Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 715

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Development and Validation of a Heart Atlas to Study Cardiac Exposure to Radiation Following Treatment for Breast Cancer

Open access
Feng, Mary, Moran, Jean M., Koelling, Todd, Chughtai, Aamer, Chan, June L., Freedman, Laura, Hayman, James A., Jagsi, Reshma, Jolly, Shruti, Larouere, Janice, Soriano, Julie, Marsh, Robin, Pierce, Lori J.·2011·International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

Abstract

Purpose Cardiac toxicity is an important sequela of breast radiotherapy. However, the relationship between dose to cardiac structures and subsequent toxicity has not been well defined, partially due to variation in substructure delineation, which can lead to inconsistent dose reporting and the failure to detect potential correlations. Here we have developed a heart atlas and evaluated its effect on contour accuracy and concordance. Methods and Materials A detailed cardiac CT atlas was developed jointly by cardiology, cardiac radiology, and radiation oncology. Seven radiation oncologists were recruited to delineate the whole heart (WH), left main (LM), left anterior descending interventricular branch (LAD), and right coronary arteries (RCA) on four cases before and after studying the atlas. Contour accuracy was assessed by percent overlap with gold standard (GS) atlas volumes. The concordance index (CI) was also calculated. Standard radiation fields were applied. Doses to observer-contoured cardiac (OC) structures were calculated, and compared with GS contour doses. Pre- and post- atlas values were analyzed using a paired t-test. Results The cardiac atlas significantly improved contour accuracy and concordance. Percent overlap and CI of OC and GS volumes improved for all structures, by up to 2.3-fold (p<0.002). After application of the atlas, reported WH, LM, LAD, and RCA mean doses were within 0.1, 0.9, 2.6, and 0.6 Gy of GS doses. Conclusions This validated University of Michigan cardiac atlas may serve as a useful tool in future studies assessing cardiac toxicity and in clinical trials which include dose volume constraints to the heart.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.10.058

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 715

Metadata

Authors
Feng, M., Moran, J. M., Koelling, T., Chughtai, A., Chan, J. L., Freedman, L., Hayman, J. A., Jagsi, R., Jolly, S., Larouere, J., Soriano, J., Marsh, R., & Pierce, L. J.
Venue
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-01
Volume
79
Issue
1
Pages
10-18
ISSN
0360-3016 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1987536026
Cited by
715
References
1
FWCI
14.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Development and Validation of a Heart Atlas to Study Cardiac Exposure to Radiation Following Treatment for Breast Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.10.058
The paper
Feng, M., Moran, J. M., Koelling, T., Chughtai, A., Chan, J. L., Freedman, L., Hayman, J. A., Jagsi, R., Jolly, S., Larouere, J., Soriano, J., Marsh, R., & Pierce, L. J. (2011). Development and Validation of a Heart Atlas to Study Cardiac Exposure to Radiation Following Treatment for Breast Cancer. International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.10.058

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.