Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33585238›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2020

Biological and Mechanical Synergies to Deal With Proton Therapy Pitfalls: Minibeams, FLASH, Arcs, and Gantryless Rooms.

Alejandro Mazal, Juan Antonio Vera Sanchez, Daniel Sanchez-Parcerisa, Jose Manuel Udias, Samuel España, Victor Sanchez-Tembleque, Luis Mario Fraile, Paloma Bragado, Alvaro Gutierrez-Uzquiza, Nuria Gordillo and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Dynamic proton arc treatment planning study for oesophageal cancer.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Radical Production with Pulsed Beams: Understanding the Transition to FLASH.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Alejandro MazalCentro de Protonterapia Quironsalud, Madrid, Spain.
Juan Antonio Vera SanchezCentro de Protonterapia Quironsalud, Madrid, Spain.
Daniel Sanchez-ParcerisaGrupo de Física Nuclear and IPARCOS, U. Complutense Madrid, CEI Moncloa, Madrid, Spain.
Jose Manuel UdiasGrupo de Física Nuclear and IPARCOS, U. Complutense Madrid, CEI Moncloa, Madrid, Spain.
Samuel EspañaGrupo de Física Nuclear and IPARCOS, U. Complutense Madrid, CEI Moncloa, Madrid, Spain.
Victor Sanchez-TemblequeGrupo de Física Nuclear and IPARCOS, U. Complutense Madrid, CEI Moncloa, Madrid, Spain.
Luis Mario FraileGrupo de Física Nuclear and IPARCOS, U. Complutense Madrid, CEI Moncloa, Madrid, Spain.
Paloma BragadoInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
Alvaro Gutierrez-UzquizaInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
Nuria GordilloDepartment of Applied Physics, U. Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Gaston GarciaCenter for Materials Microanalysis, (CMAM), U. Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Juan Castro NovaisCentro de Protonterapia Quironsalud, Madrid, Spain.
Juan Maria Perez MorenoCentro de Protonterapia Quironsalud, Madrid, Spain.
Lina Mayorga OrtizCentro de Protonterapia Quironsalud, Madrid, Spain.
Amaia Ilundain IdoateCentro de Protonterapia Quironsalud, Madrid, Spain.
Marta Cremades SendinoCentro de Protonterapia Quironsalud, Madrid, Spain.
Carme AresCentro de Protonterapia Quironsalud, Madrid, Spain.
Raymond MiralbellCentro de Protonterapia Quironsalud, Madrid, Spain.
Niek SchreuderLeo Cancer Care, Knoxville, TN, United States.
Hospital Universitario Quirónsalud Madrid · ESUniversidad Complutense de Madrid · ESInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos · ESIMDEA Materials · ESUniversidad Autónoma de Madrid · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proton therapy has advantages and pitfalls comparing with photon therapy in radiation therapy. Among the limitations of protons in clinical practice we can selectively mention: uncertainties in range, lateral penumbra, deposition of higher LET outside the target, entrance dose, dose in the beam path, dose constraints in critical organs close to the target volume, organ movements and cost. In this review, we combine proposals under study to mitigate those pitfalls by using individually or in combination: (a) biological approaches of beam management in time (very high dose rate "FLASH" irradiations in the order of 100 Gy/s) and (b) modulation in space (a combination of mini-beams of millimetric extent), together with mechanical approaches such as (c) rotational techniques (optimized in partial arcs) and, in an effort to reduce cost, (d) gantry-less delivery systems. In some cases, these proposals are synergic (e.g., FLASH and minibeams), in others they are hardly compatible (mini-beam and rotation). Fixed lines have been used in pioneer centers, or for specific indications (ophthalmic, radiosurgery,…), they logically evolved to isocentric gantries. The present proposals to produce fixed lines are somewhat controversial. Rotational techniques, minibeams and FLASH in proton therapy are making their way, with an increasing degree of complexity in these three approaches, but with a high interest in the basic science and clinical communities. All of them must be proven in clinical applications.

Indexed as

arc therapyFLASHgantryminibeamsproton therapy

Identifiers

PMID33585238
PMCPMC7874206
OpenAlexW3122546033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.