ArticleJournal of radiation research2023
Assessing target localization accuracy across different soft-tissue matching protocols using end-exhalation breath-hold cone-beam computed tomography in patients with pancreatic cancer.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Organ-contour-driven auto-matching algorithm in image-guided radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to retrospectively assess target localization accuracy across different soft-tissue matching protocols using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in a large sample of patients with pancreatic cancer and to estimate the optimal margin size for each protocol. Fifty-four consecutive patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent 15-fraction volumetric modulated arc therapy under the end-exhalation breath-hold condition were enrolled. Two soft-tissue matching protocols were used according to the resectability classification, including gross tumor volume (GTV) matching for potentially resectable tumors and planning target volume (PTV) matching for borderline resectable or unresectable tumors. The tolerance of the target localization error in both matching protocols was set to 5 mm in any direction. The optimal margin size for each soft-tissue matching protocol was calculated from the systematic and random errors of the inter- and intrafraction positional variations using the van Herk formula. The inter- and intrafraction positional variations of PTV matching were smaller than those of GTV matching. The percentage of target localization errors exceeding 5 mm in the first CBCT scan of each fraction in the superior-inferior direction was 12.6 and 4.8% for GTV and PTV matching, respectively. The optimal margin sizes for GTV and PTV matching were 3.7 and 2.7, 5.4 and 4.1 and 3.9 and 3.0 mm in the anterior-posterior, superior-inferior and left-right directions, respectively. Target localization accuracy in PTV matching was higher than that in GTV matching. By setting the tolerance of the target localization error, treatment can be successful within the planned margin size.
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.