ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024
Evaluation of the geometric and dosimetric accuracies of deformable image registration of targets and critical organs in 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.
- Comparison of deformable image registration algorithms for planning CT and CBCT in prostate cancer patients treated with external beam radiation therapy.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the geometric and dosimetric accuracies of deformable image registration of targets and critical organs in 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeKilovoltage cone beam computed tomography (kVCBCT)-guided adaptive radiation therapy (ART) uses daily deformed CT (dCT), which is generated automatically through deformable registration methods. These registration methods may perform poorly in reproducing volumes of the target organ, rectum, and bladder during treatment. We analyzed the registration errors between the daily kVCBCTs and corresponding dCTs for these organs using the default optical flow algorithm and two registration procedures. We validated the effectiveness of these registration methods in replicating the geometry for dose calculation on kVCBCT for ART.
methodsWe evaluated three deformable image registration (DIR) methods to assess their registration accuracy and dose calculation effeciency in mapping target and critical organs. The DIR methods include (1) default intensity-based deformable registration, (2) hybrid deformable registration, and (3) a two-step deformable registration process. Each technique was applied to a computerized imaging reference system (CIRS) phantom (Model 062 M) and to five patients who received volumetric modulated arc therapy to the prostate. Registration accuracy was assessed using the 95% Hausdorff distance (HD
resultsThe dCT images generated by the hybrid (dCT
conclusionThe two-step registration method outperforms the intensity-based and hybrid registration methods. While the hybrid and two-step-based methods improved the image quality of kVCBCT in a linear accelerator, only the two-step method improved the registration accuracy of the corresponding structures among the pCT and kVCBCT datasets. A two-step registration process is recommended for applying kVCBCT to ART, which achieves better registration accuracy for local and global image structures. This method appears to be beneficial for radiotherapy dose calculation in patients with pelvic 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.