ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2025
Multicenter multiplatform pattern-of-practice analysis of single-isocenter multitarget stereotactic radiosurgery.
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 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.
- Assessing the role of plan complexity and target geometry through multi-institutional gel based end-to-end QA in multi-focal single isocenter stereotactic radiosurgery.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
37 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeSingle-isocenter multitarget stereotactic radiosurgery (SIMT SRS) offers enhanced clinical efficiency for treating multiple brain metastases. However, it introduces additional uncertainties, such as off-center dose and beam profile inaccuracies, as well as quality assurance (QA) challenges, complicating its implementation. This study aims to evaluate different SIMT SRS approaches.
methodsWe collected and analyzed SIMT SRS protocol and infrastructure parameters from 23 radiotherapy centers across Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, encompassing immobilization systems, computed tomography (CT) protocols, linear accelerators, treatment planning systems, beam configurations, imaging techniques, and QA practices. Consensus, deviations, and compliance with current guidelines were assessed. Subsequent studies will include on-site measurements, evaluation of treatment plan quality and delivery accuracy, and correlation of these findings with the analyzed protocols to identify potential links between protocol parameters and clinical outcomes.
resultsThere is consensus (at least 80% agreement) for a CT slice thickness of ≤ 1 mm, the need for six-degree-of-freedom patient setup correction, and noncoplanar treatment. There is notable variability for intrafraction imaging (used by 70%), minimum accepted planning target volume diameter (ranging from 2-10 mm), SRS QA, and general plan parameters, such as photon energy and number of treatment fields. There is also high variability in employed linear accelerator models and treatment planning systems.
conclusionThese findings highlight a lack of standardization in SIMT SRS practices. Combined with future measurements correlating protocols to treatment quality, our study will provide a foundation for recommendations to support the safe and standardized implementation of SIMT SRS.
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.