Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28871980›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2017

Empowering Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy Through Physics and Technology: An Overview.

Radhe Mohan, Indra J Das, Clifton C Ling

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. ACR-ARS Practice Parameter for the Performance of Proton Beam Therapy.International journal of particle therapy · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Radhe MohanDepartment of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: rmohan@mdanderson.org.
Indra J DasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, New York.
Clifton C LingVarian Medical Systems and Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.

Funding

MDACC Clinical and Research Physics SupportU19CA021239 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI HONG, THEODORE S · 2014 to 2018
$11.2M
NCI NIH HHS U19 CA021239
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Considering the clinical potential of protons attributable to their physical characteristics, interest in proton therapy has increased greatly in this century, as has the number of proton therapy installations. Until recently, passively scattered proton therapy was used almost entirely. Notably, the overall clinical results to date have not shown a convincing benefit of protons over photons. A rapid transition is now occurring with the implementation of the most advanced form of proton therapy, intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). IMPT is superior to passively scattered proton therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) dosimetrically. However, numerous limitations exist in the present IMPT methods. In particular, compared with IMRT, IMPT is highly vulnerable to various uncertainties. In this overview we identify three major areas of current limitations of IMPT: treatment planning, treatment delivery, and motion management, and discuss current and future efforts for improvement. For treatment planning, we need to reduce uncertainties in proton range and in computed dose distributions, improve robust planning and optimization, enhance adaptive treatment planning and delivery, and consider how to exploit the variability in the relative biological effectiveness of protons for clinical benefit. The quality of proton therapy also depends on the characteristics of the IMPT delivery systems and image guidance. Efforts are needed to optimize the beamlet spot size for both improved dose conformality and faster delivery. For the latter, faster energy switching time and increased dose rate are also needed. Real-time in-room volumetric imaging for guiding IMPT is in its early stages with cone beam computed tomography (CT) and CT-on-rails, and continued improvements are anticipated. In addition, imaging of the proton beams themselves, using, for instance, prompt γ emissions, is being developed to determine the proton range and to reduce range uncertainty. With the realization of the advances described above, we posit that IMPT, thus empowered, will lead to substantially improved clinical results.

Indexed as

MovementRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedTechnology, RadiologicHealth PhysicsHumansLinear Energy TransferNeoplasmsProton TherapyQuality of Health CareRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Image-GuidedRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRelative Biological EffectivenessRespirationUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID28871980
PMCPMC5651132

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.