ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2025
Multidisciplinary approach to target volume delineation in locally recurrent rectal cancer: An explorative study.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Interobserver variation (IOV) in locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) delineations is large, possibly because of different interpretations of imaging. An explorative study was performed to investigate the benefit of additional delineations by expert radiologists. Materials and methods: 14 cases of LRRC were delineated on planning CT by 8 radiologists (RADs) to construct a median and total radiology contour, followed by 12 radiation oncologists (ROs), without (GTV-) or with (GTV+) the additional contours. IOV was calculated separately for RADs, GTV- and GTV+. The following metrics were used: the Surface Dice Similarity Coefficient (SDSC), Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), and Hausdorff Distance at the 98th percentile (HD98%). The median SDSC, DSC, and HD98% of GTV- and GTV+ were compared. Sub-analyses of IOV in different recurrence types were performed. Results: Median SDSC significantly improved from GTV- to GTV+ overall, but a significant benefit could not be proven in individual cases. Additional radiological input consistently improved all parameters in 4/14 cases (29 %). Geographical miss occurred after radiological input in 7 %. Subgroup analyses show large IOV in mainly fibrotic and intraluminal recurrences. Little IOV is seen in solitary nodal recurrences. Conclusion: This study highlights target volume delineation challenges in LRRC. Overall, radiological input reduced IOV amongst ROs in target volume delineation for LRRC. Large differences do however exist amongst recurrence types. A standard terminology for LRRC and close collaboration between radiologists and radiation oncologists seems necessary to reduce IOV and improve quality of care.
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.