ArticleJournal of medical physics
Evaluation of Normal Tissue Objective Function for Treatment Planning of Solitary Brain Metastasis Using Intensity-modulated Radiosurgery Techniques.
Article in Journal of medical physics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative evaluation of normal tissue objective functions in robotic radiosurgery planning for solitary brain tumors.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Optimization of Normal Tissue Objectives (NTO) in HyperArc Radiosurgery for Brain Oligometastases: A Systematic Analysis of the Trade-Offs among Dosimetric Quality, Plan Complexity, and Treatment Efficiency.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to systematically examine the normal tissue objective (NTO) function by comparing its variations for planning solitary brain metastasis with intensity-modulated and volumetric-modulated arc radiosurgery techniques. Materials and Methods: Twenty-two cases were retrospectively planned with two NTO parameter sets named A and B using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. The Type A set used slope, k = 0.4 mm Results: Brain doses were significantly lower for VMAT than for IMRT. R50% was more favorable for VMAT than for IMRT for each planning target volume (PTV). The mean FI was comparable between the corresponding IMRT and VMAT plan types. PCI was better for the IMRT_A plan type. PIDS was significantly lower for Type B plans than Type A for both techniques. For PTVs <3 cm Conclusions: The application of NTO variations demonstrated varied dosimetry for IMRT and VMAT techniques. The NTO parameter variations produced field size and/or beamlet size/shape variations. The strict NTO parameter set generated more conformal beam apertures to reduce the brain dose. VMAT plan types showed significantly lower brain doses and better dosimetry for all target sizes.
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.