ReviewPhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
A systematic review of tumour position reproducibility and stability in breath-hold for radiation therapy of the upper abdomen.
Review 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intrafractional variation of breath-hold radiotherapy for gastric lymphoma.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Implementation of surface-guided radiotherapy for motion management in liver SBRT: A scoping review and clinical workflow development.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Patient-specific breath-hold reproducibility in thoracic and abdominal radiotherapy: comparison of auditory and visual biofeedback.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Maintaining quality of scientific peer-review and publishing inPhysics and imaging in radiation oncology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Upper abdominal malignancies are relatively rare, and although surgery is considered the primary treatment option, radiation therapy has an emerging role in the management of liver, pancreas, kidney and adrenal gland tumours. Furthermore, stereotactic radiation therapy for the management of upper abdominal metastases is an expanding clinical indication. Breath-hold is one respiratory motion management strategy used in upper abdominal radiation therapy, and the reproducibility, and stability of breath-hold is critical for overall treatment accuracy. Materials and methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted in Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases with keyword and vocabulary terms related to radiation therapy, breath-hold and upper abdominal tumours. Results: Following screening against the selection criteria, 41 studies were included. Breath-hold reproducibility was the most commonly reported outcome and exhale breath-hold was the most common type. Studies were either prospective or retrospective cohort studies, and the mean sample size was 19 participants. The risk of bias of each included study was assessed, and the mean quality assessment score for included studies was 90 % (77-100 %). Median exhale breath-hold cranio-caudal inter-fraction reproducibility was 0.6 mm, (IQR 0.3-1.6 mm), compared to inspiratory breath-hold 0.0 mm (IQR -0.6-2.97 mm). Stability measurements were ≤3 mm in 71 % of studies, irrespective of breath-hold type. Discussion: Formulating institutional protocols for best clinical practice regarding breath-hold for upper abdominal tumours is challenging, given the significant variation in practices, interventions and definitions observed in the literature. Further investigation to individualise breath-hold strategies and safety margins is warranted.
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.