ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2024
Benefit of range uncertainty reduction in robust optimisation for proton therapy of brain, head-and-neck and breast cancer patients.
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 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.
- Assessing accuracy and artefacts in proton stopping power ratio images across four computed tomography imaging workflows using a head-sized electron density phantom.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2026Article
- Comparison of two dual-energy CT-based methods for proton stopping-power ratio estimation in brain cancer patients with metal implants.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2025Article
- Insights from initial experience for nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients treated with proton therapy.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Purpose: The primary cause of range uncertainty in proton therapy is inaccuracy in estimating the stopping-power ratio from computed tomography. This study examined the impact on dose-volume metrics by reducing range uncertainty in robust optimisation for a diverse patient cohort and determined the level of range uncertainty that resulted in a relevant reduction in doses to organs-at-risk (OARs). Materials and Methods: The effect of reducing range uncertainty on OAR doses was evaluated by robustly optimising six proton plans with varying range uncertainty levels (ranging from 3.5% in the original plan to 1.0%), keeping setup uncertainty fixed. All plans used the initial clinical treatment plan's beam directions and optimisation objectives and were optimised until a clinically acceptable plan was achieved across all setup and range scenarios. The effect of reduced range uncertainty on dose-volume metrics for OARs near the target was evaluated. This study included 30 brain cancer patients, as well as five head-and-neck and five breast cancer patients, investigating the relevance of reducing range uncertainty when different setup uncertainties were used. Results: Lowering range uncertainty slightly reduced the nominal dose to surrounding tissue. For body volume receiving 80% of the prescribed dose, reducing range uncertainty from 3.5% to 2.0% resulted in a median decrease of 4 cm Conclusions: Reducing range uncertainty in robust optimisation showed a reduction in dose to OARs. The clinical relevance depends on the affected organs and the clinical dose constraints.
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.