ArticleCancers2024
Proton Therapy Adaptation of Perisinusoidal and Brain Areas in the Cyclotron Centre Bronowice in Krakow: A Dosimetric Analysis.
Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Offline Plan Adaptation in Robustly Optimized CBCT-Guided Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Beam Therapy: Lessons From a Real-World Cohort.Advances in radiation 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Applying a proton beam in radiotherapy enables precise irradiation of the tumor volume, but only for continuous assessment of changes in patient anatomy. Proton beam range uncertainties in the treatment process may originate not only from physical beam properties but also from patient-specific factors such as tumor shrinkage, edema formation and sinus filling, which are not incorporated in tumor volume safety margins. In this paper, we evaluated variations in dose distribution in proton therapy resulting from the differences observed in the control tomographic images and the dosimetric influence of applied adaptive treatment. The data from weekly computed tomography (CT) control scans of 21 patients, which serve as the basis for adaptive radiotherapy, were used for this study. Dosimetric analysis of adaptive proton therapy (APT) was performed on patients with head and neck (H&N) area tumors who were divided into two groups: patients with tumors in the sinus/nasal area and patients with tumors in the brain area. For this analysis, the reference treatment plans were forward-calculated using weekly control CT scans. A comparative evaluation of organ at risk (OAR) dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters, as well as conformity and homogeneity indices, was conducted between the initial and recalculated dose distributions to assess the necessity of the adaptation process in terms of dosimetric parameters. Changes in PTV volume after replanning were observed in seventeen patient cases, showing a discrepancy of over 1 cm3 in ten cases. In these cases, tumor progression occurred in 30% of patients, while regression was observed in 70%. The statistical analysis indicates that the use of the adaptive planning procedure results in a statistically significant improvement in dose distribution, particularly in the PTV area. The findings led to the conclusion that the adaptive procedure provides significant advantages in terms of dose distribution within the treated volume. However, when considering the entire patient group, APT did not result in a statistically significant dose reduction in OARs (α = 0.05).
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.