ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
An investigation into the feasibility and efficacy of stereotactic radiosurgery for 1-3 cm single brain lesions on the ring-mounted Halcyon LINAC.
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 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.
- Multi-institutional evaluation of isocentricity on a ring-gantry linear accelerator platform with double-stacked MLCs.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- An investigation into the feasibility and efficacy of stereotactic radiosurgery for 1-3 cm single brain lesions on the ring-mounted Halcyon LINAC.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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAn evaluation of the accuracy, safety, and efficiency of the Halcyon ring delivery system (RDS) for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) treatment to relatively small (1-3 cm) brain lesions.
methodsAfter completing the extensive in-house quality assurance checks including Winston-Lutz test and independent dose verification via MD Anderson IROC SRS head phantom irradiation on Halcyon, fifteen brain SRS patients previously treated with a single dose of 20 Gy on TrueBeam (6MV-FFF) with HyperArc geometry were retrospectively replanned on Halcyon (6MV-FFF). Plan quality metrics including conformity index (CI), gradient index (GI), gradient distance (GD), PTV coverage, gross tumor volume (GTV) dose, heterogeneity index (HI), and doses to organs-at-risk (OAR) including normal brain dose were evaluated. Patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) and independent dose verification via in-house Monte Carlo (MC) 2nd checks were performed.
resultsThe Halcyon was able to provide highly conformal brain SRS plans. When compared to TrueBeam, CI, planning target volume (PTV) coverage, GTV dose (mean and minimum), HI, and doses to brainstem, optic pathway, and cochlea were statistically insignificant. Statistically significant increases in GI (3.76 vs. 3.25, p < 0.001), GD (0.56 cm vs. 0.48 cm, p = 0.001), and V
conclusionsHalcyon brain SRS plans provided a similar plan quality compared to HyperArc plans, although it demonstrated an inferior intermediate dose fall off thus slightly higher V
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.