Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36721485›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of particle therapy2023

Treatment Planning of Bulky Tumors Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton GRID Therapy.

Aditya Halthore, Zachary Fellows, Anh Tran, Curtiland Deville, Jean L Wright, Jeffrey Meyer, Heng Li, Khadija Sheikh

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of particle therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Proton minibeam radiotherapy: a review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Aditya HalthoreDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Zachary FellowsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Johns Hopkins Proton Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Anh TranDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Johns Hopkins Proton Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Curtiland DevilleDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Jean L WrightDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Jeffrey MeyerDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Heng LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Khadija SheikhDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Johns Hopkins Medicine · USJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To compare spatially fractionated radiation therapy (GRID) treatment planning techniques using proton pencil-beam-scanning (PBS) and photon therapy. Materials and Methods: PBS and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) GRID plans were retrospectively generated for 5 patients with bulky tumors. GRID targets were arranged along the long axis of the gross tumor, spaced 2 and 3 cm apart, and treated with a prescription of 18 Gy. PBS plans used 2- to 3-beam multiple-field optimization with robustness evaluation. Dosimetric parameters including peak-to-edge ratio (PEDR), ratio of dose to 90% of the valley to dose to 10% of the peak VPDR(D90/D10), and volume of normal tissue receiving at least 5 Gy (V5) and 10 Gy (V10) were calculated. The peak-to-valley dose ratio (PVDR), VPDR(D90/D10), and organ-at-risk doses were prospectively assessed in 2 patients undergoing PBS-GRID with pretreatment quality assurance computed tomography (QACT) scans. Results: PBS and VMAT GRID plans were generated for 5 patients with bulky tumors. Gross tumor volume values ranged from 826 to 1468 cm Conclusions: The PEDR was significantly higher for PBS than VMAT plans, indicating lower target edge dose. Normal tissue mean dose was significantly lower with PBS than VMAT. PBS GRID may result in lower normal tissue dose compared with VMAT plans, allowing for further dose escalation in patients with bulky disease.

Indexed as

bulky tumorsGRIDprotonspatial fractionation

Identifiers

PMID36721485
PMCPMC9875826
OpenAlexW4312189600

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.