ArticleMedical physics2023
An optimized framework for cone-beam computed tomography-based online evaluation for proton therapy.
Article in Medical physics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient outcome prognosis for external beam radiation therapy using CBCT-based radiomics: a systematic review.Biomedical physics & engineering express · 2026Pooled it
- Dosimetric impact of daily skin surface variations in kidney stereotactic ablative proton therapy.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Synthetic computed tomography techniques for adaptive proton therapy in head and neck cancers.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- The effect of interfractional variation on delivered dose with ultrahypofractionated pencil beam scanning proton therapy for localized prostate cancer.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- A planning approach for online adaptive proton therapy to cope with cone beam computed tomography inaccuracies.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Comparing methods to improve cone-beam computed tomography for dose calculations in adaptive proton therapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Exploration of an adaptive proton therapy strategy using CBCT with the concept of digital twins.Physics in medicine and biology · 2025Article
- Deep learning-based Fast Volumetric Image Generation for Image-guided Proton Radiotherapy.IEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2024Article
- A treatment-site-specific evaluation of commercial synthetic computed tomography solutions for proton therapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- A retrospective study on the investigation of potential dosimetric benefits of online adaptive proton therapy for head and neck cancer.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Evaluating a CBCT Correction Algorithm for Adaptive Radiotherapy.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical evidence has demonstrated that proton therapy can achieve comparable tumor control probabilities compared to conventional photon therapy but with the added benefit of sparing healthy tissues. However, proton therapy is sensitive to inter-fractional anatomy changes. Online pre-fraction evaluation can effectively verify proton dose before delivery to patients, but there is a lack of guidelines for implementing this workflow. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to develop a cone-beam CT-based (CBCT) online evaluation framework for proton therapy that enables knowledge transparency and evaluates the efficiency and accuracy of each essential component.
methodsTwenty-three patients with various lesion sites were included to conduct a retrospective study of implementing the proposed CBCT evaluation framework for the clinic. The framework was implemented on the RayStation 11B Research platform. Two synthetic CT (sCT) methods, corrected CBCT (cCBCT), and virtual CT (vCT), were used, and the ground truth images were acquired from the same-day deformed quality assurance CT (dQACT) for the comparisons. The evaluation metrics for the framework include time efficiency, dose-difference distributions (gamma passing rates), and water equivalent thickness (WET) distributions.
resultsThe mean online CBCT evaluation times were 1.6 ± 0.3 min and 1.9 ± 0.4 min using cCBCT and vCT, respectively. The dose calculation and deformable image registration dominated the evaluation efficiency, and accounted for 33% and 30% of the total evaluation time, respectively. The sCT generation took another 19% of the total time. Gamma passing rates were greater than 91% and 97% using 1%/1 mm and 2%/2 mm criteria, respectively. When the appropriate sCT was chosen, the target mean WET difference from the reference were less than 0.5 mm. The appropriate sCT method choice determined the uncertainty for the framework, with the cCBCT being superior for head-and-neck patient evaluation and vCT being better for lung patient evaluation.
conclusionsAn online CBCT evaluation framework was proposed to identify the use of the optimal sCT algorithm regarding efficiency and dosimetry accuracy. The framework is extendable to adopt advanced imaging methods and has the potential to support online adaptive radiotherapy to enhance patient benefits. It could be implemented into clinical use in the future.
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.