ArticlePloS one2024
Dose delivery uncertainties assessment in the field junction region of craniospinal irradiation with Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy using a robustness index and experimental dose verification.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- An end-to-end quality assurance procedure for pelvic VMAT using optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters and an anthropomorphic phantom.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026Article
- A simulation study of a novel spiral volumetric modulated arc therapy for enhanced dose delivery efficiency and quality in radiotherapy.Medical physics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Due to its inherent technical challenges, craniospinal irradiation (CSI) entails crucial considerations regarding plan complexity and robustness. The scope of this work was to establish and validate methods suitable for the evaluation of robustness, as well as for dose verification in CSI with VMAT. Five patients previously treated with CSI were retrospectively selected. For each patient, two technically different treatment plans were generated, based on the conventional (static overlap) and staggered (dynamic overlap) configuration. These techniques served as a benchmark to evaluate the potential of a metric proposed in this work, aimed at quantifying robustness, the Overlap Robustness Index (ORI). Furthermore, they were utilized to assess the suitability of two experimental methods relying on film dosimetry, as well as on Delta4 phantom for identifying sources of uncertainties in CSI applications. In accordance with the positional error simulation performed, the staggered approach yielded a statistically significant superior ORI value compared to the conventional one. Additionally, the strong correlation observed between the positional shift induced dose distribution changes and ORI results (Spearman's r = -0.941, p-value < 0.001) demonstrated the sensitivity of ORI in detecting areas of steep dose gradients within the overlapping regions that could potentially compromise the quality of treatment. Concerning dose verification, analysis in terms of dose profiles revealed a superior dosimetric accuracy for the staggered technique relative to conventional for both film and Delta4 measurements. Film-based gamma index results showed that staggered technique outperformed the conventional for the majority of passing criteria considered, with differences in passing rates up to 8.1%. The two treatment techniques however, exhibited equivalent dose delivery accuracy for the clinically relevant passing criteria when Delta4 was employed, with passing rate differences less than 0.6%. Findings of this study revealed that ORI is suitable for quantifying robustness in CSI with VMAT, while radiochromic films appeared to be the best candidate for CSI dose verification in this work.
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.