Trial reportInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2016
A Prospective Comparison of the Effects of Interfractional Variations on Proton Therapy and Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer.
Trial report in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of interfractional variation on delivered dose with ultrahypofractionated pencil beam scanning proton therapy for localized prostate cancer.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- From CBCT to MR-Linac in Image-Guided Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy Towards Treatment Personalization.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Review
- Exploring treatment options in cancer: Tumor treatment strategies.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2024Review
- Dose evaluation of inter- and intra-fraction prostate motion in extremely hypofractionated intensity-modulated proton therapy for prostate cancer.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2023Article
- Dosimetric advantages of daily adaptive strategy in IMPT for high-risk prostate cancer.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
- Simulation of an HDR "Boost" with Stereotactic Proton versus Photon Therapy in Prostate Cancer: A Dosimetric Feasibility Study.International journal of particle therapy · 2021Article
- A deep learning framework for prostate localization in cone beam CT-guided radiotherapy.Medical physics · 2020Article
- Dosimetric Impact of the Positional Imaging Frequency for Hypofractionated Prostate Radiotherapy - A Voxel-by-Voxel Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- Proton versus photon-based radiation therapy for prostate cancer: emerging evidence and considerations in the era of value-based cancer care.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2019Review
- Proton therapy- the modality of choice for future radiation therapy management of Prostate Cancer?Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2019Review
- Three Discipline Collaborative Radiation Therapy (3DCRT) Special Debate: I would treat prostate cancer with proton therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2019Article
- Dosimetric Impact of Interfractional Variations for Post-prostatectomy Radiotherapy to the Prostatic Fossa-Relevance for the Frequency of Position Verification Imaging and Treatment Adaptation.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Article
- Dosimetric Impact of Interfractional Variations in Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy-Implications for Imaging Frequency and Treatment Adaptation.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Article
- Dosimetric Uncertainties in Dominant Intraprostatic Lesion Simultaneous Boost Using Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
- Efficacy and Safety of Newly Installed Spot Scanning Proton Beam Therapy for Prostate Cancer.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo quantify and compare the impact of interfractional setup and anatomic variations on proton therapy (PT) and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty patients with low-risk or intermediate-risk prostate cancer randomized to receive passive-scattering PT (n=10) and IMRT (n=10) were selected. For both modalities, clinical treatment plans included 50.4 Gy(RBE) to prostate and proximal seminal vesicles, and prostate-only boost to 79.2 Gy(RBE) in 1.8 Gy(RBE) per fraction. Implanted fiducials were used for prostate localization and endorectal balloons were used for immobilization. Patients in PT and IMRT arms received weekly computed tomography (CT) and cone beam CT (CBCT) scans, respectively. The planned dose was recalculated on each weekly image, scaled, and mapped onto the planning CT using deformable registration. The resulting accumulated dose distribution over the entire treatment course was compared with the planned dose using dose-volume histogram (DVH) and γ analysis.
resultsThe target conformity index remained acceptable after accumulation. The largest decrease in the average prostate D98 was 2.2 and 0.7 Gy for PT and IMRT, respectively. On average, the mean dose to bladder increased by 3.26 ± 7.51 Gy and 1.97 ± 6.84 Gy for PT and IMRT, respectively. These values were 0.74 ± 2.37 and 0.56 ± 1.90 for rectum. Differences between changes in DVH indices were not statistically significant between modalities. All volume indices remained within the protocol tolerances after accumulation. The average pass rate for the γ analysis, assuming tolerances of 3 mm and 3%, for clinical target volume, bladder, rectum, and whole patient for PT/IMRT were 100/100, 92.6/99, 99.2/100, and 97.2/99.4, respectively.
conclusionThe differences in target coverage and organs at risk dose deviations for PT and IMRT were not statistically significant under the guidelines of this protocol.
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.