ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024
Organ-contour-driven auto-matching algorithm in image-guided radiotherapy.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2024. 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.
- 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to demonstrate the potential clinical applicability of an organ-contour-driven auto-matching algorithm in image-guided radiotherapy.
methodsThis study included eleven consecutive patients with cervical cancer who underwent radiotherapy in 23 or 25 fractions. Daily and reference magnetic resonance images were converted into mesh models. A weight-based algorithm was implemented to optimize the distance between the mesh model vertices and surface of the reference model during the positioning process. Within the cost function, weight parameters were employed to prioritize specific organs for positioning. In this study, three scenarios with different weight parameters were prepared. The optimal translation and rotation values for the cervix and uterus were determined based on the calculated translations alone or in combination with rotations, with a rotation limit of ±3°. Subsequently, the coverage probabilities of the following two planning target volumes (PTV), an isotropic 5 mm and anisotropic margins derived from a previous study, were evaluated.
resultsThe percentage of translations exceeding 10 mm varied from 9% to 18% depending on the scenario. For small PTV sizes, more than 80% of all fractions had a coverage of 80% or higher. In contrast, for large PTV sizes, more than 90% of all fractions had a coverage of 95% or higher. The difference between the median coverage with translational positioning alone and that with both translational and rotational positioning was 1% or less.
conclusionThis algorithm facilitates quantitative positioning by utilizing a cost function that prioritizes organs for positioning. Consequently, consistent displacement values were algorithmically generated. This study also revealed that the impact of rotational corrections, limited to ±3°, on PTV coverage was minimal.
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.