ArticleF1000Research2024
Comparison of treatment planning for stereotactic radiosurgery and stereotactic body radiation therapy techniques with 2.5mm and 5mm multileaf collimator (MLC): A pilot study.
Article in F1000Research, 2024. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Elekta micro-multileaf collimator (mMLC) known as apex for planning stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS)/stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT)/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) provides excellent dose distribution; however, it offers disadvantages such as prolonged treatment duration and technical errors in terms of mMLC and gantry calibration, which adds to the total treatment duration. Hence, we aimed to compare the treatment planning performed with the 2.5mm mMLC and 5mm MLC known as Agility for brain and lung targets treated with SRS and SBRT in Elekta Versa high definition (HD). Methods: The study included 10 patients, five each with brain and lung targets. Two treatment plans were performed for each case using Elekta's Monaco (5.11.03) treatment planning system (TPS) with 2.5mm and 5mm MLC. An X-ray photon beam of energy 6FFF was used for planning purposes with various gantry, couch, and collimator combinations. These two plans were compared using target coverage (TC), conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), gradient index (GI), and organ at risk (OAR) doses. Results: No significant differences were found in the target coverage, CI, HI, or OAR doses in either MLC design. Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with a 5 mm MLC provided equivalent tumor coverage with an additional number of monitor units. OAR doses were comparable in both MLC widths for brain targets, whereas for lung targets, OAR doses were slightly lower with 2.5mm mMLC. GI was superior in the 2.5mm mMLC compared to the 5mm MLC giving a steep falloff in the dose distributions (p = 0.158). Conclusions: The TC, CI, HI, and OAR doses were similar in both 2.5mm and 5mm based VMAT plans. The gradient index was better in the 2.5mm mMLC resulting in steep dose gradients, which further reduced the isodose volumes. Therefore, a 5mm MLC (agility) can also be used for SRS/SBRT treatment planning, with a further reduction in the gradient index. However, the study must be extended further with more samples and multiple comparison parameters.Clinical Trials Registry - India, registration number CTRI/2021/11/037842, registration date. 8
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.