ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Assessing population-based to personalized planning strategies for head and neck adaptive radiotherapy.
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.
- Best Practice: CT-guided Adaptive Radiotherapy Reference Planning on the Ethos Platform.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Review
- Improving efficiency in lung SAbR planning using integrated tools for X-ray based adaptive radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Assessing population-based to personalized planning strategies for head and neck adaptive radiotherapy.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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeOptimal head-and-neck cancer (HNC) treatment planning requires accurate and feasible planning goals to meet dosimetric constraints and generate robust online adaptive treatment plans. A new x-ray-based adaptive radiotherapy (ART) treatment planning system (TPS) version 2.0 emulator includes novel methods to drive the planning process including the revised intelligent optimization engine algorithm (IOE2). HNC is among the most challenging and complex sites and heavily depends on planner skill and experience to successfully generate a reference plan. Therefore, we evaluate the new TPS performance via conventionally accepted planning strategies with/without artificial intelligence (AI) and knowledge-based planning (KBP).
methodsOur institution has a pre-clinical release of the Varian Ethos2.0 TPS emulator which includes several changes that may affect current planning strategies. Twenty definitive and post-operative HNC patients were retrospectively selected with a two or three-level simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) dosing scheme. Patients were replanned in the emulator using population-based, KBP-guided with/without human intervention and AI-guided planning goals. These planning strategies were compared both dosimetrically and for plan deliverability.
resultsAll strategies generally demonstrated acceptable plan quality with KBP- and AI-guided goals offering enhanced dosimetric sparing in organs-at-risk (OAR). The average contralateral parotid gland mean dose was 20.0 ± 6.1 Gy (p < 0.001) for population-based and 15.0 ± 6.1 Gy (p = n.s.) for KBP-with human intervention versus 15.1 ± 7.4 Gy for clinical plans. Target coverage, minimum dose, and plan hotspot were acceptable in all cases. KBP-enabled strategy demonstrated higher modulation and faster optimization time than both population-based and AI-guided strategies.
conclusionSimply entering population, automatic KBP-enabled or AI-generated planning goals into the new Ethos2.0 TPS produced dosimetrically compliant plans, with AI-guided goals demonstrating the most OAR sparing. Several of these approaches are easy to translate to other treatment sites and will help lower the barrier to entry for x-ray-based online-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.