ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Verification of daily dose recalculation accuracy for an adaptive radiation therapy monitoring tool in helical tomotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.
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.
- Performance of a Vendor System for Systematic Offline Adaptive Breast Helical Radiotherapy.Cancers · 2026Article
- Inter-institutional variability in CT-to-mass-density conversion tables for helical tomotherapy: a national survey in Japan.Journal of radiation research · 2025Article
- Verification of daily dose recalculation accuracy for an adaptive radiation therapy monitoring tool in helical tomotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePreciseART, an adaptive radiation therapy (ART) software for helical tomotherapy (HT), was integrated into the Precision treatment planning system (Accuray, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA). It supports automatic monitoring of dose variations to both the target and organs at risk (OARs) throughout the treatment course. This study aims to verify the accuracy of PreciseART's automatic dose recalculation and assess the effectiveness of its notification function.
methodsThe Radixact X9's kVCT image-guided system (ClearRT) was used to acquire daily images for dose recalculations. We assessed the accuracy of PreciseART's automatic dose recalculation by comparing it with the treatment planning system (TPS) recalculation for the PTV70, spinal cord, and bilateral parotid glands. We also evaluated the efficacy of its notification function by comparing each dose metric for each notification color to TPS recalculation, assessing its role as a trigger tool.
resultsIn the phantom study, dosimetric analysis indicated no statistically significant differences between TPS and PreciseART recalculations (p > 0.05), with dose variations under 1.5%. Similarly, in the patient study (n = 10), no significant dosimetric discrepancies were found (p > 0.05), with a maximum variation of 2.3%. The notification system performed effectively, providing accurate notifications in accordance with predefined dose criteria.
conclusionsPreciseART's daily dose recalculation demonstrated good agreement with TPS recalculation, and its notification function is effective for identifying dose threshold compliance, supporting its use in clinical ART.
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.