ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026
Assessment of planning organ at risk volume margins in non-adaptive pancreatic stereotactic body radiotherapy.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2026. 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.
- Practical Considerations in the Radiotherapy Treatment Planning for SBRT Pancreas Program.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Organ at risk (OAR) motion results in increased risk of radiotherapy treatment side effects due to the potential for greater dose than intended being delivered. This is of particular concern in stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR). The study aim was to assess the role of planning organ at risk volume (PRV) margins applied to OARs of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract over five fraction non-adaptive SABR for pancreatic cancer. Materials and Methods: The clinical adaptive magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy baseline planning for 10 patients was combined with retrospective replanning respecting constraints to OAR plus a margin of 2-5 mm. Baseline planning/replanning was applied to OAR contouring at treatment fractions without plan adaptation. The impact of PRV margin was assessed in terms of the encompassing of OAR motion, effect on delivered dose, and degree of associated compromise in planned treatment volume (PTV) dose coverage. Results: Whilst variable across individual OARs, a 2-5 mm margin poorly encompassed motion in 40-70% of fractions. However, a 2-5 mm margin did effectively limit dose increases in most cases such that delivered biological effective dose (BED) did not exceed, on average, the baseline value. A margin of 2-3 mm resulted in minor PTV compromise (D Conclusions: A PRV margin of 2-5 mm for OARs limits the increase in delivered dose. Consideration of such a margin is relevant in optimizing non-adaptive treatment practice.
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.