ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2024
Evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging derived synthetic computed tomography for proton therapy planning in prostate cancer.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dosimetric evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging based synthetic computed tomography for head and neck photon and proton therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Clinical implementation of deep learning-based synthetic CT for MRI-only volumetric modulated arc therapy in head and neck and pelvic cancer patients.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- The promise of artificial intelligence-assisted radiotherapy for prostate cancer in Morocco: a transformational opportunity.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Feasibility of Magnetic Resonance-based Synthetic Computed Tomography for Proton Dose Calculation in Prostate Cancer.Journal of medical physicsArticle
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
Background and purpose: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-only workflow is used in photon radiotherapy (RT) today, but not yet for protons. To bring MRI-only proton RT into clinical use, proton dose calculation on MRI-derived synthetic CT (sCT) must be validated. We evaluated proton dose calculation accuracy of prostate cancer proton plans using a commercially available sCT generator already validated for photon planning. Materials and methods: The retrospective planning study included 10 prostate cancer patients who underwent MRI and planning CT (pCT) before RT. sCT were generated from the MRI with MRI Planner v2.3, and compared to pCT using structural mean absolute error (MAE). The pCT was used to create one-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) photon plan and two-field intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) proton plan. Each plan was recalculated on the sCT and compared to pCT doses. Dose volume histogram parameters, gamma analyses and range differences were evaluated. Results: Median MAE for the body contour was 71 HU. Dose differences between pCT and sCT were small and similar for VMAT and IMPT plans. Median (range) gamma pass rates were lower for IMPT plans with 95.8 (89.3-98.7) % compared to VMAT plans with 99.4 (91.2-99.6) %. The proton range difference was 1.0 (interquartile range -0.1 - 0.2) mm deeper for sCT compared to the reference. Conclusion: MRI-only IMPT planning for prostate cancer seems feasible in a clinical setting for the evaluated beam arrangement and sCT generator. More patients and evaluation of other beam arrangements are needed for a more general conclusion.
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.