ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2025
Clinical validation of using a commercial synthetic-computed tomography solution for brain MRI-only radiotherapy treatment planning.
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. 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.
- Phantom benchmarking for quality assurance of synthetic computed tomography in cranial magnetic resonance-only radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: MRI-only radiotherapy treatment planning (RTP) relies on synthetic-CT (sCT) images for dose calculation. This study evaluates the clinical feasibility of using a commercial sCT solution in brain RTP, MRCAT Brain, focusing on dosimetric accuracy and patient setup verification. Method and materials: For dosimetric evaluation, 93 patients with brain cancer who were treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using a CT/MRI fusion workflow were included. sCT images were generated using MRCAT Brain. The sCT images were rigidly co-registered to the CT images. The clinical plan produced on the CT was recalculated on the sCT. Dosimetric accuracy was assessed by comparing dose differences in dose volume histogram (DVH) statistics for the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs).For patient setup verification, 70 patients were included, and total of 572 cone beam CT (CBCT) registrations were performed with sCT and CT as reference images. The sCT matching accuracy was validated by comparing the translational and rotational differences between sCT-CBCT and CT-CBCT registrations. Results: The PTV mean dose difference between CT and sCT were 0.3 %, 0.4 %, and 0.2 % for D50%, D2%, and D98%, respectively. The OAR mean dose differences were less than 0.3 % for all OARs. 4 of 93 patients (4.3 %) showed gross dosimetric errors of greater than ± 2 %. 3/4 were caused by sCT error. For positioning verification, all results were between ± 1 mm and ± 1°. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the clinical feasibility of the MRCAT solution for brain MRI-only RTP, with dosimetric differences being clinically acceptable, along with submillimetre and sub-degree accuracy in patient setup verification.
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.