Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40366562›Full record

ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2025

Improving patient specific quality assurance for image registration: clinical use case of target contouring for PET deformable image registration.

Johnson Yuen, Joel Poder, Michael Jameson, Laurel Schmidt, Ryan Brown, Charlotte Atkinson, Shrikant Deshpande, Anna Ralston, Lois Holloway

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Johnson YuenCancer Care Centre, Department of Medical Physics, St. George Hospital, Kogarah, NSW, Australia. Johnson.Yuen@health.nsw.gov.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0305-5360
Joel PoderCancer Care Centre, Department of Medical Physics, St. George Hospital, Kogarah, NSW, Australia.
Michael JamesonGenesisCare St. Vincent's Clinic, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Laurel SchmidtCancer Care Centre, Department of Medical Physics, St. George Hospital, Kogarah, NSW, Australia.
Ryan BrownCancer Care Centre, Department of Medical Physics, St. George Hospital, Kogarah, NSW, Australia.
Charlotte AtkinsonQueens Hospital, Romford, Essex, UK.
Shrikant DeshpandeSouth Western Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Anna RalstonCancer Care Centre, Department of Medical Physics, St. George Hospital, Kogarah, NSW, Australia.
Lois HollowaySouth Western Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deformable image registration (DIR) has proven to be an invaluable tool to maximize the clinical benefits of multimodality imaging in radiation oncology. In contrast to rigid image registration (RIR), which is employed at all stages of diagnosis and treatment, the uptake of DIR has been constrained by concerns over the potential for unsafe use. The AAPM Task Group 132 (TG132) published a report on the use of image registration, including many recommendations on clinical integration of registration in treatment planning and delivery. There is a remaining uncertainty on incorporating registration uncertainties into treatment margins (Sect. 6.A, TG 132), a challenge in clinical practice. The aim of this work was to report our experience in implementing a practical, patient specific quality assurance process based on the AAPM Task Group 132 report recommendations. This work includes refining our process of target contouring using PET with deformable image registration based on our experience of addressing vulnerabilities identified during implementation. A multidisciplinary team created a flowchart for patient specific quality assurance for image registration (RIR or DIR) based on use cases defined in the AAPM TG132 Report on the use of image registration in radiotherapy. Vulnerabilities identified from this implementation were assessed relative to AAPM TG132 recommendations. These findings were used to adapt our patient specific quality assurance to mitigate vulnerabilities. The main vulnerabilities were identified in the last steps of image registration. There was potential for inappropriate use of the registration for clinical use, such as target contouring where the image registration accuracy level was poor. Vulnerabilities were addressed by an adaptation in our quality assurance process. A new physics image registration QA task was introduced that independently checks registration accuracy and appropriateness of target contouring, addressing the vulnerability in the last steps of the AAPM TG132 flowchart. A multi-disciplinary team implemented the image registration process outlined by AAPM TG132. An improved patient specific quality assurance process was developed by introducing an independent physics image registration review that considers the acceptable registration uncertainty for the specific clinical use case in question.

Indexed as

Image Processing, Computer-AssistedPositron-Emission TomographyQuality Assurance, Health CareQuality ImprovementHumansQuality ControlAdaptive radiotherapyContour propagationDeformable image registrationMulti-modality image registrationPETQuality managementTarget delineation

Identifiers

PMID40366562
PMCPMC12209017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.