ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
Cone-beam CT-based estimations of prostate motion and dose distortion during radiotherapy.
Article 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 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.
- Role of autophagy‑modulating long non‑coding RNAs in tumor radioresistance (Review).Oncology reports · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Intra-fractional prostate translational and rotational (6DoF) motion can cause dose distortions. As intra-fractional motion monitoring is often unavailable, this study compares three methods to use pre- and post-treatment cone beam CTs (CBCT) to estimate prostate positioning errors during treatment and their dosimetric impact. Material and Methods: Eighteen patients received prostate radiotherapy with pre-treatment CBCT setup. For 7-10 fractions per patient (total:174), triggered kV-images were acquired every 3 s during beam-on and a CBCT was acquired post-treatment. The 6DoF prostate position error during treatment was determined from the kV-images (ground truth) and estimated from the CBCTs assuming a static position as in the pre-CBCT(Scenario1), a linear drift between pre- and post-CBCT position(Scenario2) or a static position as in the post-CBCT(Scenario3). The positioning errors and prostate dose from each scenario were compared with the ground truth. Results: Scenario1 was inferior to the others with prostate position root-mean-square errors of 1.1 mm(LR), 1.7 mm(AP) and 1.8 mm(CC). Scenario2 and 3 were similarly accurate with root-mean-square errors of 0.5 mm(LR), 0.9 mm(AP) and 0.8 mm(CC) (Scenario2) and 0.6 mm(LR), 1.1 mm(AP) and 0.9 mm(CC) (Scenario3). The prostate position errors reduced the CTV D Conclusion: Using the post-CBCT prostate position, acquired right after treatment, performed best in detecting intra-fractional prostate position errors and CTV dose deficits. It offers a scalable and conservative estimate of motion-induced dose distortions.
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.