ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology
Treatment Time Optimization in Single Fraction Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy: A 10-Year Institutional Experience.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Stereotactic body radiotherapy for early-stage lung cancer: a systematic review on the choice of photon energy and linac flattened/unflattened beams.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Efficient deep learning-driven workflows for accelerated single-fraction radiation therapy planning of a solitary tumour in the lung.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- A deep learning approach for predicting linear accelerator output settings in automated radiotherapy planning of oligometastatic cancer.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Selection of motion management in liver stereotactic body radiotherapy and its impact on treatment time.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) delivered in a single fraction (SF) can be considered to have higher uncertainty given that the error probability is concentrated in a single session. This study aims to report the variation in technology and technique used and its effect on intrafraction motion based on a 10 years of experience in SF SABR. Methods and Materials: Records of patients receiving SF SABR delivered at our instruction between 2010 and 2019 were included. Treatment parameters were extracted from the patient management database by using an in-house script. Treatment time was defined as the time difference between the first image acquisition to the last beam off of a single session. The intrafraction variation was measured from the 3-dimensional couch displacement measured after the first cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquired during a treatment. Results: The number of SF SABR increased continuously from 2010 to 2019 and were mainly lung treatments. Treatment time was minimized by using volumetric modulated arc therapy, flattening filter-free dose rate, and coplanar field (24 ± 9 min). Treatment time increased as the number of CBCTs per session increased. The most common scenario involved both 2 and 3 CBCTs per session. On the average, a CBCT acquisition added 6 minutes to the treatment time. All treatments considered, the average intrafraction variation was 1.7 ± 1.6 mm. Conclusions: SF SABR usage increased with time in our institution. The intrafraction motion was acceptable and therefore a single fraction is an efficacious treatment option when considering SABR.
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.