Observational studyActa oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden)2025
Quantifying the dosimetric impact of online daily adaptation for MR-guided RT in cervical cancer.
Observational study in Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04075305 (The Multiple Outcome Evaluation of Radiation Therapy Using the MR-Linac Study), which is not on this 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.
The Multiple Outcome Evaluation of Radiation Therapy Using the MR-Linac Study
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study assessed the inter- and intra-fractional dosimetric impact of MR-Linac-based adaptive radiotherapy for cervical cancer (CC).
methodsA retrospective analysis of five node-negative, locally advanced cervical cancer patients treated under the MOMENTUM study (NCT04075305) using adapt-to-shape (ATS) on an Elekta Unity MR-Linac. Assessing the dosimetric impact of daily online adaptations: (1) comparing dose between daily adapted (MR-adapted) and non-adapted (MR-guided) plans, by quantifying dose differences relative to reference plans (by 2 and 5%) and evaluating adaptation frequency; (2) performing intra-fraction dose evaluations. Dose metrics for targets and organs at risk (OARs) were evaluated following EMBRACE II guidelines.
resultsMR-adapted plans improved target coverage or reduced OAR dose in 82-100% of fractions at a 2% dose deviation (and in 25-84% at a 5% deviation), compared to MR-guided plans. Dose reductions for OARs ranged from 2 to 8% for D0.1%, 4.77-16.70% for V4000cGy and 2.10-14.00% for V3000cGy. Intra-fraction analysis showed that the difference between daily planned and delivered doses in all target structures was not clinically significant, ranging from 0.08 to 2.20%, except two fractions that experienced higher deviations (5%) in ITV45. Treatment was well-tolerated, with no Grade 2 or 3 toxicities reported.
interpretationMR-guided plans required adaptation in 25-100% of the fractions when compared to MR-adapted plans. MR-adapted plans demonstrated enhanced target dose consistency and reduced OAR dose for all patients, highlighting the benefits of daily adaptation. Despite longer treatment times, dose accuracy was preserved. Toxicity results for MRgART in CC appear promising.
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.