers

PMID36691450
PMCPMC9860416

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.