ArticleRadiological physics and technology2024
Inter-fractional error and intra-fractional motion of prostate and dosimetry comparisons of patient position registrations with versus without fiducial markers during treatment with carbon-ion radiotherapy.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of upright immobilization methods for abdominal and head-and-neck cancer treatments in a carbon ion radiotherapy setting.Technical innovations & patient support 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A few reports have discussed the influence of inter-fractional position error and intra-fractional motion on dose distribution, particularly regarding a spread-out Bragg peak. We investigated inter-fractional and intra-fractional prostate position error by monitoring fiducial marker positions. In 2020, data from 15 patients with prostate cancer who received carbon-ion beam radiotherapy (CIRT) with gold markers were investigated. We checked marker positions before and during irradiation to calculate the inter-fractional positioning and intra-fractional movement and evaluated the CIRT dose distribution by adjusting the planning beam isocenter and clinical target volume (CTV) position. We compared the CTV dose coverages (CTV receiving 95% [V95%] or 98% [V98%] of the prescribed dose) between skeletal and fiducial matching irradiation on the treatment planning system. For inter-fractional error, the mean distance between the marker position in the planning images and that in a patient starting irradiation with skeletal matching was 1.49 ± 1.11 mm (95th percentile = 1.85 mm). The 95th percentile (maximum) values of the intra-fractional movement were 0.79 mm (2.31 mm), 1.17 mm (2.48 mm), 1.88 mm (4.01 mm), 1.23 mm (3.00 mm), and 2.09 mm (8.46 mm) along the lateral, inferior, superior, dorsal, and ventral axes, respectively. The mean V95% and V98% were 98.2% and 96.2% for the skeletal matching plan and 99.5% and 96.8% for the fiducial matching plan, respectively. Fiducial matching irradiation improved the CTV dose coverage compared with skeletal matching irradiation for CIRT for prostate cancer.
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.