ArticleBMC cancer2025
Validation of in vivo dose using EPID combined with fan-beam CT guidance in post-breast-conserving radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer.
Article in BMC cancer, 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.
- An all-in-one workflow for emergency hippocampal-avoidance whole-brain radiotherapy in brain metastases, with optional online adaptive extension.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 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
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the use of in vivo dose validation during post-breast-conserving radiation for early breast cancer, the impact of image guidance on validation outcomes, and the role of inter- and intra-fractional variations on dose distribution.
methodsTwenty-six patients undergoing post-breast-conserving radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer were selected for in-treatment in vivo dose validation. The target area and organs at risk were re-defined using the image-guided images to quantitatively evaluate the impact of inter- and intra-fractional differences on the dose distribution. The retrospective analysis examined the in vivo dose validation outcomes.
resultsThe 3%3 mm/5%3 mm 2Dγ-pass (gamma pass) rates in the image-guided radiotherapy(IGRT) group were significantly higher than those in the non-IGRT(N-IGRT) group for both left and right breast cancer (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the 5%3 mm 2Dγ-pass rate of the fan-beam CT(FBCT) group was higher than that of the IGRT group and was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The target area parameters primary gross tumor volume (PGTV) D95, PGTV D2, planning target volume (PTV) D95, PTV D90, heart Dmean and V5, lung V5, and inter-fractional differences were statistically significant (p < 0.05) in patients with left breast cancer. The effects of intra-fractional differences on dose distribution were statistically significant except for cardiac Dmean (p < 0.05). Similarly, the dose distribution of measures including PGTV D95, PGTV D2, PTV D95, PTV D90, Heart Dmean, and Lung V5 was strongly impacted by inter-fractional variances in patients with right breast cancer. The influence of intra-fractional differences on dose distribution was statistically significant for all parameters (p < 0.05), and they were statistically significant (p < 0.05).
conclusionWhen paired with fan-beam CT image guidance, electronic portal imaging device (EPID) in vivo dose validation provides a precise real-time dose delivery evaluation for patients undergoing radiation therapy for breast cancer.
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.