Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41758274›Full record

ArticleRadiological physics and technology2026

Evaluation of planning target margins in head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy: a multicentric study in Bangladesh.

Jobairul Islam, Abu Kausar, Mohammad Ullah Shemanto, Ali Abbas, Mostafa A Sumon, A F M Kamal Uddin, Alessio G Morganti, Savino Cilla

Abstract readMulticenter StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Jobairul IslamLabaid Cancer Hospital & Super Speciality Centre, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Abu KausarDelta Hospital Limited, Dakha, Bangladesh.
Mohammad Ullah ShemantoAhsania Mission Cancer and General Hospital, Dakha, Bangladesh.
Ali AbbasUnited Hospital Limited, Dakha, Bangladesh.
Mostafa A SumonKurmitola General Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
A F M Kamal UddinNational Institute of ENT, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Alessio G MorgantiAlma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Savino CillaMedical Physics Unit, Responsible Research Hospital, Largo Agostino Gemelli, 1, Campobasso, 86100, Italy. savino.cilla@responsible.hospital.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6711-350X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In radiation therapy, the planning target volume (PTV) is a geometrical concept used to account for the variations of target position during treatment in terms of systematic (Σ) and random (σ) errors. It ensures that the prescribed radiation dose is delivered to the target with a high degree of confidence. We report the results of a multi-institutional study investigating PTV margin calculation for head-and-neck cancer patients across four radiotherapy departments in Bangladesh, considering the specific challenges and resource constraints of the local context. Forty patients from four different Institutions were enrolled in this multicentric prospective study. All patients underwent planning computed tomography (CT) simulation on supine position, using a head-shoulder thermoplastic mask for immobilization. Contrast-enhanced CT images were acquired with a 3–5 mm slice thickness. All institutions used their locally developed treatment planning technique and inverse planning objectives for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) optimization, together with their imaging protocols (electronic portal imaging device (EPID)-based megavolt (MV), EPID-based kilovolt (kV) or cone-beam CT imaging (CBCT)). For each patient, shifts in the lateral (LR), antero-posterior (AP) and supero-inferior (SI) directions were recorded for each daily fraction. PTV margins in each direction and three-dimensional isotropic margins (PTV3D) were calculated using the Stroom and the van Herk’s equations. The comparisons among institutions were performed using the non-parametric statistical Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by a Dunn’s test. Results were compared with those published in literature for head-and-neck cancer radiotherapy. 1400 setup images from CBCT or EPID were analysed. Using the van Herk recipe, in order to ensure ≥ 95% of tumor coverage in 90% of patients, the isotropic PTV3D were calculated as 7.1, 4.7, 8.0 and 7.4 mm for the institutions A, B, C and D, respectively. Institution B reported significant smaller values for all metrics (p < 0.05) that was attributed to the use of a hybrid kV-CBCT in the set-up protocol of this Institution, not used in the other three Centers. A total of 16 studies were identified from the literature, providing a weighted mean PTV3D margin of 6.8 mm. This multicentric study represents a significant step forward in addressing the challenges of PTV margin calculation for HNC patients in a low- and middle-income country setting. The findings highlight substantial variability in systematic and random errors across institutions, emphasizing the critical importance of customizing PTV margins to reflect local practices, available resources, and technological constraints. The study also demonstrates that accurate image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) protocols, can significantly reduce PTV margins, potentially minimizing toxicity without compromising treatment efficacy, highlighting the need to prioritize investments in advanced IGRT technologies.

Indexed as

Head and Neck NeoplasmsRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedAdultAgedBangladeshFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedTomography, X-Ray ComputedHead-neck cancerRadiotherapyRandom errorSystematic errorTarget margins

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.