ArticleMedical physics2025
Impact of range uncertainties for intensity-modulated mixed electron-photon radiation therapy.
Article in Medical physics, 2025. 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.
- Impact of range uncertainties for intensity-modulated mixed electron-photon radiation therapy.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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn the context of mixed electron-photon radiation therapy (MBRT), while the necessity of robust optimization to setup uncertainties is well-established, range uncertainties have yet to be investigated. PURPOSE: This study provides the first assessment of the impact of range uncertainties on MBRT plans.
methodsThe percent depth dose of 2 electron beams (6 MeV and 20 MeV) and 1 photon beam (6 MV) are calculated by Monte Carlo using EGSnrc in slab phantoms. Range uncertainties are simulated by generating two copies of the phantom with each voxel's mass density upscaled or downscaled by 3.5%. Two clinical plans for a leg sarcoma case and a post-mastectomy breast case were replanned with MBRT with 2 optimization methods: once without robust optimization and once with robust to both setup and range uncertainties.
resultsDose discrepancies between the percent depth doses of density-scaled phantoms and the nominal phantom were found to be much larger for electron beams than photons with maximum differences of 6.9% (6 MeV) and 5.5% (20 MeV) versus 1.6% (6 MV) of the maximum dose. In both clinical cases, the region of largest dose discrepancy between the range and nominal scenarios was found to be along the electron's beam path, starting immediately downstream from the target and within a few cm. Even without robust optimization, dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of all relevant structures were not meaningfully degraded under range scenarios. In the breast plan, the ipsilateral lung's V20Gy increased by 1.9% under the worst range scenario. No substantial change in the DVHs of range scenarios were observed between the robustly and non-robustly optimized plan.
conclusionIn the two investigated cases, robustness to range uncertainties was not improved in robustly optimized versus non-robustly optimized plans. A larger study comprising more patients and treatment sites remains to be performed to adequately assess the necessity of robust optimization of MBRT plans to range uncertainties.
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.