Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37342208›Full record

ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2023

Evaluation of fan-beam kilovoltage computed tomography image quality on a novel biological-guided radiotherapy platform.

Tingliang Zhuang, Grant Gibbard, Xinhui Duan, Jun Tan, Yang Park, Mu-Han Lin, Zhihui Sun, Oluwaseyi M Oderinde, Weiguo Lu, Robert Reynolds and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

18 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tingliang ZhuangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Grant GibbardDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Xinhui DuanDepartment of Radiology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Jun TanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Yang ParkDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Mu-Han LinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Zhihui SunRefleXion Medical, Inc, Hayward, CA, USA.
Oluwaseyi M OderindeRefleXion Medical, Inc, Hayward, CA, USA.
Weiguo LuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Robert ReynoldsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Andrew GodleyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Arnold PomposDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Tu DanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Aurelie GarantDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Puneeth IyengarDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Robert TimmermanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Steve JiangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Bin CaiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas- Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USRefleXion Medical (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Purpose: A recently developed biology-guided radiotherapy platform, equipped with positron emission tomography (PET) and computed tomography (CT), provides both anatomical and functional image guidance for radiotherapy. This study aimed to characterize performance of the kilovoltage CT (kVCT) system on this platform using standard quality metrics measured on phantom and patient images, using CT simulator images as reference. Materials and Methods: Image quality metrics, including spatial resolution/modular transfer function (MTF), slice sensitivity profile (SSP), noise performance and image uniformity, contrast-noise ratio (CNR) and low-contrast resolution, geometric accuracy, and CT number (HU) accuracy, were evaluated on phantom images. Patient images were evaluated mainly qualitatively. Results: On phantom images the MTF Conclusions: Major image quality metrics of the PET/CT Linac kVCT were within vendor-recommended tolerances. Better spatial resolution but higher noise and better/comparable low contrast visibility were observed as compared to a CT simulator when images were acquired with clinical protocols.

Indexed as

CT simulatorImage qualitykV fan-beam CTPET/CT Linac

Identifiers

PMID37342208
PMCPMC10277913
OpenAlexW4362735307

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.