ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2024
Effect of different optimization parameters in single isocenter multiple brain metastases radiosurgery.
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2024. 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.
- Evaluation of EPID-Based Transmission and DLG Correction Methods for Dosimetric Verification in HyperArc Single-Isocenter Multiple Target Radiosurgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Neurofilament light and glial fibrillary acidic protein do not reflect neuronal or glial damage during different intracranial radiotherapy regimes: a pilot study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAutomated treatment planning for multiple brain metastases differs from traditional planning approaches. It is therefore helpful to understand which parameters for optimization are available and how they affect the plan quality. This study aims to provide a reference for designing multi-metastases treatment plans and to define quality endpoints for benchmarking the technique from a scientific perspective.
methodsIn all, 20 patients with a total of 183 lesions were retrospectively planned according to four optimization scenarios. Plan quality was evaluated using common plan quality parameters such as conformity index, gradient index and dose to normal tissue. Therefore, different scenarios with combinations of optimization parameters were evaluated, while taking into account dependence on the number of treated lesions as well as influence of different beams.
resultsDifferent scenarios resulted in minor differences in plan quality. With increasing number of lesions, the number of monitor units increased, so did the dose to healthy tissue and the number of interlesional dose bridging in adjacent metastases. Highly modulated cases resulted in 4-10% higher V
conclusionAlthough no clinically relevant differences in parameters where found, we identified some variation in the dose distributions of the different scenarios. Less complex scenarios generated visually more dose overlap; therefore, a more complex scenario may be preferred although differences in the quality metrics appear minor.
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.