ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
Comparing methods to improve cone-beam computed tomography for dose calculations in adaptive proton therapy.
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. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantitative stability of CT numbers in novel cone-beam CT: An intra-institution cross-scanner and longitudinal analysis.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Deep learning-based synthetic-CT-free photon dose calculation in MR-guided radiotherapy: A proof-of-concept study.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Imaging, automation and workflow challenges for online adaptive proton therapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Synthetic computed tomography techniques for adaptive proton therapy in head and neck cancers.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Triggered plan adaptation using multi-image optimization for improved robustness in head-and-neck cancer proton therapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Evaluating a CBCT Correction Algorithm for Adaptive Radiotherapy.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
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 and purpose: Proton therapy requires dose monitoring, often performed based on repeated computed tomography (reCT) scans. However, reCT scans may not accurately reflect the internal anatomy and patient positioning during treatment. In-room cone-beam CT (CBCT) offers a potential alternative, but its low image quality limits proton dose calculation accuracy. This study therefore evaluated different methods for quality-improvement of CBCTs (synthetic CTs; sCTs) for use in adaptive proton therapy of head-and-neck cancer patients. Materials and methods: Thirty-five CBCTs from twenty-four head-and-neck cancer patients were used to assess four sCT generation methods: an intensity-correction method, two deformable image registration methods, and a deep learning-based method. The sCTs were evaluated against same-day reCTs for CT number accuracy, proton range accuracy through single-spot plans, and dose recalculation accuracy of clinical plans via dose-volume-histogram (DVH) parameters. Results: All four methods generated sCTs with improved image quality while preserving the anatomy relative to the CBCT. The differences in absolute median proton range between sCT methods were small and generally less than the difference between sCT and reCT, which had median differences of 1.0-1.1 mm. Similarly, differences in DVH parameters were generally small between the sCT methods. While outliers were identified for all four methods, these outliers were often consistent for all sCT methods and could be attributed to anatomical and/or positional discrepancies between the CBCT and reCT. Conclusions: All four sCT methods enabled accurate proton dose calculation and preserved the anatomy, making them of value for adaptive proton therapy.
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.