ArticleRadiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology2015
Robust optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy to account for anatomy changes in lung cancer patients.
Article in Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 85 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ionizing radiation acoustic beam localization: one step towards "proton surgery".medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Quantifying interplay effects in lung cancer IMPT: a comprehensive analysis of treatment planning parameter sensitivity.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Benefits of robust optimization in comparison with PTV-based planning approach to overcome beam positioning uncertainties in spot-scanning proton therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Interval Analysis-Based Optimization: A Robust Model for Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT).Cancers · 2025Article
- Enabling clinical use of linear energy transfer in proton therapy for head and neck cancer - A review of implications for treatment planning and adverse events study.Visualized cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Deep-learning based fast and accurate 3D CT deformable image registration in lung cancer.Medical physics · 2023Article
- Article
- Online adaptive planning methods for intensity-modulated radiotherapy.Physics in medicine and biology · 2023Review
- Deep-Learning-based Fast and Accurate 3D CT Deformable Image Registration in Lung Cancer.ArXiv · 2023Article
- Pre-treatment analysis of non-rigid variations can assist robust intensity-modulated proton therapy plan selection for head and neck patients.Medical physics · 2022Article
- DIR-based models to predict weekly anatomical changes in head and neck cancer proton therapy.Physics in medicine and biology · 2022Article
- AAPM Task Group Report 290: Respiratory motion management for particle therapy.Medical physics · 2022Article
- Dosimetric impact of tumor position displacements between photon and proton stereotactic body radiation therapy for lung cancer.Journal of radiosurgery and SBRT · 2022Article
- Evaluating Proton Dose and Associated Range Uncertainty Using Daily Cone-Beam CT.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Adaptive proton therapy.Physics in medicine and biology · 2021Review
- Anatomic changes in head and neck intensity-modulated proton therapy: Comparison between robust optimization and online adaptation.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2021Article
- Physics of Particle Beam and Hypofractionated Beam Delivery in NSCLC.Seminars in radiation oncology · 2021Review
- A Review of the Robust Optimization Process and Advances with Monte Carlo in the Proton Therapy Management of Head and Neck Tumors.International journal of particle therapy · 2021Article
- Online adaptive dose restoration in intensity modulated proton therapy of lung cancer to account for inter-fractional density changes.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeRobust optimization for IMPT takes setup and range uncertainties into account during plan optimization. However, anatomical changes were not prospectively included. The purpose of this study was to examine robustness and dose variation due to setup uncertainty and anatomical change in IMPT of lung cancer. MATERIAL AND
methodsPlans were generated with multi-field optimization based on planning target volume (MFO-PTV) and worst-case robust optimization (MFO-RO) on simulation computed tomography scans (CT0) for nine patients. Robustness was evaluated on the CT0 by computing the standard deviation of DVH (SD-DVH). Dose variations calculated on weekly CTs were compared with SD-DVH. Equivalent uniform dose (EUD) change from the original plan on weekly dose was also calculated for both plans.
resultsSD-DVH and dose variation on weekly CTs were both significantly lower in the MFO-RO plans than in the MFO-PTV plans for targets, lungs, and the esophagus (p<0.05). When comparing EUD for ITV between weekly and planned dose distributions, three patients and 28% of repeated CTs for MFO-RO plans, and six patients and 44% of repeated CTs for MFO-PTV plans, respectively, showed an EUD change of >5%.
conclusionsRO in IMPT reduces the dose variation due to setup uncertainty and anatomy changes during treatment compared with PTV-based planning. However, dose variation could still be substantial; repeated imaging and adaptive planning as needed are highly recommended for IMPT of lung tumors.
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.