ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
Transmission beam planning for improved robustness and efficiency in proton therapy for head and neck cancer.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Optimizing head and neck cancer (HNC) plans with single-energy proton beams that fully traverse the patient (transmission beams) can improve robustness and delivery efficiency, complementing conventional approaches. Materials and Methods: Experimental measurements, validated with Monte Carlo (MC) simulations, were carried out on a uniform water-equivalent plastic phantom (RW3) containing a metal component (2-Euro coins) irradiated with a single high energy proton field (228.6 MeV) to verify the transmission beam concept. 28 nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) were then optimized with nine coplanar single-energy fields (228.6 MeV), positioning the Bragg peaks well beyond the patient body, so called transmission beam mode. These plans (IMPT-TB) were compared to conventional IMPT and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) photon plans in terms of dose distributions quality, expected organ at risk (OAR) toxicity, robustness and delivery time. Results: Transmission beams minimized dose perturbation by metal objects (∼7% max relative variation at 18 cm depth). IMPT-TB plans achieved comparable dose distribution and expected toxicities to IMPT, increasing the dose bath (+96 % vs. IMPT) but remaining significantly lower than VMAT (-31.4 %). For 94 % of patients (N = 26), IMPT-TB met at least one additional dose constraint that the corresponding IMPT plan failed to satisfy. Moreover, in the analyzed subgroup (N = 5), IMPT-TB plans delivered with our synchrotron exhibit a 67 % reduction in beam time compared to IMPT plans. Conclusions: IMPT-TB plans demonstrated enhanced robustness and significantly faster delivery compared to IMPT. Transmission beams could be clinically implemented, also in conjunction with standard IMPT, for proton radiation treatment of NPC.
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.