ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Quantification of Treatment Plan Deliverability in Breast Volumetric-modulated Arc Therapy With Agility Multi-leaf Collimator.
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Comparative Analysis of Peripheral Dose Measurement Between Apex and Agility Collimators in Linear Accelerators.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2026Article
- Dosimetric advantages of dual arc increments for head and neck volumetric-modulated arc therapy in the Monaco treatment planning system.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Impact of Heart Dose on Survival in Palliative Radiotherapy for Bone Metastases: Propensity Score-matched Analysis.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimThe aim was to assess the complexity of breast volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans using various indices and to evaluate their performance through gamma analysis in predicting plan deliverability. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 285 VMAT plans for 260 patients were created using the VersaHD™ linear accelerator with a Monaco treatment planning system. Corresponding verification plans were generated using the ArcCHECK
resultsThe average GPR values for all plans were 97.7%, 89.9%, and 78.0% for the 2 mm/2%, 1 mm/2%, and 1 mm/1% criteria, respectively. While most complexity metrics exhibited weak correlations with GPRs under the 2 mm/2% criterion, leaf sequence variability (LSV), plan-averaged beam area (PA), converted area metric (CAM), and edge area metric (EAM) demonstrated the most robust performance, with Pearson's correlation coefficients of 0.57, 0.50, -0.70, and -0.56, respectively.
conclusionMetrics related to beam aperture size and irregularity, such as LSV, PA, CAM and EAM, proved to be reasonable predictors of plan deliverability in breast VMAT.
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.