ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
Hybrid proton planning combining spread-out Bragg peak beams with transmission beams to shorten field delivery times while maintaining plan quality.
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 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.
- Towards ultra-fast treatments: large energy acceptance beam delivery systems and opportunities for proton beam therapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Delivery times of Bragg-peak-based intensity-modulated proton therapy fields play an important role in patient throughput and comfort. Despite the associated exit dose, single-layer proton transmission beams benefit from sharper penumbras and are extremely fast to deliver. In this study, we investigated the trade-offs in field delivery times (FDT) and plan quality when using both field types. Materials and methods: Reference treatment plans were created for eight left-sided breast and ten oropharynx cancer patients using an in-house automatic iterative optimizer. Comparative hybrid plans were created for each case. For breast, different combinations of transmission and conventional beams were evaluated. For oropharynx, two of the three conventional beams were replaced with six transmission beams. Hybrid plans were evaluated by comparing the dose metrics and FDT against the reference plans. Results: Hybrid breast plans exhibited mean and maximum organ at risk (OAR) doses, and target dose homogeneity and conformity comparable to the reference plans, while their FDTs decreased by median (interquartile range) of 58 %/166 s (56-61 %). Compared to reference plans, hybrid oropharynx plans exhibited higher mean OAR dose especially to oral cavity (median of 34 Gy vs 31 Gy) and spinal cord (20 Gy vs 11 Gy), while FDTs decreased by 73 %/91 s (71-73 %). Discussion: Depending on the case, hybrid planning can significantly reduce total FDT with only limited impact on plan quality. The reduced total FDT can improve patient comfort, reduce overall duration of the treatment, and improve beam scheduling at multi-room centers.
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.