Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42711722›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2026

Metal artifact reduction for 3 T MRI-only prostate radiotherapy in patients with hip prostheses: impact on target definition, synthetic CT generation, dose calculation, and fiducial marker identification.

Mizgin Coskun, J Stefan Petersson, Sacha Af Wetterstedt, Patrik Brynolfsson, Christian Jamtheim Gustafsson, Adalsteinn Gunnlaugsson, Lars E Olsson, Carl Siversson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 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.

Mizgin CoskunMedical Radiation Physics, Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. mizgin.coskun@med.lu.se.
J Stefan PeterssonMedical Radiation Physics, Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Sacha Af WetterstedtMedical Radiation Physics, Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Patrik BrynolfssonRadiation Physics, Department of Hematology, Oncology, and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Christian Jamtheim GustafssonMedical Radiation Physics, Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Adalsteinn GunnlaugssonDivision of Oncology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Lars E OlssonMedical Radiation Physics, Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Carl SiverssonMedical Radiation Physics, Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) offers superior soft-tissue contrast and MRI-only radiotherapy (RT) eliminates uncertainties associated with computed tomography (CT)-to-MRI image registration. An MRI-only RT workflow in patients with hip prostheses remains challenging since delineation, synthetic CT (sCT) generation, and marker identification ideally rely on MR images, which are sensitive to distortions. Metal-artifact reduction sequences (MARS) mitigate metal distortions but often obscure gold markers. The aim of this study is to present a proof-of-concept 3 T MRI-only RT workflow for prostate cancer patients with hip prostheses, using only MARS MAVRIC-SL (GE HealthCare) for delineation, sCT generation and fiducial marker identification.

methodsFive prostate cancer patients with one or two hip prostheses and intraprostatic fiducial markers underwent CT, standard 3 T MRI and additional MAVRIC-SL MRI. All images were used retrospectively and did not affect patient treatment. Delineation and sCT generation were performed using MAVRIC-SL. Intraprostatic markers were not visible in MAVRIC-SL due to artifact suppression; instead, raw data were reconstructed into spectral-bin images to manually identify the markers. To prevent incoming radiation from passing through the implants and reduce the associated uncertainties in dose calculation and treatment delivery, beam avoidance sectors (AS) were applied. Conventional CT-based avoidance sectors were registered to the sCT and defined as AS1. Prosthesis-induced signal voids in MAVRIC-SL were used to define AS2. Two treatment plans (42.7 Gy, 7 fractions) were created per patient using AS1 and AS2. Plans were compared using dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters. AS2-plans were recalculated on registered CTs for DVH-comparison and gamma analyses (2%/2 mm and 1%/1 mm with 10% dose threshold) were performed.

resultsDelineation, marker identification and sCT generation were successful using MAVRIC-SL. Median dose differences between AS1 and AS2 remained within ± 0.1% for PTV, while OAR metrics ranged from - 0.4% to + 0.7%. AS2-plans recalculated on CT showed dose differences ≤ 0.9% for PTV and ≤ 1% for OARs. Median gamma pass rates were 99.1% (2%/2 mm) and 96.4% (1%/1 mm).

conclusionsThis study demonstrates the feasibility of an MRI-only radiotherapy workflow at 3 T for prostate cancer patients with hip prostheses, enabling delineation, sCT generation, dose calculation and marker identification from a single MAVRIC-SL acquisition. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.

Indexed as

ArtifactsFiducial MarkersHip ProsthesisMagnetic Resonance ImagingMetalsProstatic NeoplasmsRadiotherapy, Image-GuidedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedHumansMaleRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRetrospective StudiesMetals

Identifiers

PMID42711722
PMCPMC13551977

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.