ArticleMedical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists
Proton pencil beam scanning craniospinal irradiation (CSI) with a single posterior brain beam: Dosimetry and efficiency.
Article in Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study explores the feasibility and potential dosimetric and time efficiency benefit of proton Pencil Beam Scanning (PBS) craniospinal irradiation with a single posterior-anterior (SPA) brain field. The SPA approach was compared to our current clinical protocol using Bilateral Posterior Oblique brain fields (BPO). Ten consecutive patients were simulated in the head-first supine position on a long BOS frame and scanned using 3 mm CT slice thickness. A customized thermoplastic mask immobilized the patient's head, neck, and shoulders. A vac-lock was used to secure the legs. PBS proton plans were robustly optimized with 3mm setup errors and 3.5% range uncertainties in the Eclipse V15.6 treatment planning system (n = 12 scenarios). In order to achieve a smooth gradient dose match at the junction area, at least 5 cm overlap region was maintained between the segments and 5 mm uncertainty along the cranial-cauda direction was applied to each segment independently as additional robust optimization scenarios. The brain doses were planned by SPA or BPO fields. All spine segments were planned with a single PA field. Dosimetric differences between the BPO and SPA approaches were compared, and the treatment efficiency was analyzed according to timestamps of beam delivery. Results: The maximum brain dose increases to 111.1 ± 2.1% for SPA vs. 109.0 ± 1.7% for BPO (p < 0.01). The dose homogeneity index (D5/D95) in brain CTV was comparable between techniques (1.037 ± 0.010 for SPA and 1.033 ± 0.008 for BPO). Lens received lower maximum doses by 2.88 ± 1.58 Gy (RBE) (left) and 2.23 ± 1.37 Gy (RBE) (right) in the SPA plans (p < 0.01). No significant cochlea dose change was observed. SPA reduced the treatment time by more than 4 minutes on average and ranged from 2 to 10 minutes, depending on the beam waiting and allocation time. SPA is dosimetrically comparable to BPO, with reduced lens doses at the cost of slightly higher dose inhomogeneity and hot spots. Implementation of SPA is feasible and can help to improve the treatment efficiency of PBS CSI treatment.
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.