Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38013636›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024

The impact of margin reduction on radiation dose distribution of ultra-hypofractionated prostate radiotherapy utilizing a 1.5-T MR-Linac.

Cem Onal, Esma Efe, Recep Bozca, Cagdas Yavas, Guler Yavas, Gungor Arslan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Cem OnalFaculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2742-9021
Esma EfeFaculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University, Ankara, Turkey.
Recep BozcaAdana Dr. Turgut Noyan Research and Treatment Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University Faculty of Medicine, Adana, Turkey.
Cagdas YavasFaculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University, Ankara, Turkey.
Guler YavasFaculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University, Ankara, Turkey.
Gungor ArslanFaculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University, Ankara, Turkey.
Başkent University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe examined the effects of reducing the planning target volume (PTV) margin in MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) on the distribution of radiation dose to target volumes and organs-at-risk (OARs). Thus, we compared MR-Linac (MRL) plans with and without reduced margin and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plan with conventional linac for low-risk prostate cancer patients receiving 36.25 Gy in five fractions of ultra-hypofractionated radiation therapy. MATERIALS AND

methodsTwenty low-risk prostate cancer patients treated with 1.5 T MR-Linac were evaluated. The same planning CT images were used for four plans: the MRL-R plan with reduced margin planning target volume (PTV-R) and the MRL-N plan with normal margin PTV (PTV-N), which is also used for IMRT plan. In four plans, PTV doses, organs-at-risk (OARs) doses, the homogeneity index (HI), and monitor units were compared.

resultsAll plans met the criteria for PTV coverage and OARs dose constraints. The maximum and mean PTV doses were significantly higher in the MRL-R and MRL-N plans compared to the IMRT plan. The HI was lowest in the IMRT plan (0.040 ± 0.013) and highest in the MRL-N plan (0.055 ± 0.012; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the PTV dosimetric parameters between the MRL-R and the MRL-N plans. The high doses in the rectum was significantly lower in the MRL-R compared to other plans. The bladder V36.25 Gy was significantly lower in the MRL-R plan (2.43 ± 1.87 Gy) compared to MRL-N (4.50 ± 2.42 Gy; p < 0.001), and IMRT plans (4.76 ± 2.77 Gy; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the low-dose volumes of the body, maximum femur doses, or monitor units across each plan.

conclusionsUltra-hypofractionated MR-guided RT with 1.5 T MRL is dosimetrically feasible for patients with prostate cancer. The improved soft tissue contrast and the online adaptive plan for 1.5 T MR-Linac allows for PTV margin reduction resulted in a significant dose reduction in OARs.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedHumansMaleProstateRadiation DosageRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssisteddosimetryMR-linacprostate cancerradiotherapystereotactic body radiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID38013636
PMCPMC10795449
OpenAlexW4389093957

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.