Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35561700›Full record

ReviewPhysics in medicine and biology2022

Reflections on beam configuration optimization for intensity-modulated proton therapy.

Wenhua Cao, Humberto Rocha, Radhe Mohan, Gino Lim, Hadis M Goudarzi, Brígida C Ferreira, Joana M Dias

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Physics in medicine and biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Wenhua CaoDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States of America.
Humberto RochaUniversity of Coimbra, CeBER, Faculty of Economics, Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-5981-4469
Radhe MohanDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3746-4557
Gino LimDepartment of Industrial Engineering, University of Houston, Houston, United States of America.
Hadis M GoudarziDepartment of Industrial Engineering, University of Houston, Houston, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9490-0522
Brígida C FerreiraUniversity of Coimbra, INESC Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-7988-7545
Joana M DiasUniversity of Coimbra, CeBER, Faculty of Economics, Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-2517-7905

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
MDACC Clinical and Research Physics SupportU19CA021239 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI HONG, THEODORE S · 2014 to 2018
$11.2M
Optimizing the Biological Effectiveness of Intensity-Modulated Proton TherapyR03CA256220 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI CAO, WENHUA · 2021 to 2022
$159k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS R03 CA256220NCI NIH HHS U19 CA021239
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Presumably, intensity-modulated proton radiotherapy (IMPT) is the most powerful form of proton radiotherapy. In the current state of the art, IMPT beam configurations (i.e. the number of beams and their directions) are, in general, chosen subjectively based on prior experience and practicality. Beam configuration optimization (BCO) for IMPT could, in theory, significantly enhance IMPT's therapeutic potential. However, BCO is complex and highly computer resource-intensive. Some algorithms for BCO have been developed for intensity-modulated photon therapy (IMRT). They are rarely used clinically mainly because the large number of beams typically employed in IMRT renders BCO essentially unnecessary. Moreover, in the newer form of IMRT, volumetric modulated arc therapy, there are no individual static beams. BCO is of greater importance for IMPT because it typically employs a very small number of beams (2-4) and, when the number of beams is small, BCO is critical for improving plan quality. However, the unique properties and requirements of protons, particularly in IMPT, make BCO challenging. Protons are more sensitive than photons to anatomic changes, exhibit variable relative biological effectiveness along their paths, and, as recently discovered, may spare the immune system. Such factors must be considered in IMPT BCO, though doing so would make BCO more resource intensive and make it more challenging to extend BCO algorithms developed for IMRT to IMPT. A limited amount of research in IMPT BCO has been conducted; however, considerable additional work is needed for its further development to make it truly effective and computationally practical. This article aims to provide a review of existing BCO algorithms, most of which were developed for IMRT, and addresses important requirements specific to BCO for IMPT optimization that necessitate the modification of existing approaches or the development of new effective and efficient ones.

Indexed as

Proton TherapyRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedPhotonsProtonsRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedProtonsbeam angle optimization (BAO)IMPTproton therapyRBErobustness

Identifiers

PMID35561700
PMCPMC11827663

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.