ArticleMedical physics2025
Quantification of the aperture modulation in radiotherapy treatment plans.
Article in Medical physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficient deep learning-driven workflows for accelerated single-fraction radiation therapy planning of a solitary tumour in the lung.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Clinical assessment of dedicated SRS detector for dose verification in SBRT/SRS treatment plans: to establish clinical threshold with AAPM TG-218 recommendation.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- To measure or not to measure: Is pre-treatment measurement of all IMRT plans a legacy practice?Medical physics · 2026Article
- Development of an artificial intelligence driven dose prediction pipeline for online adaptive magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Quantification of the aperture modulation in radiotherapy treatment plans.Medical physics · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMany international guidelines, including those from the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM), emphasize the importance of quantifying plan modulation and recommend clearly documenting the modulation amount and range of radiotherapy treatment plans. However, there is no standardization or consensus on how to quantify plan modulation, partly due to the limitations of existing metrics. PURPOSE: This study introduces two novel metrics to quantify the modulation of treatment plans: the plan aperture modulation (PAM) and the modulation factor (MF). The aim of these metrics is to provide a clear and intuitive assessment of the aperture modulation in radiotherapy plans, addressing limitations of previous metrics and facilitating integration into treatment planning workflows.
methodsPAM was defined as the average fraction of the target area located outside the beam aperture, weighted across all control points in a treatment plan. It was evaluated on volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for prostate with lymph nodes and lung stereotactic body radiation therapy. Plans with varying complexities were generated using the Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS), and PAM was compared to established metrics including plan modulation (PM), modulation complexity score (MCS), and monitor units per gray (MU/Gy). MF was defined in this paper as the relative increase in MUs due to plan modulation, and the relationship between PAM and MF was investigated using analytical expressions.
resultsPAM provided an intuitive and geometrically clear assessment of plan modulation and was validated across different delivery platforms, such as C-arm linacs and Halcyon systems. Derived equations allowed calculation of MF based on PAM, which is useful to assess and control the MU increase due to aperture modulation. PAM and MF outperformed the previous metrics, indicating zero modulation in Dynamic Conformal Arc plans, and demonstrated independence from confounding variables such as treatment technique, beam energy, delivery system, and patient anatomy, enabling an absolute quantification of plan modulation.
conclusionsPAM and MF offer a clear and absolute quantification of the aperture modulation in radiotherapy plans. They address limitations of previous metrics and can be readily implemented in TPSs to control plan modulation during optimization and for reporting, thus facilitating improvements in treatment planning workflows and plan benchmarking in multi-institutional studies, clinical trials, and audits.
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.