ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2014
mARC vs. IMRT radiotherapy of the prostate with flat and flattening-filter-free beam energies.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measuring out-of-field dose to the hippocampus in common radiotherapy indications.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
- Feasibility of flattening filter free beams for hippocampal avoidance whole-brain radiotherapy: a dosimetric and radiobiological analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Monte-Carlo simulation of the Siemens Artiste linear accelerator flat 6 MV and flattening-filter-free 7 MV beam line.PloS one · 2019Article
- mARC preoperative rectal cancer treatments vs. 3D conformal radiotherapy. A dose distribution comparative study.PloS one · 2019Article
- Volumetric-modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment planning for prostate cancer with flattened beam and flattening filter free linear accelerators.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2017Article
- Clinical experience with planning, quality assurance, and delivery of burst-mode modulated arc therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2016Article
- mARC Treatment of Hypopharynx Carcinoma with Flat and Flattening-Filter-Free Beam Energies - A Planning Study.PloS one · 2016Article
- VMAT to arclet plan conversion in a treatment planning system : Feasibility and dosimetric relationship between VMAT, arclet, and stationary fields.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2015Article
- Comparison of VMAT-SABR treatment plans with flattening filter (FF) and flattening filter-free (FFF) beam for localized prostate cancer.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2015Article
- The effect of beam shape on physical parameters of head and neck simultaneous-integrated boost intensity-modulated radiation therapy.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation OncologyArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere as yet exists no systematic planning study investigating the novel mARC rotational radiotherapy technique, which is conceptually different from VMAT. We therefore present a planning study for prostate cancer, comparing mARC with IMRT treatment at the same linear accelerator equipped with flat and flattening-filter-free (FFF) photon energies.
methodsWe retrospectively re-contoured and re-planned treatment plans for 10 consecutive prostate cancer patients. Plans were created for a Siemens Artiste linear accelerator with flat 6 MV and FFF 7 MV photons, using the Prowess Panther treatment planning system. mARC and IMRT plans were compared with each other considering indices for plan quality and dose to organs at risk. All plans were exported to the machine and irradiated while measuring scattered dose by thermoluminescent dosimeters placed on an anthropomorphic phantom. Treatment times were also measured and compared.
resultsAll plans were found acceptable for treatment. There was no marked preference for either technique or energy from the point of view of target coverage and dose to organs at risk. Scattered dose was significantly decreased by the use of FFF energies. While mARC and IMRT plans were of very similar overall quality, treatment time could be markedly decreased both by the use of mARC and FFF energy.
conclusionsHighly conformal treatment plans could be created both by the use of flat 6 MV and FFF 7 MV energy, using IMRT or mARC. For all practical purposes, the FFF 7 MV energy and mARC plans are acceptable for treatment, a combination of both allowing a drastic reduction in treatment time from over 5 minutes to about half this value.
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.