ArticleTechnology in cancer research & treatment
Dosimetric and Radiobiological Impact of Patient Setup Errors in Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer.
Article in Technology in cancer research & treatment. 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.
- Analysis of the application of 3D-printed personalized positioning fixation in nasopharyngeal carcinoma radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Microbiota-mediated modulation of radiosensitivity: mechanisms and therapeutic prospects of oral and gut microbiota, metabolites, and probiotics.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the impact of patient setup errors on the dosimetry and radiobiological models of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for esophageal cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This retrospective study with 56 patients in thermoplastic mask (TM) and vacuum bag (VB) groups utilized real setup-error (RSE) data from cone-beam CT scans to generate simulated setup-error (SSE) data following a normal distribution. The SSE data were applied to simulate all treatment fractions per patient by shifting the plan isocenter and recalculating the dose. A simulated plan sum (SPS) was created by accumulating all simulated fraction plans. Comparisons of target dose, improved homogeneity index (iHI), conformity index (CI), tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were conducted between SPSs and original treatment plans (OTPs). Correlations between RSE and TCP/NTCP were analyzed.
resultsCompared to OTPs in the TM group, the planning target volume (PTV) of SPSs showed reductions in D
conclusionsSetup errors may reduce dose homogeneity and conformity, potentially reducing TCP of PTV and increasing NTCP, especially when mean RSE shifts the isocenter towards OARs. VB immobilization may result in relatively larger impacts of setup errors, but this needs future validation.
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.