Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36344543›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Sharp dose profiles for high precision proton therapy using strongly focused proton beams.

Fardous Reaz, Kyrre Ness Sjobak, Eirik Malinen, Nina Frederike Jeppesen Edin, Erik Adli

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 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
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Ionizing radiation acoustic beam localization: one step towards "proton surgery".medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Improving Brain Tumor Treatment through Nanotechnology and Proton Therapy Using Laser-driven Accelerators through GEANT4 Simulation.Indian journal of nuclear medicine : IJNM : the official journal of the Society of Nuclear Medicine, India
    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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fardous ReazDepartment of Physics, University of Oslo, 0316, Oslo, Norway.
Kyrre Ness SjobakDepartment of Physics, University of Oslo, 0316, Oslo, Norway. k.n.sjobak@fys.uio.no.
Eirik MalinenDepartment of Physics, University of Oslo, 0316, Oslo, Norway.
Nina Frederike Jeppesen EdinDepartment of Physics, University of Oslo, 0316, Oslo, Norway.
Erik AdliDepartment of Physics, University of Oslo, 0316, Oslo, Norway.
University of Oslo · NO

Funding

Norges Forskningsråd 255196/F50
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The main objective of radiotherapy is to exploit the curative potential of ionizing radiation while inflicting minimal radiation-induced damage to healthy tissue and sensitive organs. Proton beam therapy has been developed to irradiate the tumor with higher precision and dose conformity compared to conventional X-ray irradiation. The dose conformity of this treatment modality may be further improved if narrower proton beams are used. Still, this is limited by multiple Coulomb scattering of protons through tissue. The primary aim of this work was to develop techniques to produce narrow proton beams and investigate the resulting dose profiles. We introduced and assessed three different proton beam shaping techniques: (1) metal collimators (100/150 MeV), (2) focusing of conventional- (100/150 MeV), and (3) focusing of high-energy (350 MeV, shoot-through) proton beams. Focusing was governed by the initial value of the Twiss parameter [Formula: see text] ([Formula: see text]), and can be implemented with magnetic particle accelerator optics. The dose distributions in water were calculated by Monte Carlo simulations using Geant4, and evaluated by target to surface dose ratio (TSDR) in addition to the transverse beam size ([Formula: see text]) at the target. The target was defined as the location of the Bragg peak or the focal point. The different techniques showed greatly differing dose profiles, where focusing gave pronouncedly higher relative target dose and efficient use of primary protons. Metal collimators with radii [Formula: see text] gave low TSDRs ([Formula: see text]) and large [Formula: see text]([Formula: see text]). In contrast, a focused beam of conventional ([Formula: see text]) energy produced a very high TSDR ([Formula: see text]) with similar [Formula: see text] as a collimated beam. High-energy focused beams were able to produce TSDRs [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] around 1.5 mm. From this study, it appears very attractive to implement magnetically focused proton beams in radiotherapy of small lesions or tumors in close vicinity to healthy organs at risk. This can also lead to a paradigm change in spatially fractionated radiotherapy. Magnetic focusing would facilitate FLASH irradiation due to low losses of primary protons.

Indexed as

Proton TherapyRadioactivityMonte Carlo MethodParticle AcceleratorsProtonsRadiotherapy DosageProtons

Identifiers

PMID36344543
PMCPMC9640624
OpenAlexW4308410310

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.