Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40746434›Full record

ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2025

Patient experience of head and neck treatment on a 1.5 T MR-Linac: is the ATS-lite adaptive solution tolerable?

Helen Barnes, Sophie Alexander, Shreerang Bhide, Alex Dunlop, Amit Gupta, Kevin Harrington, Trina Herbert, Kee Howe Wong, Helen McNair

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03727698 (Prospective Evaluation of Radiotherapy Using Magnetic Resonance Image Guided Treatment), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03727698 naunknown statusnot on this map

Prospective Evaluation of Radiotherapy Using Magnetic Resonance Image Guided Treatment

TypeinterventionalSponsorInstitute of Cancer Research, United KingdomRan2019 to 2025Enrolled200ConditionsCancerArmsMR Linac
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Helen BarnesRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.
Sophie AlexanderRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.
Shreerang BhideRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.
Alex DunlopRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.
Amit GuptaInstitute of Cancer Research, United Kingdom.
Kevin HarringtonRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.
Trina HerbertRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.
Kee Howe WongRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.
Helen McNairRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment on the Unity MR-Linac (MRL) (Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden) has been developed using the novel adapt-to-shape Lite (ATS-lite) method to create clinically acceptable adaptive treatments clinician-free. Here we investigate patient experience and acceptability of this technique. Methods: Ten HNC patients treated to 65 Gy in 30 fractions with MRI-guided adaptive radiotherapy (MRIgART) within the PERMIT trial (NCT03727698), were included. Data collected comprised patient demographics, treatment time, and patient experience, using an established MRL questionnaire.Back-up plans were created for use on the conventional linac with CT guidance, to prevent missed fractions. The frequency of use was collected and categorised to reflect the cause. Results: The median total treatment time for ATS-lite method was 39 min. The percentage of treatments under 60 mins was 98.8 %.Questionnaire response rate was 85% and individual question response rate was 99%. Ninety-six percent of responses scored 2 or 3 on the Likert scale, a positive answer. The lowest scoring question was "I forced myself to manage the situation," with a mean (SD) of 2.4 (0.9).The MRL delivered 84.7 % of treatments. The back-up plan was used for 46 fractions, 7 attributed to patient tolerance (n = 2 patients). Conclusion: Average treatment times for the ATS-lite HNC MRIgART are acceptable and faster than reported ATP treatment times. Patient-reported experience was extremely positive. Use of back-up plans attributable to lack of patient tolerance was low. This technique can used with the confidence that patient experience is not negatively impacted.

Identifiers

PMID40746434
PMCPMC12312102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.