ArticlePrecision radiation oncology2025
Feasibility study of a multi-lesion cyberknife radiotherapy plan verification method using a 2D array with pre-set roll angles.
Article in Precision radiation oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- C-X-C Motif Chemokine Receptor 4 (CXCR4)-Targeted Biologically Guided Proton Spatially Fractionated Radiotherapy for Bulky Limited-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer.Precision radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Feasibility study of a multi-lesion cyberknife radiotherapy plan verification method using a 2D array with pre-set roll angles.Precision radiation oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: When validating intracranial multi-lesion CyberKnife M6/S7 plans with SRSmapcheck, setting the array to a fixed 0° measures only one target dose distribution, leaving the other lesions unmeasured. Moreover, the CyberKnife treatment planning system does not support roll verification tools, and testing confirms that X-sight fiducial marker guidance is incompatible with free array roll. A novel method and workflow are required to validate multi-lesion plans with random positions. Methods: A geometric model was established based on the relationship between SRSmapcheck and the tumor location. For two tumors spaced 77 mm apart (each 20 mm in diameter, or one 40 mm apart and the other infinitesimally small), the corresponding array roll angle interval was approximately 15.05°. The SRSmapcheck and StereoPHAN computed tomography (CT) images were acquired at 15° intervals, starting at 0°, and preprocessed into phantom plans for verification. A total of 101 intracranial multi-lesion plans were verified using the fixed 0° and pre-set roll angle methods to optimize the dose distribution, particularly in high-dose and rapidly varying areas. A two-sample test compared the results of the 0° versus pre-set roll angle verification and assessed the performance under different criteria to determine suitable criteria for pre-set roll angle verification. Results: The equivalent diameter of the 296 tumors ranged from 5 to 45 mm (average: 21.86 mm). Each plan had an average of 2.97 lesions. Using the pre-set roll angle method, 2.34 targets were assessed on average (89.83% of lesions had diameters ranging from 10 to 40 mm), compared to 1.32 targets on average in 0° plans. Statistically significant differences occurred at 2 mm/1% and 2 mm/2% in the γ analysis, showing that plan pass rates were stable between the fixed 0° and pre-set roll angle methods. Relaxing either the distance to agreement or dose deviation significantly increased the pass rates during pre-set roll angle verification, whereas cross-transforming criteria had minimal impact. For pre-set roll angle methods, it is recommended to use 1 mm/1% (action limit: 86.0% ± 13.3%) and 1 mm/2% (action limits: 91.6% ± 7.9%) for γ analysis. Conclusion: SRSmapcheck with the pre-set roll angle method can verify intracranial multi-lesion CyberKnife plans by measuring multiple targets in a single validation and comparing the 1 mm/1% and 1 mm/2% γ analysis criteria.
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.