ArticleRadiological physics and technology2025
Impact of dynamic jaw width adjustment in tomotherapy on hippocampus sparing and treatment efficiency in whole-brain radiotherapy.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 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.
- Dosimetric comparison of TomoTherapy and non-coplanar VMAT for hippocampal-avoidance prophylactic cranial irradiation.Frontiers in oncology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of dynamic jaw width adjustment in tomotherapy on hippocampal sparing, target dose conformity, and treatment efficiency in hippocampal-avoidance whole-brain radiotherapy (HA-WBRT), in accordance with RTOG 0933 guidelines. A retrospective study of 60 patients treated with HA-WBRT was conducted. CT-MRI fusion facilitated accurate hippocampal delineation. Treatment plans were created using Accuray Precision TPS and delivered on the Radixact Tomotherapy system with three jaw widths (1 cm, 2.5 cm, and 5 cm), fixed pitch (0.215), and modulation factor (3.0). The prescription dose was 30 Gy in 10 fractions. Evaluation metrics included PTV coverage (D98%, V95%, D2%, Dmax), homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), hippocampal and lens doses, and beam-on time (BOT). Plan verification was performed with ArcCHECK using 3%/3 mm and 3%/2 mm gamma criteria. The 1 cm jaw achieved the best PTV coverage (D98% = 29.22 Gy, V95% = 98.71%), with HI = 0.09, CI = 0.99, and superior hippocampal sparing (Dmax = 14.91 Gy, Dmin = 7.57 Gy), but had the longest BOT (1165 s). Wider jaws (2.5 cm, 5 cm) reduced BOT (480 s, 280 s) but slightly compromised conformity and increased OAR doses, all within limits. Jaw width selection in Helical Tomotherapy influences dose distribution characteristics and treatment delivery efficiency in hippocampus-sparing WBRT. A 1 cm jaw width provides superior dosimetric conformity and enhanced hippocampal sparing, albeit at the cost of increased BOT. In contrast, wider jaw widths (2.5 cm and 5 cm) improve delivery efficiency but result in modest reductions in dose precision and organ-at-risk sparing. Therefore, jaw width selection should be carefully individualized based on clinical objectives, balancing the trade-off between organ preservation and treatment efficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40824464What 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.