Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37273924›Full record

ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology

Online Adaptive Radiation Therapy and Opportunity Cost.

Kyra N McComas, Adam Yock, Kaleb Darrow, Eric T Shinohara

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 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The Value of Radiation Therapists in Online Adaptive Radiotherapy.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2025
    Article
  10. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Sequences and Technologies in Adaptive Radiation Therapy.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Kyra N McComasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Adam YockDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Kaleb DarrowDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Eric T ShinoharaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Changes in patient anatomy and tumor geometry pose a challenge to ensuring consistent target coverage and organ-at-risk sparing; online adaptive radiation therapy (ART) accounts for these interfractional changes by facilitating replanning before each treatment. This project explored the opportunity cost of computed tomography (CT)-based online ART by evaluating time and human resource requirements. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) was employed to determine the cost of this time to assess if the dosimetric benefit is worthwhile. Methods and Materials: CT-based online ART was recently employed at our institution and has been used to treat pelvic disease sites (prostate, prostate bed, prostate with nodal coverage, bladder, rectum); data points from all adaptively treated patients (415 fractions) were used. Time taken for each adaptive fraction before treatment, which at our facility is best represented by the duration between 2 cone beam CT scans, was used as a broadly applicable and transferable metric, representing the additional time required for ART on top of standard image guided radiation therapy. Dosimetric effect was also considered by taking the difference of planning target volume V100% for the scheduled and adapted plans. Using recently validated TDABC at this facility, the per fraction cost of ART was determined, reflecting the added cost of ART on top of image guided radiation therapy. Results: A median time of 15.97 (interquartile range, 13.23-18.83) additional minutes was required for each adaptive fraction. TDABC demonstrated an average minimum cost per adapted fraction of $103.58. Dosimetric differences between V100% of the scheduled versus adapted plan showed a mean dosimetric difference of 15.8%. Conclusions: Although online ART decreases the uncertainty of anatomic shifts, each adaptive fraction requires more staff time, delaying completion of other tasks and increasing resource utilization. Although toxicity benefits require further studies, the implementation of progressively complex radiation therapy technologies, like ART, requires consideration of the time and human resource requirements and subsequent opportunity cost.

Identifiers

PMID37273924
PMCPMC10238262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.