Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41316040›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2025

Necessity of daily IGRT? Dosimetric study of beam position offsets at central double-beam junction in pediatric craniospinal irradiation.

Bo Gao, Zaojie Yao, Lizhen Wu, Kongfeng Shao, Xijin Lin, Qiandong Liang, Xizhen Huang, Haiyan Chen, Zhanquan Lei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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.

Bo GaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Children's Hospital (Fujian Branch of Shanghai Children's Medical Center), College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, 966 Hengyu Road, Jinan District, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350000, China.
Zaojie YaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Children's Hospital (Fujian Branch of Shanghai Children's Medical Center), College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, 966 Hengyu Road, Jinan District, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350000, China.
Lizhen WuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Children's Hospital (Fujian Branch of Shanghai Children's Medical Center), College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, 966 Hengyu Road, Jinan District, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350000, China.
Kongfeng ShaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Children's Hospital (Fujian Branch of Shanghai Children's Medical Center), College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, 966 Hengyu Road, Jinan District, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350000, China.
Xijin LinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Children's Hospital (Fujian Branch of Shanghai Children's Medical Center), College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, 966 Hengyu Road, Jinan District, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350000, China.
Qiandong LiangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Children's Hospital (Fujian Branch of Shanghai Children's Medical Center), College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, 966 Hengyu Road, Jinan District, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350000, China.
Xizhen HuangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Children's Hospital (Fujian Branch of Shanghai Children's Medical Center), College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, 966 Hengyu Road, Jinan District, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350000, China.
Haiyan ChenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Children's Hospital (Fujian Branch of Shanghai Children's Medical Center), College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, 966 Hengyu Road, Jinan District, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350000, China.
Zhanquan LeiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Children's Hospital (Fujian Branch of Shanghai Children's Medical Center), College of Clinical Medicine for Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics, Fujian Medical University, 966 Hengyu Road, Jinan District, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350000, China. 244902263@qq.com.

Funding

Fujian Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China 2023J011299Fujian Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China 2023J011305
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCraniospinal irradiation (CSI) is an essential treatment modality for pediatric patients with tumors at high risk of leptomeningeal spread. However, accurate reproduction of the original simulation posture is difficult in subsequent CSI sessions as expansion of the target volume cannot fully compensate for variations, potentially resulting in dose uncertainties caused by the beam junction. PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of offsets in beam positions on dose uncertainty at the central double-beam junction during CSI radiotherapy.

methodsTo compute the dose distribution in different positional offsets, the relative positions of the beams and CT images of the brain and spine beam centers were adjusted according to the original treatment plan of individual patients. Four parameters were calculated to assess the quality of the radiotherapy plan: the conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), percentage of 1-V95%, and percentage of V110% at the planning target volume (PTV) at the beam junction.

resultsThe quality parameters (CI, HI, 1-V95%, V110%) were observed to deteriorate with increasing positional offsets. Overall, higher absolute values of beam center offset were associated with poorer dose distributions at the beam junction. Movement along the craniospinal axis toward the brain was defined as positive, while movement toward the spine was defined as negative. Shifting of the brain beams by + 3 mm and the spine beams by -3 mm resulted in an average CI value of 0.50, compared to 0.76 in the non-offset scenario, while the average HI was 0.33 versus 0.11 and the average 1-V95% value was 41.05% compared to 0.52% in the reference plan. When the brain beams were shifted by -3 mm and the spine beams by + 3 mm, the average V110% was 62.75%, compared to 2.01% without offset. Considering all beam offset scenarios, the worst-case doses to organs at risk were a maximum dose 7.78 Gy to the lens and average doses of 10.01, 8.58, 8.46, and 5.57 Gy to the parotid gland, thyroid gland, heart, and kidneys, respectively, while the lung V5 was 47%.

conclusionGreater discrepancies in beam positioning during CSI radiotherapy result in poorer dose distributions at the beam junction. Therefore, opposing shifts of the brain and spinal fields can lead to significant underdosing or overdosing at the junction. Therefore, daily image-guided radiation therapy is recommended for CSI.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsCraniospinal IrradiationRadiotherapy, Image-GuidedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedChildFemaleHumansMalePatient PositioningRadiometryRadiotherapy DosageTomography, X-Ray ComputedBeam junctionCraniospinal irradiationDouble-beams center radiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID41316040
PMCPMC12764042

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.