ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2025
PrecisionPro Fusion: Clinical validation of an automated, rigid, Prostate-Specific MRI-CT Fusion system for prostate radiotherapy planning.
Article in Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Accurate image registration between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) is required for precise radiation therapy of prostate cancer. Manual registration methods have been identified as a significant barrier to the implementation of advanced treatment techniques such as focal boost therapy. Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy of PrecisionPro Fusion-an automated, rigid, prostate-specific MRI-CT registration pipeline- compared to manual registration by experienced radiation oncologists. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective, multi-institutional validation study involving six genitourinary radiation oncologists from three institutions who performed registrations on 20 patient cases. The study used a two-round design with a one-month washout period, where physicians conducted MRI-CT registrations with and without PrecisionPro Fusion. We compared PrecisionPro Fusion to practical accuracy limits of manual registration, defined by intra-physician variability (distance between a physician's two MRI-CT registrations of the same patient case) and inter-physician variability (maximum distance between a physician's registration and the physician consensus- average of all physicians' registrations of that patient case). Physician participants reported on the PrecisionPro Fusion user experience using a System Usability Scale questionnaire. Results: Intra-physician variability for manual subspecialist registrations was median 2.9 mm (IQR: 1.9, 5.4); inter-physician variability was median: 4.7 mm (4.3, 5.7). PrecisionPro Fusion registrations had median distance from the physician consensus of 1.3 mm (IQR: 0.9, 2.7). The system received high usability scores (median 81; IQR: 74, 88). Conclusion: PrecisionPro Fusion provides prostate MRI-CT registration accuracy comparable to manual physician registration. Automated, rigid, prostate-specific MRI-CT registration could enable faster delineation of structures visible on MRI, including the urethra and intraprostatic tumors.
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.