ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2024
Feasibility of dose calculation for treatment plans using electron density maps from a novel dual-layer detector spectral CT simulator.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application and Development of Spectral CT in Target Delineation for Lung Cancer Radiotherapy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Photon-counting detector computing tomography in treatment planning of head-and-neck cancer.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Learning CT-to-electron-density mapping for radiotherapy treatment planning using neural networks.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Combined single- and dual-energy CT workflow for dose calculation in radiotherapy.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2025Article
- IR808-ATIPA: A Dual-Function Agent for Enhanced Computed Tomography Imaging and Radiotherapy Sensitization in Cervical Cancer Treatment.Biomaterials research · 2025Article
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
backgroundConventional single-energy CT can only provide a raw estimation of electron density (ED) for dose calculation by developing a calibration curve that simply maps the HU values to ED values through their correlations. Spectral CT, also known as dual-energy CT (DECT) or multi-energy CT, can generate a series of quantitative maps, such as ED maps. Using spectral CT for radiotherapy simulations can directly acquire ED information without developing specific calibration curves. The purpose of this study is to assess the feasibility of utilizing electron density (ED) maps generated by a novel dual-layer detector spectral CT simulator for dose calculation in radiotherapy treatment plans.
methods30 patients from head&neck, chest, and pelvic treatment sites were selected retrospectively, and all of them underwent spectral CT simulation. Treatment plans based on conventional CT images were transplanted to ED maps with the same structure set, including planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs), and the dose distributions were then recalculated. The differences in dose and volume histogram (DVH) parameters of the PTV and OARs between the two types of plans were analyzed and compared. Besides, gamma analysis between these plans was performed by using MEPHYSTO Navigator software.
resultsIn terms of PTV, the homogeneity index (HI), gradient index (GI), D
conclusionCompared to conventional treatment plans relying on CT images, plans utilizing ED maps demonstrated similar dosimetric quality. However, the latter approach enables direct utilization in dose calculation without the requirements of establishing and selecting a specific Hounsfield unit (HU) to ED calibration curve, providing an advantage in clinical applications.
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.