ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology2026
Clinical Implementation of Simulation-Free Palliative Radiation Therapy: Consensus Recommendations From a Modified Delphi Study.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology, 2026. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Simulation-free radiation therapy (sim-free RT) uses diagnostic computed tomography scans in place of dedicated computed tomography simulations for treatment planning, potentially expediting palliative radiation therapy (PRT) while optimizing resource utilization. Broader adoption has been limited by the absence of standardized implementation guidance. This study aimed to establish expert consensus on key clinical, technical, and educational considerations for sim-free RT in PRT practice. Methods and Materials: A modified Delphi process was conducted with international experts in sim-free RT, including radiation oncologists (n = 7), medical physicists (n = 2), a radiation therapist, and a PhD candidate specializing in PRT. The process included an open-ended first round followed by 3 Likert-scale survey rounds across 12 domains. Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement; ≥90% agreement indicated strong support. "Trend toward agreement" was defined as 67% to 74%. Results: Nine respondents, representing 11 individual experts from 8 institutions in 5 countries, completed all study rounds. Experts from the same institution responding as a group were considered as 1 participant. Consensus was achieved for 95% of statements. Strong support was observed for sim-free RT in palliative-intent treatments at low-risk sites (eg, thoracic/lumbar spine, pelvis) using conventional dose-fractionation. Recommended prerequisites included recent high-quality diagnostic scans (≤3 mm slice thickness, 100-140 kVp), robust image quality assurance, and multidisciplinary oversight. Areas of limited agreement included the use of older scans, application to cervical spine targets, and integration with intensity modulated radiotherapy/volumetric modulated arc therapy planning. Conclusions: This Delphi study provides expert-driven recommendations to support safe implementation of sim-free RT in palliative practice. Findings highlight suitable indications, workflow safeguards, and training needs while underscoring the need for further dosimetric validation and broader evaluation across diverse practice settings.
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.