ArticleTechnology in cancer research & treatment
Comparison of Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Treatment Plans Between 1.5T MR-Linac and Conventional Linac.
Article in Technology in cancer research & treatment. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adoption of Hybrid MRI-Linac Systems for the Treatment of Brain Tumors: A Systematic Review of the Current Literature Regarding Clinical and Technical Features.Technology in cancer research & treatmentPooled it
- Assessment of dose distribution in pancreatic SABR in the presence of a metallic biliary stent using Monte Carlo modeling.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Multimodal radiotherapy dose prediction using a multi-task deep learning model.Medical physics · 2024Article
- Evaluation of clinical parallel workflow in online adaptive MR-guided Radiotherapy: A detailed assessment of treatment session times.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- The impact of margin reduction on radiation dose distribution of ultra-hypofractionated prostate radiotherapy utilizing a 1.5-T MR-Linac.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Dosimetry impact of distinct gating strategies in cine MR image-guided breath-hold pancreatic cancer radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- Dosimetric analysis of MR-LINAC treatment plans for salvage spine SBRT re-irradiation.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
- Brain stereotactic radiosurgery using MR-guided online adaptive planning for daily setup variation: An end-to-end test.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
- Novel Plasma Proteomic Biomarkers for Early Identification of Induction Chemotherapy Beneficiaries in Locoregionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Impact of 1.5 T Magnetic Field on Treatment Plan Quality in MR-Guided Radiotherapy: Typical Phantom Test Cases.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we assess the dosimetric qualities and usability of planning for 1.5 T MR-Linac based intensity modulated radiotherapy (MRL-IMRT) for various clinical sites in comparison with IMRT plans using a conventional linac. In total of 30 patients with disease sites in the brain, esophagus, lung, rectum and vertebra were re-planned retrospectively for simulated MRL-IMRT using the Elekta Unity dedicated treatment planning system (TPS) Monaco (v5.40.01). Currently, the step-and-shoot (ss) is the only delivery technique for IMRT available on Unity. All patients were treated on an Elekta Versa HD
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.