ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2015
VMAT to arclet plan conversion in a treatment planning system : Feasibility and dosimetric relationship between VMAT, arclet, and stationary fields.
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2015. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of this study was to make dynamic rotation treatment with mARC available for the non-dedicated Philips Pinnacle treatment planning system by converting SmartArc plans, offering insight into the relationship between SmartArc, mARC, and stationary field irradiation.
methodsA scripting solution is presented that can be run in the Pinnacle system. This allows for the conversion of SmartArc plans into mARC format. The dose distribution of the converted mARC plan can be evaluated both in the form of a "real" mARC plan with arclets and-as is generally done in treatment planning systems certified for mARC planning-by approximating the arclets as stationary fields. We present the proof of principle and dosimetric comparisons.
resultsThe converted plans were irradiated without problems. For the measured 3D dose distributions, on average over 90 % points agreed with the calculated dose distributions (mARC and stationary field plans) within the gamma criteria of 3 % deviation in the local dose, 3-mm distance to agreement, for all dose values above 10 % of the maximum. The agreement between the three calculated dose distributions (SmartArc with both converted plans) was above 87 % (above 92 % when comparing mARC with stationary fields).
conclusionOur solution offers the possibility of mARC planning in Pinnacle. The dose comparisons furthermore prove that the dosimetric differences between SmartArc and mARC, when appropriately translated, are minor.
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.