ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
Adaptive treatment margins to reduce organs at risk dose in patients with no or minimal anatomical changes in radiotherapy of non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2025. 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.
- Time series analysis of dosimetric changes in target volumes and organs at risk monitored by cone beam computed tomography during radiotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
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
Background and purpose: In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) a significant portion of the planning target volume (PTV) margin accommodates for anatomical changes during treatment. Patients with no or minimal anatomical changes might therefore benefit from a reduced PTV margin, resulting in lower organ at risk (OAR) doses. We evaluated a plan of the day approach using different PTV margins to quantify its effect on OAR and clinical target volume (CTV) dose. Materials and methods: Twenty NSCLC patients were included in this retrospective study. CBCTs of all fractions were evaluated using an image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) protocol to classify fractions into two groups: no or minimal anatomical changes to which reduced PTV margin plans (5 or 2 mm) were assigned, or with anatomical changes that received the reference treatment plan (8 mm PTV margin). OAR doses were investigated and CTV coverage was evaluated using CBCT dose recalculations. Results: All plans showed decreased OAR dose when the PTV margin was reduced from 8 mm to 5 mm or 2 mm. The IGRT protocol selected 254/600 fractions in 19/20 patients, that could be treated with a smaller margin. CTV V Conclusion: The IGRT protocol could identify fractions with no or minimal anatomical changes allowing a plan of the day approach to reduce PTV margins. Target coverage remained adequate in the majority of patients, while reducing OAR doses.
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.