ArticleZeitschrift fur medizinische Physik2025
Evaluation of proton and carbon ion beam models in TReatment Planning for Particles 4D (TRiP4D) referring to a commercial treatment planning system.
Article in Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comprehensive Robustness Evaluation of Proton and Carbon-Ion Plans in Thoracic Cancer Treatment.International journal of particle therapy · 2025Article
- Technical Note: Improving the workflow in a carbon ion therapy center with custom software for enhanced patient care.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the accuracy of the treatment planning system (TPS) TRiP4D in reproducing doses computed by the clinically used TPS SyngoRT.
methodsProton and carbon ion beam models in TRiP4D were converted from SyngoRT. Cubic plans with different depths in a water-tank phantom (WP) and previously treated and experimentally verified patient plans from SyngoRT were recalculated in TRiP4D. The target mean dose deviation (ΔD
resultsThe carbon and proton absorbed dose gamma passing rates (γ-PRs) were ≥99.93% and ΔD
conclusionThe absorbed dose between TRiP4D and SyngoRT were identical for both proton and carbon ion plans in the WP. Compared to SyngoRT, TRiP4D underestimated the target RBE-weighted dose; however more efficient in RBE-weighted dose calculation. Large variation for proton beam with range shifter was observed. TRiP4D will be used to evaluate doses delivered to moving targets. Uncertainties inherent to the 4D-dose reconstruction calculation are expected to be significantly larger than the dose errors reported here. For this reason, the residual differences between TRiP4D and SyngoRT observed in this study are considered acceptable. The study was approved by the Institutional Research Board of Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center (approval number SPHIC-MP-2020-04, RS).
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.