Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37457822›Full record

ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology

Scorecards: Quantifying Dosimetric Plan Quality in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy.

Kareem Rayn, Ryan Clark, Anthony Magliari, Brian Jeffers, Elizaveta Lavrova, Ingrid Valencia Lozano, Michael J Price, Lesley Rosa, David P Horowitz

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 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Knowledge-based planning, multicriteria optimization, and plan scorecards: A winning combination.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

9 authors.

Kareem RaynDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.
Ryan ClarkVarian Medical Systems Inc, Palo Alto, California.
Anthony MagliariVarian Medical Systems Inc, Palo Alto, California.
Brian JeffersDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.
Elizaveta LavrovaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.
Ingrid Valencia LozanoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.
Michael J PriceDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.
Lesley RosaVarian Medical Systems Inc, Palo Alto, California.
David P HorowitzDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: A scoring mechanism called the scorecard that objectively quantifies the dosimetric plan quality of pancreas stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment plans is introduced. Methods and Materials: A retrospective analysis of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma receiving stereotactic body radiation therapy at our institution between November 2019 and November 2020 was performed. Ten patients were identified. All patients were treated to 36 Gy in 5 fractions, and organs at risk (OARs) were constrained based on Alliance A021501. The scorecard awarded points for OAR doses lower than those cited in Alliance A021501. A team of 3 treatment planners and 2 radiation oncologists, including a physician resident without plan optimization experience, discussed the relative importance of the goals of the treatment plan and added additional metrics for OARs and plan quality indexes to create a more rigorous scoring mechanism. The scorecard for this study consisted of 42 metrics, each with a unique piecewise linear scoring function which is summed to calculate the total score (maximum possible score of 365). The scorecard-guided plan, the planning and optimization for which were done exclusively by the physician resident with no prior plan optimization experience, was compared with the clinical plan, the planning and optimization for which were done by expert dosimetrists, using the Sign test. Results: Scorecard-guided plans had, on average, higher total scores than those clinically delivered for each patient, averaging 280.1 for plans clinically delivered and 311.7 for plans made using the scorecard ( Conclusions: A scorecard tool can help clarify the goals of a treatment plan and provide an objective method for comparing the results of different plans. Our study suggests that a completely novice treatment planner can use a scorecard to create treatment plans with enhanced coverage, conformality, and improved OAR sparing, which may have significant effects on both tumor control and toxicity. These tools, including the scorecard used in this study, have been made freely available.

Identifiers

PMID37457822
PMCPMC10344689

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.