ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2024
Estimation of adaptive radiation therapy requirements for rectal cancer: a two-center study.
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 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.
- Accumulated dose on daily iCBCT for rectal cancer: Effects of inter-fraction bowel cavity motion volume.Journal of applied clinical 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRectal cancer patients are potential beneficiaries of adaptive radiotherapy (ART) which demands considerable resources. Currently, there is no definite guidance on what kind of patients and when will benefit from ART. This study aimed to develop and validate a methodology for estimating ART requirements in rectal cancer before treatment course. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study involved 66 rectal cancer patients from center 1 and 27 patients from center 2. The ART requirements were evaluated by comparing 8 dose volume histogram (DVH) metrics of targets and organs at risk (OARs) between planning and treatment fractions. Tolerance ranges of deviation of DVH metrics were derived from 10 patients and applied to assess fractional variability. Eighteen features, encompassing diagnostic, dosimetric, and time-related information, were utilized to formulate a stepwise logistic regression model for fraction-level ART requirement estimation. The super parameters were determined through 5-fold cross-validation with 250 training fractions and the methodology was validated with 109 internal testing fractions and 134 external testing fractions.
resultsThe area under the curve (AUC) of training dataset was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.61 to 0.85), while in the internal and external testing, the AUC achieved 0.76 (95% CI: 0.60-0.90) and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.56-0.81). Using a best (or clinical applicable) cut-off value of 33.4% (11%), the predictive model achieved a sensitivity of 46.2% (69.2%) and specificity of 97.9% (68.7%). During the modeling, 5 features were retained: Homogeneity index (OR = 6.06, 95% CI: 2.93-14.8), planning target volume (OR = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.17-2.69), fraction dose (OR = 45.37, 95% CI: 5.74-469), accumulated dose (OR = 2.29, 95% CI: 1.35-4.14), and whether neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (OR > 1000).
conclusionART requirements are associated with target volume, target dose homogeneity, fraction dose, dose accumulation and whether neoadjuvant radiotherapy. The predictive model exhibited the capability to predict fraction-level ART requirements.
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.