ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2026
Dose and clinical impact of delineation variability in brain metastases treated with stereotactic radiotherapy.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Accurate delineation is critical for stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) of brain metastases. We evaluated how inter-reader delineation variability affects target dose coverage and local relapse-free survival (LRFS). Methods and Materials: We retrospectively analyzed 130 patients with 198 brain metastases treated with SRT. Four observers independently delineated gross tumor volumes (GTVs) on pre-treatment MRI; each GTV was expanded by 2 mm to create a planning target volume (PTV). Inter-observer variability was quantified using overlap- and distance-based similarity metrics. Dose coverage (V99%) for each observer-derived GTV/PTV was extracted from the delivered clinical dose distribution (the treatment plan created and delivered in routine practice), without replanning on alternative contours. Associations between variability, dose coverage and LRFS were evaluated using ROC analyses and Cox models. Results: Similarity metrics were significantly correlated with GTV volume. Higher inter-reader variability predicted lower GTV and PTV dose coverage (best AUC for Hausdorff distance: 0.92 for GTV coverage). However, neither reduced GTV/PTV dose coverage nor higher variability (HD or mean distance to agreement) was significantly associated with LRFS in univariate or multivariate analyses. Conclusion: Inter-reader variability can substantially modify apparent GTV/PTV dose coverage when the delivered plan is evaluated on alternative contours. In this cohort, variability did not translate into a significant reduction in LRFS, likely reflecting prescription to the PTV and the use of a 2‑mm margin. Standardized contouring workflows and validated AI-assisted tools may further reduce variability and improve treatment robustness.
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.