ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2024
Evaluation of clinical parallel workflow in online adaptive MR-guided Radiotherapy: A detailed assessment of treatment session times.
Article in Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Daily image-guided carbon ion stereotactic radiotherapy of hepatocellular carcinoma: paving the way for MR-guided online adaptive treatment.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Automated planning architectures for online adaptive radiotherapy: A narrative review of the ethos and unity/Monaco platforms.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Review
- Article
- MRI-enhanced online adaptive radiotherapy by virtual integration of a standalone MRI simulator and CBCT-based treatment delivery.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Evaluating the role of plan complexity metrics in online adaptive radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer patients.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Magnetic resonance-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy (MRIgSBRT) for nodal disease in oligometastatic setting: a single-institution study.Clinical & experimental metastasis · 2026Article
- AI-driven online adaptive radiotherapy in prostate cancer treatment: considerations on activity time and dosimetric benefits.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Evaluating CBCT-Guided Adaptive Radiotherapy for Pancreatic Cancer Using Synthetic CBCT Data.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Evolving Trends and Patterns of Utilization of Magnetic Resonance-Guided Radiotherapy at a Single Institution, 2018-2024.Cancers · 2025Article
- Feasibility and time gain of implementing artificial intelligence-based delineation tools in daily magnetic resonance image-guided adaptive prostate cancer radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Feasibility and Acute Toxicity of Hypo-Fractionated Radiotherapy on 0.35T MR-LINAC: The First Prospective Study in Spain.Cancers · 2024Article
- Case report: Intrafraction dose-guided tracking for gastrointestinal organ-at-risk isotoxicity delivery on an MR-guided radiotherapy system.Frontiers in 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Advancements in MRI-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) enable clinical parallel workflows (CPW) for online adaptive planning (oART), allowing medical physicists (MPs), physicians (MDs), and radiation therapists (RTTs) to perform their tasks simultaneously. This study evaluates the impact of this upgrade on the total treatment time by analyzing each step of the current 0.35T-MRgRT workflow. Methods: The time process of the workflow steps for 254 treatment fractions in 0.35 MRgRT was examined. Patients have been grouped based on disease site, breathing modality (BM) (BHI or FB), and fractionation (stereotactic body RT [SBRT] or standard fractionated long course [LC]). The time spent for the following workflow steps in Adaptive Treatment (ADP) was analyzed: Patient Setup Time (PSt), MRI Acquisition and Matching (MRt), MR Re-contouring Time (RCt), Re-Planning Time (RPt), Treatment Delivery Time (TDt). Also analyzed was the timing of treatments that followed a Simple workflow (SMP), without the online re-planning (PSt + MRt + TDt.). Results: The time analysis revealed that the ADP workflow (median: 34 min) is significantly (p < 0.05) longer than the SMP workflow (19 min). The time required for ADP treatments is significantly influenced by TDt, constituting 40 % of the total time. The oART steps (RCt + RPt) took 11 min (median), representing 27 % of the entire procedure. Overall, 79.2 % of oART fractions were completed in less than 45 min, and 30.6 % were completed in less than 30 min. Conclusion: This preliminary analysis, along with the comparative assessment against existing literature, underscores the potential of CPW to diminish the overall treatment duration in MRgRT-oART. Additionally, it suggests the potential for CPW to promote a more integrated multidisciplinary approach in the execution of oART.
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.