ArticleMedical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists
Dosimetric comparison between laterality-specific and general knowledge-based planning models for nonsmall cell lung cancer.
Article in Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists. 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.
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
Abstract
To investigate the dosimetric impact of laterality-specific RapidPlan models for nonsmall cell lung cancer. Three RapidPlan models were developed and validated for Right, Left, and General conventional lung radiotherapy. Each model was trained using 50 plans. The right and left models consisted of plans corresponding to their respective laterality. Twenty-five cases were randomly chosen from each laterality-specific model to craft a general model. All models shared identical optimization objectives and the same target and OAR structures. Validation included 13 right-sided and 13 left-sided cases optimized using each RapidPlan model without intervention and normalized such that the prescription dose covered 95% of the target volume. Statistical analysis using a paired sample t-test (p < 0.01) assessed dosimetric endpoints based on RTOG 0617 criteria. For right-sided cases, spinal cord Dmax and D0.03cc were lowest in the left model and highest in the right model (21.08 Gy and 21.22 Gy vs 23.67 Gy and 24.08 Gy). D
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.