ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2025
Online CBCT-based adaptive radiation with reduced PTV margins for prostate cancer: Does reference plan comparison tell the whole story?
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. 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.
- Artificial intelligence in respiratory medicine: From diagnosis to treatment and future directions.Chinese medical journal pulmonary and critical care medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Online adaptive radiation (ART) is a novel treatment approach that allows for a new daily treatment plan based on cone beam CT (CBCT) imaging. This daily adaptation facilitates precise tumor and organ-at-risk (OAR) localization and minimizes the impact of interfractional motion, allowing for planning target volume (PTV) margin reduction. Isotropic PTV margins for localized non-stereotactic adaptive prostate radiation performed on an ETHOS linear accelerator with HyperSight have been reduced from standard 7 mm to 5 mm. This study assesses the impact of margin reduction by evaluating the dose metrics of patient reference plans, as well as daily treated plans, for 7 mm vs 5 mm PTV margins. Methods: Patients with prostate cancer receiving moderately hypofractionated adaptive radiation were initially treated with a 7 mm PTV margin (n = 10). This retrospective study generated 5 mm PTV margin treatment plans (n = 10) for these patients for comparison. In addition, a full adaptive 20 fraction treatment course was simulated with margin reduction to identify differences not recognized with reference plan comparison alone. Results: Bladder V40.8 and V48.6 but not V60 were significantly reduced in 5 mm treatment plans compared to 7 mm treatment plans. However, when daily treated plan data was examined bladder V60 was lower for the 5 mm PTV case. Similarly, rectum doses V24.6-V57 but not V60 were significantly reduced in 5 mm PTV margin treatment plans. Further differences were identified when looking at the daily treated plan data as opposed to simply comparing reference plans. Significance: In the era of online ART, with significant data available, such as daily treated plan dosimetry, analysis of reference plans alone may not be sufficient. PTV margin reduction, made possible due to the use of online ART, reduced the volume of bladder and rectum receiving <60 Gy, which may reduce toxicity and secondary malignancy risk.
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.