ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2026
Control-point-specific plan robustness in volumetric modulated arc therapy-based cranial radiotherapy.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2026. 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.
- Control-point-specific plan robustness in volumetric modulated arc therapy-based cranial radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProgress in mitigating plan degradation due to intrafraction patient motion may involve the identification and management of specific control points that are sensitive to motion. Robust planning in this manner could improve deliverable dosimetry and support advancements toward reducing planning target volume (PTV) margins. PURPOSE: To improve radiotherapy plan quality robustness in the presence of intrafraction motion by identifying the control-point-specific dosimetric sensitivities. This work explores control-point-specific plan characteristics that impact dosimetry by retrospectively assessing the consequence of simulated patient scenarios for cranial radiotherapy.
methodsSingle target cranial volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans (n = 30) were converted into static field plans and reconstructed by applying 3D control-point-specific motion traces (n = 100) using our in-house MATLAB application. PTV coverage (volume covered by 100% of the prescription isodose, VRx) and the differences in minimum dose delivered to 99% (D
resultsUnder conditions of simulated intrafraction motion, PTV coverage spanned from -2.8% to +0.73% of target volume with 78.6% of the three thousand motion traces resulting in coverage loss. There were no changes in GTV D
conclusionThis work has demonstrated that the dosimetric impact of intrafractional motion reflects the inherent motion sensitivity of specific control points. Our findings suggest that motion sensitive control points could be selectively targeted for gating to enhance robustness against intrafraction motion and improve dosimetry in support of a PTV margin reduction strategy. Single target cranial plans serve as ideal cases to characterize the consequences of motion at the control point level with the aim of expanding the analysis to other anatomical regions.
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.