Trial reportRadiation oncology (London, England)2025
Dummy run study for outlining and plan quality of intensity-modulated radiotherapy in elderly patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: The Japan clinical oncology group study JCOG1910 (AgedGlio-PIII).
Trial report in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiotherapy quality assurance in the PRO-GLIO trial: results from a dummy run comparing experts across twelve institutions in two Scandinavian countries.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Survey data analysis of treatment planning methods in particle therapy facilities.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Article
- RANO 2.0: critical updates and practical considerations for radiological assessment in neuro-oncology.Japanese journal of radiology · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA dummy run was conducted to ensure the quality of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) before registration in a randomized phase III study of elderly patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma by the Japan Clinical Oncology Group 1910 (JCOG1910).
methodsAll 41 institutions enrolled in this study were required to report outlining that included gross tumor volume (GTV), clinical target volume (CTV), planning target volume (PTV), and treatment planning for one benchmark case. First, deviations in outlining were evaluated using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and mean distance agreement (MDA), compared to reference targets delineated by the research secretariat. Second, the participating institutions were required to create treatment plans for arms A (40.05 Gy in 15 fractions) and B (25 Gy in 5 fractions) using IMRT techniques. The quality of the outlining and dose-volume criteria for each target and organs at risk were evaluated.
resultsSix institutions failed to adhere to the protocol and required revision due to insufficient GTV outlining, not considering anatomical barriers for CTV, and modifying PTV against protocols. Compared to the reference outlining, the means and standard deviations of DSC and MDA were 0.37 ± 0.19 and 9.41 ± 3.99 mm for GTV; 0.80 ± 0.08 and 4.31 ± 1.85 mm for CTV; and 0.83 ± 0.05 and 4.23 ± 1.45 mm for PTV, respectively. Regarding dose-volume criteria, 40 of the 41 institutions met the per-protocol limits; only one was within the acceptable limits.
conclusionsSeveral institutions demonstrated deviations in outlining that necessitated revisions. Thus, appropriate feedback and periodic sharing of information with participating institutions is necessary in the upcoming prospective JCOG1910 study.
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.