ArticleThe British journal of radiology2023
Implementation of automated personalised breast radiotherapy planning techniques with scripting in Raystation.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- A rule-based, feedback-driven framework for fully automated prostate VMAT planning.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Objective-function-guided automated VMAT planning reduces OAR dose, low-dose exposure, and inter-planner variability in breast radiotherapy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Development of automated whole breast 3D planning with tangential fields.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Determining the library size for the optimal output plan in the RapidPlan knowledge-based planning system using multicriteria optimization.The British journal of radiology · 2024Article
- Synthesizing Efficiency Tools in Radiotherapy to Increase Patient Flow: A Comprehensive Literature Review.Clinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 2024Review
- Comparative Study of Plan Robustness for Breast Radiotherapy: Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Plans with Robust Optimization versus Manual Flash Approach.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Fully automated volumetric modulated arc therapy planning for locally advanced rectal cancer: feasibility and efficiency.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
- Addressing the Global Expertise Gap in Radiation Oncology: The Radiation Planning Assistant.JCO global oncology · 2023Review
- Enhancing Patient-specific Quality Assurance in Carbon-ion Radiation Therapy: Recalculating Delivered Dose Distribution Using Log Data.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveImplement scripted automatic breast planning (AP) for breast techniques within Raystation.
methodsManual plans (MPs) were re-planned and compared with AP plans for whole breast (WB), partial breast (PB), hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy simultaneous integrated boost (VMAT SIB) and VMAT nodal plans.
resultsWB AP plans took 7 min comparing well to MP. One WB AP failed a mandatory dose constraint. Small statistically significant differences showed improved coverage for AP at expense of slightly hotter plans, however absolute differences were small (mean differences < 1% or D
conclusionAutomatic planning of modern breast techniques has been successfully introduced using a commercial planning system. AP plans are very similar to MP, requiring little manual interaction for most cases with significant timesaving potential. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Scripted breast plans produced within minutes for WB, PB, SIB and VMAT. Successfully introduced into large busy department. Plans similar to manual plans, requiring little manual interaction.
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.