ArticleInternational journal of particle therapy2025
Benchmarking Modern Day Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy Treatment Times: Insights From Real Time Location Service Treatment Time Data.
Article in International journal of particle therapy, 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.
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
Purpose: Collecting consistent and accurate treatment time data is challenging, particularly when relying on manual records or predictive models. Our center uses a Real-Time Location System (RTLS), which provides precise, automated tracking of patient movement throughout the clinic. This study leverages RTLS data to benchmark treatment times in a high-volume pencil beam scanning proton facility where ancillary systems like cone beam CT, surface imaging, and ultrasound bladder scans are used to aid in setup. Materials and Methods: We analyzed RTLS data from 12,551 fractions delivered between January 2023 and July 2024 across three gantries of an IBA Proteus Plus system. Treatment time was defined as the duration between a patient entering and exiting a gantry zone, recorded by infrared and radio frequency badges. Outliers and erroneous entries were excluded using clinical and statistical criteria. Mean and median treatment times were calculated by disease sites, subsites, and gantries. Imaging protocols and setup factors were provided to give context to the data. Results: Treatment times ranged from 26 minutes (vertebrae) to 52 minutes (craniospinal and gynecologic), with an overall average of 35.5 minutes. High-volume sites such as prostate (4479 fractions), head and neck (2153), and central nervous system (CNS) (1954) showed relatively tight distributions, but had many outliers due to complex setups or anatomical variability. Discrepancies in treatment time across gantries were observed, with certain gantries consistently faster, likely due to staff familiarity and case concentration on specific gantries. Conclusion: RTLS provides a scalable method for tracking treatment times in proton therapy. These data offer an unbiased, data-driven foundation for clinical and business planners to develop more accurate and sustainable proton center models as well as serve as benchmark data for other proton centers seeking to optimize performance.
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.