ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Comparison of translation algorithms in determining maximum allowable CTV shifts for Real-Time Gated Proton Therapy (RGPT) robustness evaluation in prostate cancers.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2025. 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.
- Fluoroscopy-Guided Motion Management in Particle Therapy: Evolution, Challenges, and AI-Enabled Opportunities.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Review
- Real-time gated proton therapy: Introducing clinical workflow and failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA).Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Comparison of translation algorithms in determining maximum allowable CTV shifts for Real-Time Gated Proton Therapy (RGPT) robustness evaluation in prostate cancers.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionReal-Time Gated Proton Therapy (RGPT) is an active motion management technique that utilizes treatment gating and tumor tracking via fiducial markers. When performing RGPT treatment for prostate cancer, it is essential to account for the CTV displacement relative to the body in the clinical workflow. The workflow at the National Cancer Centre Singapore (NCCS) includes bone matching via CT-CBCT images, followed by fiducial matching via pulsed fluoroscopy (soft tissue matching), and finally, a robustness evaluation procedure to determine if the difference is within an allowable tolerance. In this study, we compare two CTV translation methods for robustness evaluation: (1) an in-house translation algorithm and (2) the RayStation "simulate organ motion" Deformable image registration (DIR) algorithm.
methodsNine RGPT prostate patient plans with CTV volumes ranging from 17.1 to 96.72 cm
resultsAcross all axes, there were no statistically significant differences between the two algorithms for all three dose metrics: CTV D
conclusionOur results demonstrate that the simpler in-house algorithm performs equivalently to the realistic DIR algorithm when simulating CTV motion in prostate cancers. Furthermore, the in-house algorithm completes the robustness evaluation two orders of magnitude faster than the DIR algorithm. This significant reduction in evaluation time is crucial especially when preparatory time efficiency is of paramount importance in a busy clinic.
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.