Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35120547›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2022

How can we consider variable RBE and LET

Stewart Mein, Benedikt Kopp, Anthony Vela, Pauline Dutheil, Paul Lesueur, Dinu Stefan, Jürgen Debus, Thomas Haberer, Amir Abdollahi, Andrea Mairani and 1 more

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

11 authors.

Stewart MeinDivision of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Benedikt KoppDivision of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Anthony VelaRadiation Oncology Department, Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France.
Pauline DutheilRadiation Oncology Department, Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France.
Paul LesueurRadiation Oncology Department, Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France.
Dinu StefanRadiation Oncology Department, Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France.
Jürgen DebusDivision of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Thomas HabererHeidelberg Ion-beam Therapy Center (HIT), In Neuenheimer Feld (INF) 450, DE, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Amir AbdollahiDivision of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Andrea MairaniDivision of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Thomas TessonnierDivision of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany. thomas.tessonnier@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8919-4299

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo develop an auxiliary GPU-accelerated proton therapy (PT) dose and LET

methodsThe physics engine for FRoG has been modified for compatibility with Proteus®ONE PT centers. Subsequently, FRoG was installed and commissioned at NPTC. Dosimetric validation was performed against measurements and the clinical TPS, RayStation (RS-MC). A head patient cohort previously treated at NPTC was collected and FRoG forward calculations were compared against RS-MC for evaluation of 3D-Γ analysis and dose volume histogram (DVH) results. Currently, treatment design at NPTC is supported with fast variable RBE and LET

resultsSimple dosimetric tests against measurements of iso-energy layers and spread-out Bragg Peaks in water verified accuracy of FRoG and RS-MC. Among the patient cohort, average 3D-Γ applying 2%/2 mm, 3%/1.5 mm and 5%/1 mm were > 97%. DVH metrics for targets and OARs between FRoG and RayStation were in good agreement, with ∆D

conclusionAn auxiliary dose calculation system was successfully integrated into the clinical workflow at a Proteus®ONE IBA facility, in excellent agreement with measurements and RS-MC. FRoG may lead to further insight on D

Indexed as

ChildHumansOptic Nerve GliomaProton TherapyRadiotherapy DosageDose calculationGPULETPediatricsProton therapyTreatment planning

Identifiers

PMID35120547
PMCPMC8815260

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.