ArticleTechnology in cancer research & treatment
Optimization of Normal Tissue Objectives (NTO) in HyperArc Radiosurgery for Brain Oligometastases: A Systematic Analysis of the Trade-Offs among Dosimetric Quality, Plan Complexity, and Treatment Efficiency.
Article in Technology in cancer research & treatment. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
ObjectiveTo systematically investigate the impact of adjusting the relative weight of the built-in Stereotactic Radiosurgery Normal Tissue Objective (SRS-NTO) on dosimetric quality, plan complexity, and delivery efficiency in HyperArc™ stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain oligometastases.MethodsIn this retrospective planning study, a cohort of 20 patients with 1-3 brain oligometastases was analyzed. For each case, six distinct HyperArc plans were designed and optimized using the Varian Eclipse™ Treatment Planning System. To precisely isolate its impact, the relative weight of the SRS-NTO to the PTV objective was systematically varied across six levels-50%, 75%, 100% (default), 125%, 150%, and 200%-while all other planning parameters were held constant. A comprehensive comparative evaluation was then performed to assess the plans across four key domains: (i) dosimetric quality, evaluated by metrics including the Paddick Conformity Index (CI), Gradient Index (GI), and dose to Organs at Risk (OARs); (ii) plan complexity, characterized by various modulation and aperture-based indices; (iii) delivery efficiency, primarily quantified by the total Monitor Units (MUs); and (iv) physical deliverability, verified via Gamma analysis.ResultsIncreasing NTO weight did not significantly alter dosimetric quality; key metrics for CI, GI, and OAR sparing remained statistically equivalent (p > .05). Conversely, higher NTO weights prompted a significant reduction in total MUs (p < .001) that reached an optimum at the 150% setting, and enhanced plan deliverability, evidenced by significantly higher Gamma passing rates under stricter verification criteria. An inflection point was observed beyond the 150% setting, with higher weights leading to degraded plan complexity and efficiency. Strategies within the 125% to 150% range demonstrated a superior balance, achieving optimal dosimetric trends while maximizing gains in efficiency and precision.ConclusionIn HyperArc SRS for brain oligometastases, moderately increasing the SRS-NTO weight from the default 100% into the 125% to 150% range is a superior clinical strategy. This adjustment significantly enhances treatment efficiency and delivery precision by reducing plan complexity, without compromising dosimetric quality, thereby achieving a superior overall 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.