Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41244915›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025

Novel volumetric modulated arc therapy approach for lattice radiation therapy for bulky liver tumors.

Christine V Chung, Saurabh S Nair, Meena S Khan, Callistus I Nguyen, Rachael M Martin-Paulpeter, Ethan B Ludmir, Laurence E Court, Joshua S Niedzielski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

8 authors.

Christine V ChungDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.
Saurabh S NairDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.
Meena S KhanDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.
Callistus I NguyenDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.
Rachael M Martin-PaulpeterDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.
Ethan B LudmirDepartment of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.
Laurence E CourtDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.
Joshua S NiedzielskiDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Lattice radiation therapy (LRT) is a type of spatially fractionated radiation therapy that has emerged as an effective treatment approach for bulky solid tumors. RapidArc Dynamic (RAD) is a novel beam delivery approach that may be advantageous for LRT. The purpose of this Methods: Twenty patients with bulky liver tumors treated with RT were retrospectively identified. VMAT-LRT and RAD-LRT plans were generated for all patients. Lattice spheres were placed in a standardized hexagonal pattern with alternating high-dose spheres (vertex tumor volume high [VTVH], analogous to the peak dose) and low-dose control spheres (vertex tumor volume low [VTVL], analogous to the valley dose). Gross tumor volumes (GTVs)<1,000 cm Results: For all 20 cases, RAD-LRT achieved superior plan quality than VMAT-LRT, indicated by similar prescription dose coverage (group mean, VTVH D80: 20.40 Gy for VMAT-LRT, 20.50 Gy for RAD-LRT) but significantly lower valley dose (group mean, VTVL mean dose: 3.40 Gy for VMAT-LRT, 2.20 Gy for RAD-LRT, p<0.0001). Compared to VMAT-LRT, RAD-LRT required fewer planning structures (mean ± SD, 9 ± 1 for VMAT-LRT, 4 ± 1 for RAD-LRT), less planning time (26 ± 8 min for VMAT-LRT, 18 ± 11 min for RAD-LRT), and fewer treatment beams (5 ± 1 arcs for VMAT-LRT, 1 arc with 4 ± 1 static ports for RAD-LRT). RAD-LRT also had significantly higher peak-to-valley dose ratios (group mean, VTVH/VTVL D90 ratio: 8.92 for VMAT-LRT, 18.20 for RAD-LRT, p<0.0001). Conclusion: RAD may offer a unique approach to Lattice RT. RAD-LRT generated high quality plans with notable treatment planning efficiency, allowing for creation of quality plans without extensive planning time and LRT expertise.

Indexed as

bulky tumorshepatic cancerlattice radiation therapyliver cancerpeak-to-valley dose ratioRapidArc Dynamicspatially fractionated radiation therapyVMAT

Identifiers

PMID41244915
PMCPMC12615216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.