Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38586079›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2024

Developing and validating a simple urethra surrogate model to facilitate dosimetric analysis to predict genitourinary toxicity.

Ragu Ratnakumaran, Jonathan Mohajer, Samuel J Withey, Douglas H Brand, Ernest Lee, Andrew Loblaw, Shaun Tolan, Nicholas van As, Alison C Tree, PACE Trial Investigators

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. PURE-MRI: An international study assessing physician accuracy in delineating the prostate and urethra on prostate MRI.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2026
    Article
  2. Urethra contours on MRI: Multidisciplinary consensus educational atlas and reference standard for artificial intelligence benchmarking.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2026
    Article
  3. 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

10 authors.

Ragu RatnakumaranThe Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Jonathan MohajerThe Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Samuel J WitheyThe Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Douglas H BrandDepartment of Medical Physics and Bioengineering, University College London, UK.
Ernest LeeThe Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Andrew LoblawOdette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Shaun TolanThe Clatterbridge Cancer Centre, Liverpool, UK.
Nicholas van AsThe Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Alison C TreeThe Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
PACE Trial Investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The urethra is a critical structure in prostate radiotherapy planning; however, it is impossible to visualise on CT. We developed a surrogate urethra model (SUM) for CT-only planning workflow and tested its geometric and dosimetric performance against the MRI-delineated urethra (MDU). Methods: The SUM was compared against 34 different MDUs (within the treatment PTV) in patients treated with 36.25Gy (PTV)/40Gy (CTV) in 5 fractions as part of the PACE-B trial. To assess the surrogate's geometric performance, the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Hausdorff distance (HD), mean distance to agreement (MDTA) and the percentage of MDU outside the surrogate (UOS) were calculated. To evaluate the dosimetric performance, a paired Results: The median results showed low agreement on DSC (0.32; IQR 0.21-0.41), but low distance to agreement, as would be expected for a small structure (HD 8.4mm (IQR 7.1-10.1mm), MDTA 2.4mm (IQR, 2.2mm-3.2mm)). The UOS was 30% (IQR, 18-54%), indicating nearly a third of the urethra lay outside of the surrogate. However, when comparing urethral dose between the MDU and SUM, the mean of differences for D99, D98 and D95 were 0.12Gy (p=0.57), 0.09Gy (p=0.61), and 0.11Gy (p=0.46) respectively. The mean of differences between the D50, D2 and D1 were 0.08Gy (p=0.04), 0.09Gy (p=0.02) and 0.1Gy (p=0.01) respectively, indicating good dosimetric agreement between MDU and SUM. Conclusion: While there were geometric differences between the MDU and SUM, there was no clinically significant difference between urethral dose-volume parameters. This surrogate model could be validated in a larger cohort and then used to estimate the urethral dose on CT planning scans in those without an MRI planning scan or urinary catheter.

Indexed as

Prostate radiotherapyStereotactic body radiotherapySurrogateUrethra

Identifiers

PMID38586079
PMCPMC10998036

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.