ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2013
Impact of MLC leaf width on volumetric-modulated arc therapy planning for head and neck cancers.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Two-dimensional dynamic multileaf collimator (2DDMLC) technique for improved treatment quality in intensity modulated radiation therapy.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Dosimetric evaluation study of IMRT and VMAT techniques for prostate cancer based on different multileaf collimator designs.Radiation and environmental biophysics · 2023Article
- Dosimetric sensitivity of leaf width on volumetric modulated arc therapy plan quality: an objective approach.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2022Article
- Beam complexity and monitor unit efficiency comparison in two different volumetric modulated arc therapy delivery systems using automated planning.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Is High Definition MLC Dosimetrically Superior to Standard Definition MLC for SIB-SBRT for Carcinoma Prostate.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2019Article
- Influence of multi-leaf collimator leaf transmission on head and neck intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy planning.Japanese journal of radiology · 2017Article
- Quality of tri-Co-60 MR-IGRT treatment plans in comparison with VMAT treatment plans for spine SABR.The British journal of radiology · 2017Article
- The effect of extremely narrow MLC leaf width on the plan quality of VMAT for prostate cancer.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2016Article
- Capability of leaf interdigitation with different inverse planning strategies in Monaco: an investigation of representative tumour sites.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2016Article
- Impact of MLC properties and IMRT technique in meningioma and head-and-neck treatments.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2015Article
- A treatment planning study comparing Elekta VMAT and fixed field IMRT using the varian treatment planning system eclipse.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2014Article
- Impact of Multileaf Collimator Configuration Parameters on the Dosimetric Accuracy of 6-MV Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Treatment Plans.Journal of medical physicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This dosimetric study investigated the impact of multileaf collimators (MLC) leaf width in volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for head and neck cancers (HNC), either with a "standard" simultaneously integrated boost technique (S-SIB) or with a "dose painting" SIB technique (DP-SIB). HNC patients were planned either with an S-SIB comprising three dose levels, from 56 to 70 Gy (16 patients), or with a DP-SIB comprising five dose levels, from 56 to 84 Gy (8 patients), in 35 fractions. Two VMAT plans were calculated for each SIB technique using two Elekta MLCs: MLCi2 with 10 mm leaf width and Beam Modulator (BM) with 4 mm leaf width. Dose distributions were evaluated by comparing doses on PTVs, main OARs, and healthy tissue, and by comparing conformation indexes. Treatment efficiencies were evaluated by comparing the number of monitor units and the number of needed arcs. Comparisons of the two MLCs depending on the two SIB techniques showed: i) Regarding PTVs: Dmean and D2% on lower doses PTV decreased respectively by 0.5 Gy (p = 0.01) and 0.9 Gy (p = 0.01) with BM than with MLCi2 for S-SIB; no significant difference was found for DP-SIB;ii) Regarding OARs: for spinal cord and brainstem, D2% decreased respectively by 1.2 Gy (p = 0.03) and 4.2 Gy (p = 0.04) with BM than with MLCi2 for S-SIB; for controlateral parotid, D50% decreased by 1.5 Gy (p = 0.01) with BM than with MLCi2 for S-SIB; iii) Regarding treatment efficiency: the number of monitor units was 44% (p = 0.00) and 51% (p = 0.01) higher with BM for S-SIB and DP-SIB, respectively. Two arcs were more frequently needed with BM to reach an acceptable dose distribution. This study demonstrated that Beam Modulator (4 mm leaf width) and MLCi2 (10 mm leaf width) MLCs from Elekta provided satisfactory dose distributions for treatment delivery with VMAT technique for complex HNC cases with standard and dose painting prescriptions. OAR sparing was better with BM, mainly for brainstem and spinal cord. However, delivery efficiency of VMAT plans was better with MLCi2.
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.