ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2023
Intra- and inter-fraction breath-hold variations and margins for radiotherapy of abdominal targets.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2023. 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.
- Case Report: MR-guided adaptive stereotactic body radiotherapy for splenic metastases: a case series of technical feasibility and early clinical outcomes.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Effect of end expiration breath hold on target volumes and organ at risk doses for oesophageal cancer radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radiotherapy in expiration breath-hold (EBH) has the potential to reduce treatment volumes of abdominal targets compared to an internal target volume concept in free-breathing. The reproducibility of EBH and required safety margins were investigated to quantify this volumetric benefit. Pre- and post-treatment diaphragm position difference and the positioning variability were determined on computed tomography. Systematic and random errors for EBH position reproducibility and positioning variability were calculated, resulting in margins of 7 to 12 mm depending on the prescription isodose and fractionation. A reduced volume was shown for EBH for lesions with superior-inferior breathing motion above 4 to 8 mm.
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.