ArticleScientific reports2024
Evaluation of dose delivery based on deformed CT using a commercial software for lung cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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.
- A self-gated 4D-MRI sequence for internal target volume delineation in liver: Phantom and pre-clinical validation.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study employed a commercial software velocity to perform deformable registration and dose calculation on deformed CT images, aiming to assess the accuracy of dose delivery during the radiotherapy for lung cancers. A total of 20 patients with lung cancer were enrolled in this study. Adaptive CT (ACT) was generated by deformed the planning CT (pCT) to the CBCT of initial radiotherapy fraction, followed by contour propagation and dose recalculation. There was not significant difference between volumes of GTV and CTV calculated from the ACT and pCT. However, significant differences in dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and coverage ratio (CR) between GTV and CTV were observed, with lower values for GTV volumes below 15 cc. The mean differences in dose corresponding to 95% of the GTV, GTV-P, CTV, and CTV-P between ACT and pCT were - 0.32%, 4.52%, 2.17%, and 4.71%, respectively. For the dose corresponding to 99%, the discrepancies were - 0.18%, 8.35%, 1.92%, and 24.96%, respectively. These differences in dose primarily appeared at the edges of the target areas. Notably, a significant enhancement of dose corresponding to 1 cc for spinal cord was observed in ACT, compared with pCT. There was no statistical difference in the mean dose of lungs and heart. In general, for lung cancer patients, anatomical motion may result in both CTV and GTV moving outside the original irradiation region. The dose difference within the original target area was small, but the difference in the planning target area was considerable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.