ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026
An ESTRO-EPTN Delphi consensus on robustness evaluation in proton therapy.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative treatment planning of photon, proton and carbon ion radiotherapy for sphenoid wing meningiomas.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Moderately hypofractionated IMPT with pelvic nodal irradiation for high-risk prostate cancer: an emerging standard or an incremental step?Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Treatment planning comparison of proton arc therapy and intensity modulated proton therapy for synchronous bilateral breast or chest wall and regional nodal irradiation.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Feasibility of reduced setup uncertainty in intensity-modulated proton therapy for mediastinal lymphoma.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Maintaining quality of scientific peer-review and publishing inPhysics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Dose comparison of proton beam therapy with and without a multileaf collimator in the treatment of multiple hepatocellular carcinoma.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 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
42 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Robustness evaluation (RE) is vital for proton treatment planning, but lacks international consensus or guidelines, with clinics using varied, self-developed methods focused on selected uncertainties. This ESTRO project surveys expert opinions on clinical RE methods to inform future treatment planning system (TPS) development. Materials and methods: A study within the European Particle Therapy Network (EPTN) involved 24 European proton therapy centres, with one radiation oncologist and one medical physicist per centre. The goal was to reach a consensus on transitioning from Planning Target Volume (PTV)-based planning to robustly optimized planning, including uncertainties, methods, and reporting of robustness evaluations. An internal committee drafted 39 statements, reviewed by an independent committee. Following a two-round Delphi procedure, consensus was set at a 75% agreement threshold. Results: Twenty of 24 contacted centers (83.0%) responded to both questionnaire rounds. Consensus was reached on 26 of 39 statements (66.7%), with 5 being high-priority. Strong agreement emerged regarding which uncertainties to include in RE (range, setup, intra-fraction, anatomy changes), methodologies (e.g., for moving targets, combining setup and range), and how to report RE results clinically. Disagreement was found on using the PTV for both planning and dose reporting. The results also offer important implications for TPS vendors and future software development. Conclusions: The ESTRO Delphi consensus may serve as practical guidance on points where a clear consensus was achieved. For remaining points, the development of guidelines is recommended to standardize methodologies and reporting. Furthermore, TPS vendors are encouraged to align their developments with the community's articulated requirements.
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.