ReviewRadiological physics and technology2022
Creation, evolution, and future challenges of ion beam therapy from a medical physicist's viewpoint (part 1). Introduction and Chapter 1. accelerator and beam delivery system.
Review in Radiological physics and technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Creation, evolution, and future challenges of ion beam therapy from a medical physicist's viewpoint (Part 3): Chapter 3. Clinical research, Chapter 4. Future challenges, Chapter 5. Discussion, and Conclusion.Radiological physics and technology · 2023Review
- Biomedical advances and future prospects of high-precision three-dimensional radiotherapy and four-dimensional radiotherapy.Proceedings of the Japan Academy. Series B, Physical and biological sciences · 2023Article
- Creation, evolution, and future challenges of ion beam therapy from a medical physicist's viewpoint (Part 2). Chapter 2. Biophysical model, treatment planning system and image guided radiotherapy.Radiological physics and technology · 2023Review
- Particle radiotherapy for breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radiation therapy for cancer using the Bragg peak of an ion beam has been making steady progress after being proposed by Robert Wilson in 1946. At the end of 2020, 12 dedicated treatment devices existed in operation worldwide, and approximately 40,000 patients have been treated with ion beams (mostly carbon ions). To date, ion beam therapy is superior to other treatments for rare cancers in the head and neck as well as bone and soft tissues; however, most recently, evidence submitted in Japan for the 2022 revision of public health insurance shows that ion beam therapy outperforms photon therapy for intractable common cancers such as pancreatic cancer and liver cancer. This may greatly expand its indications. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory in the United States started research of ion beam therapy, National Institute of Radiological Sciences in Japan built the first dedicated device Heavy Ion Accelerator in Chiba and started systematic clinical research, and GSI in Germany developed the scanning irradiation method and rotating gantry for the first time. This paper presents the history and future challenges of ion beam therapy in three fields: accelerator and beam delivery system, physical/biological model and treatment planning system, and clinical research. This study is divided into three parts describing the achievements and roles of the three laboratories. In Part 1, accelerator and beam delivery system are described.
Indexed as
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.