ArticleScientific reports2023
Setup accuracy and margins for surface-guided radiotherapy (SGRT) of head, thorax, abdomen, and pelvic target volumes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Maskless head and neck radiotherapy using surface-guided radiation therapy: initial clinical feasibility of real-time setup, intrafraction monitoring, and automatic beam-hold.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Correction of image-guided radiotherapy and intrafraction motion using ExacTrac dynamic for head and neck cancer patients.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Enhancing inter-fraction set-up accuracy and margin minimization (E-SAMM): a comparison of maskless surface-guided and mask-based laser alignment positioning in pelvic radiotherapy.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2026Article
- Surface-Guided Radiotherapy for Vulvar Cancer in the Frog-Leg Position: Setup Accuracy and BMI Effects.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Commissioning and clinical positioning assessment of a novel surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT) system at a C-Arm linear accelerator.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Outcomes of radiotherapy of hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective analysis.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Implementation of surface-guided radiotherapy for motion management in liver SBRT: A scoping review and clinical workflow development.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Multiregional assessment of surface guidance for patient positioning in radiotherapy.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Scaling Surface-Guided Radiation Therapy to Larger Lung Cancer Cohorts: Frameless Immobilization and Enhanced Setup Accuracy.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Accuracy and workflow efficiency of surface-guided open-face vs. closed-face masks in SRT/SRS for brain metastases.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Feasibility of transitioning to marker-less immobilisation using optical surface guidance in head and neck cancer treatment: a study at territory state cancer centre in a developing country.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Beyond the snapshot: continuous optical surface monitoring reveals non-linear temporal dynamics and postural stability window in free-breathing breast radiotherapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the accuracy of a surface-guided radiotherapy system for patient positioning in radiotherapy of breast cancer.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Control-point-specific plan robustness in volumetric modulated arc therapy-based cranial radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Analysis of setup error and setup efficiency in SBRT for non-small cell lung cancer via a surface-guided radiation therapy system.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Accuracy of Patient Setup Using Surface Guided Radiotherapy (SGRT) for Abdominal Malignancies.Methods and protocols · 2025Article
- Workflow evaluation of surface-guided initial patient set-up in radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Enhancing patient positioning precision: a comparative analysis of surface-guided radiation therapy systems.Radiological physics and technology · 2025Article
- Impact of deep inspiration breath hold, surface-guided radiotherapy, and daily CBCT on the organs at risk in breast cancer radiotherapy.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The goal of the study was to evaluate the inter- and intrafractional patient setup accuracy of target volumes located in the head, thoracic, abdominal, and pelvic regions when using SGRT, by comparing it with that of laser alignment using patient skin marks, and to calculate the corresponding setup margins. A total of 2303 radiotherapy fractions of 183 patients were analyzed. All patients received daily kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography scans (kV-CBCT) for online verification. From November 2019 until September 2020, patient setup was performed using laser alignment with patient skin marks, and since October 2020, using SGRT. The setup accuracy was measured by the six degrees of freedom (6DOF) corrections based on the kV-CBCT. The corresponding setup margins were calculated using the van Herk formula. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to evaluate the impact of multiple factors on the setup accuracy. The inter-fractional patient setup accuracy was significantly better using SGRT compared to laser alignment with skin marks. The mean three-dimensional vector of the translational setup deviation of tumors located in the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis using SGRT was 3.6 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.3 mm to 3.9 mm) and 4.5 mm using laser alignment with skin marks (95% CI 3.9 mm to 5.2 mm; p = 0.001). Calculation of setup margins for the combined inter- and intra-fractional setup error revealed similar setup margins using SGRT and kV-CBCT once a week compared to laser alignment with skin marks and kV-CBCT every other day. Furthermore, comparable setup margins were found for open-face thermoplastic masks with AlignRT compared to closed-face thermoplastic masks with laser alignment and mask marks. SGRT opens the possibility to reduce the number of CBCTs while maintaining sufficient setup accuracy. The advantage is a reduction of imaging dose and overall treatment time. Open-face thermoplastic masks may be used instead of closed-face thermoplastic masks to increase the patient's comfort.
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.