ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2024
Intrafraction organ movement in adaptive MR-guided radiotherapy of abdominal lesions - dosimetric impact and how to detect its extent in advance.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of planning organ at risk volume margins in non-adaptive pancreatic stereotactic body radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Dosimetric impact of daily MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy across different anatomical sites.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- Long-term patient experience with online MR-guided radiotherapy: adaptive versus non-adaptive workflow.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Intra-adaptational changes in online adaptive radiotherapy: from the ideal to the real dose.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025Article
- Article
- Uncertainties in outcome modelling in radiation oncology.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Review
- Modeling of artificial intelligence-based respiratory motion prediction in MRI-guided radiotherapy: a review.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Review
- Article
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
introductionMagnetic resonance guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) allows daily adaptation of treatment plans to compensate for positional changes of target volumes and organs at risk (OARs). However, current adaptation times are relatively long and organ movement occurring during the adaptation process might offset the benefit gained by adaptation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric impact of these intrafractional changes. Additionally, a method to predict the extent of organ movement before the first treatment was evaluated in order to have the possibility to compensate for them, for example by adding additional margins to OARs. MATERIALS &
methodsTwenty patients receiving adaptive MRgRT for treatment of abdominal lesions were retrospectively analyzed. Magnetic resonance (MR) images acquired at the start of adaptation and immediately before irradiation were used to calculate adapted and pre-irradiation dose in OARs directly next to the planning target volume. The extent of organ movement was determined on MR images acquired during simulation sessions and adaptive treatments, and their agreement was evaluated. Correlation between the magnitude of organ movement during simulation and the duration of simulation session was analyzed in order to assess whether organ movement might be relevant even if the adaptation process could be accelerated in the future.
resultsA significant increase in dose constraint violations was observed from adapted (6.9%) to pre-irradiation (30.2%) dose distributions. Overall, OAR dose increased significantly by 4.3% due to intrafractional organ movement. Median changes in organ position of 7.5 mm (range 1.5-10.5 mm) were detected within a median time of 17.1 min (range 1.6-28.7 min). Good agreement was found between the range of organ movement during simulation and adaptation (66.8%), especially if simulation sessions were longer and multiple MR images were acquired. No correlation was determined between duration of simulation sessions and magnitude of organ movement.
conclusionIntrafractional organ movement can impact dose distributions and lead to violations of OAR tolerance doses, which impairs the benefit of daily on-table plan adaptation. By application of simulation images, the extent of intrafractional organ movement can be predicted, which possibly allows to compensate for them.
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.