ArticleThe British journal of radiology2020
Is an analytical dose engine sufficient for intensity modulated proton therapy in lung cancer?
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- An ion treatment planning framework for inclusion of nanodosimetric ionization detail through cluster dose.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Generalizability of deep learning-based dose conversion model in proton beam therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Improvement of deep learning-based dose conversion accuracy to a Monte Carlo algorithm in proton beam therapy for head and neck cancers.Journal of radiation research · 2025Article
- Deep learning-based prediction of Monte Carlo dose distribution for heavy ion therapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Improving Proton Dose Calculation Accuracy by Using Deep Learning.Machine learning: science and technology · 2021Article
- Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography at a tertiary hospital in Anhui, China and secondary analysis of trial data.The British journal of radiology · 2021Article
- Proton therapy special feature: introductory editorial.The British journal of radiology · 2020Article
- Assessment of robustness against setup uncertainties using probabilistic scenarios in lung cancer: a comparison of proton with photon therapy.The British journal of radiology · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo identify a subgroup of lung cancer plans where the analytical dose calculation (ADC) algorithm may be clinically acceptable compared to Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation in intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT).
methodsRobust-optimised IMPT plans were generated for 20 patients to a dose of 70 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) in 35 fractions in Raystation. For each case, four plans were generated: three with ADC optimisation using the pencil beam (PB) algorithm followed by a final dose calculation with the following algorithms: PB (PB-PB), MC (PB-MC) and MC normalised to prescription dose (PB-MC scaled). A fourth plan was generated where MC optimisation and final dose calculation was performed (MC-MC). Dose comparison and γ analysis (PB-PB
resultsOverestimation of the dose to 99% and mean dose of the clinical target volume was observed in all PB-MC compared to PB-PB plans (median: 3.7 Gy(RBE) (5%) (range: 2.3 to 6.9 Gy(RBE)) and 1.8 Gy(RBE) (3%) (0.5 to 4.6 Gy(RBE))). PB-MC scaled plans resulted in significantly higher CTVD2 compared to PB-PB (median difference: -4 Gy(RBE) (-6%) (-5.3 to -2.4 Gy(RBE)),
conclusionIn the presence of mediastinal involvement and absence of range shifters Raystation ADC may be clinically acceptable in lung IMPT. Otherwise, MC algorithm would be recommended to ensure accuracy of treatment plans. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Although MC algorithm is more accurate compared to ADC in lung IMPT, ADC may be clinically acceptable where there is mediastinal involvement and absence of range shifters.
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.