ArticleJournal of radiation research2026
Dosimetric comparison of scanned proton therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy in isodose-prescribed stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancer.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 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.
- Hypofractionated and stereotactic body proton radiotherapy for a high-risk lung cancer cohort: A multi-institutional experience from the proton collaborative group prospective registry.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2027Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study evaluated the feasibility of pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy for stereotactic body radiotherapy using an isodose prescription in patients with isolated early-stage lung cancer, comparing dose-volume metrics with those of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Treatment plans were generated for 10 patients with tumors located at least 2 cm from the trachea. Each plan prescribed 48 Gy(RBE) in four fractions with a 60% isodose prescription. Both multi-field optimized and single-field optimized PBS plans used four fields, while VMAT plans used two coplanar arcs. Plan robustness was assessed by simulating setup errors of ±5.0 mm and density uncertainties of ±3.5%, with worst-case target coverage also analyzed. Comparisons among the three planning strategies employed Bonferroni-adjusted multiple comparisons for target coverage, robustness, and organ-at-risk doses. PBS achieved target coverage comparable to VMAT, with similar D98% (63.2 ± 1.3 GyRBE vs. 64.0 ± 1.6 Gy; P = 0.12), mean doses (73.2 ± 0.8 GyRBE vs. 73.7 ± 1.2 Gy; P = 0.21), and robustness (D98%: 50.2 ± 0.9 GyRBE vs. 50.3 ± 1.1 Gy; P = 0.77). For the normal lung, PBS significantly reduced low-dose exposure up to V10Gy, whereas VMAT was more effective in reducing doses from V20Gy to the prescription level. All evaluated organ-at-risks received significantly lower mean doses with PBS than with VMAT (P < 0.05). Under a 60% isodose prescription for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy, multi-field optimized-based PBS proton therapy provides target coverage and robustness comparable to VMAT while offering superior normal tissue sparing.
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.