ArticleMedical physics2020
A novel energy layer optimization framework for spot-scanning proton arc therapy.
Article in Medical physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Develop a novel non-coplanar trajectory optimization algorithm for an efficient 4pi spot-scanning proton Arc (SPArcMedical physics · 2026Article
- Particle Arc Therapy in Cancer Radiotherapy: A Scoping Review of Feasibility and Dosimetric Evidence.Cancers · 2026Review
- Biologically Effective Dose-Optimized Multi-Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy: A Biologically Comparable Alternative to Proton Arc Therapy.International journal of particle therapy · 2026Article
- Mid-range arc therapy for efficient and RBE-robust proton treatment.Physics in medicine and biology · 2026Article
- Dynamic range optimization for treatment time reduction in respiratory-gated proton therapy using RayStation v2025.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Towards ultra-fast treatments: large energy acceptance beam delivery systems and opportunities for proton beam therapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Automated Planning for Bias-Free Validation of Discrete Proton Arc Therapy for Oropharyngeal Cancer.International journal of particle therapy · 2025Article
- A novel adaptive energy switching algorithm for proton arc therapy based on the machine-specific delivery characteristics.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Optimizing normal tissue sparing via spatiotemporal optimization under equivalent tumor-radical efficacy.ArXiv · 2025Article
- Range-compensated pencil beam scanning proton Arc therapy: a feasibility study.Communications engineering · 2025Article
- The Cut-Sort-Group algorithm for efficient delivery of collimated step-and-shoot proton arc therapy.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Towards faster plan adaptation for proton arc therapy using initial treatment plan information.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Proton ARC based LATTICE radiation therapy: feasibility study, energy layer optimization and LET optimization.Physics in medicine and biology · 2024Article
- Emulating the Delivery of Sawtooth Proton Arc Therapy Plans on a Cyclotron-Based Proton Beam Therapy System.Cancers · 2024Article
- Simultaneous reduction of number of spots and energy layers in intensity modulated proton therapy for rapid spot scanning delivery.Medical physics · 2024Article
- FLASH instead of proton arc therapy is a more promising advancement for the next generation proton radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- An orthogonal matching pursuit optimization method for solving minimum-monitor-unit problems: Applications to proton IMPT, ARC and FLASH.Medical physics · 2023Article
- Beam angle optimization for proton therapy via group-sparsity based angle generation method.Medical physics · 2023Article
- A treatment plan optimization method with direct minimization of number of energy jumps for proton arc therapy.Physics in medicine and biology · 2023Article
- A novel optimization algorithm for enabling dynamically collimated proton arc therapy.Scientific reports · 2022Article
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 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeSpot-scanning proton arc therapy (SPAT) is an emerging modality to improve plan conformality and delivery efficiency. A greedy and heuristic method is proposed in the existing SPAT algorithm to select energy layers and sequence energy switching with gantry rotation, which does not promise optimality in either dosimetry or efficiency. We aim to develop a method to solve the energy layer switching and dosimetry optimization problems in an integrated framework for SPAT.
methodsIn an integrated approach, energy layer optimization for spot-scanning proton arc therapy (ELO-SPAT) is formulated with a dose fidelity term, a group sparsity regularization, a log barrier regularization, and an energy sequencing (ES) penalty. The combination of L2,1/2-norm group sparsity regularization and log barrier function allows one energy layer being selected per control point. The ES regularization term sorts the delivery sequence from high energy to low energy to reduce the total energy layer switching time (ELST) and subsequently the total delivery time. Within the ES penalty, the gradient of layer weights between adjacent beams is first calculated along beam direction and then along energy direction. The gradients indicate energy switch patterns between two adjacent beams. The time-wise costly energy switch-up is more heavily penalized in the ES term. This ELO-SPAT method was tested on one frontal base-of-skull (BOS) patient, one chordoma (CHDM) patient with a simultaneous integrated boost, one bilateral head-and-neck (H&N) patient, and one lung (LNG) patient. We compared ELO-SPAT with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) using discrete beams and SPArc by Ding et al. For the two arc algorithms, both the plans with and without energy sequencing were created and compared.
resultsEnergy layer optimization for spot-scanning proton arc therapy reduced the runtime of optimization by 84% on average compared with the greedy SPArc method. In both the ELO-SPAT plans with and without ES, one energy layer per control point was selected. Without ES regularization, the energy sequence was arbitrary, with around 40-60 switch-up for the tested cases. After adding ES regularization, the number of energy switch-up was reduced to less than 20. Compared with the energy sequenced SPArc plans, the ELO-SPAT plans with ES led to 24% less total ELST for synchrotron plans and 14% less for cyclotron plans. Both the ELO-SPAT and SPArc plans achieved better sparing compared with the IMPT plans for most Organs-at-risks (OARs), with or without ES. Without ES, the ELO-SPAT plans achieved further improvement of the OARs compared with the SPArc plans, with an averaged reduction of OAR [Dmean, Dmax] by [1.57, 3.34] GyRBE. Adding the ES regularization degraded the plan quality, but the ELO-SPAT plans still had comparable or slightly better sparing than the SPArc plans with ES, with an averaged reduction of OAR [Dmean, Dmax] by [1.42, 2.34] GyRBE.
conclusionWe developed a computationally efficient spot-scanning proton arc optimization method, which solved energy layer selection and sequencing in an integrated framework, generating plans with good dosimetry and high delivery efficiency.
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.