ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024
Empirical analysis of a plan-of-the-day strategy to approximate daily online reoptimization for prostate CBCT-guided adaptive 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A cone-beam computed tomography based workflow for online adaptive ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy of prostate cancer.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Empirical analysis of a plan-of-the-day strategy to approximate daily online reoptimization for prostate CBCT-guided adaptive 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAdaptive radiotherapy (ART) can improve the dose delivered to the patient in the presence of anatomic variations. However, the required time, effort, and clinical resources are intensive. This work analyzed a plan-of-the-day (POD) approach on clinical patients treated with online ART to explore implementations that balance dosimetric benefit and clinical resource cost.
methodsEight patients treated to the prostate and proximal seminal vesicles with 26 fractions of CBCT-guided, daily online ART were retrospectively analyzed. With a plan library composed of daily adaptive plans from the initial week of treatment and the original plan, the effect of a POD approach starting the following week was investigated by simulating use of these previously generated plans under 3- and 6-degree-of-freedom patient alignment. The plan selected for each treatment was that from the library that maximized the Dice similarity coefficient of the clinical target volume with that of the current treatment fraction. The resulting distribution of several target coverage and organ-at-risk dose metrics are described relative to those achieved with the daily online reoptimized adaptive technique.
resultsThe values of target coverage and organ-at-risk dose metrics varied across patients and metrics. The POD schemas closely approximated the reference values from a fully reoptimized adaptive plan yet required less than 20% of the reoptimization effort. The POD schemas also had a much greater effect on target coverage metrics than 6-degree-of-freedom registration did. Organ-at-risk dose metrics also varied considerably across patients but did not exhibit a consistent dependence on the particular schema.
conclusionsPOD schemas were able to achieve the vast majority of the dosimetric benefit of daily online ART with a small fraction of the online reoptimization effort. Strategies like this might allow for more practical and strategic implementation of ART so as to benefit a greater number of patients.
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.