ArticleInternational journal of particle therapy2026
PTCOG Ocular Survey - Perspective on Ocular Particle Therapy: Current Practices and Emerging Trends.
Article in International journal of particle therapy, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To overview the status and trends in the current rapidly evolving field of ocular particle therapy (OPT). Materials and Methods: The Particle Therapy Co-Operative Group Ocular Subcommittee developed an online survey, including 127 questions, made available to treatment centers worldwide, between April 2022 and January 2024. The survey covered a broad range of topics from general program organization and beamline description, to diagnoses and patient numbers treated, treatment planning and set-up, quality assurance techniques, as well as insights into anticipated future developments. Results: Twenty facilities offered OPT by the end of 2023: 3 in Asia, 9 in Europe, and 8 in the USA. Combined, they treated, on average, 1800 patients per year, with uveal melanoma being the most common indication. The vast majority of treatments continue to be delivered on dedicated horizontal beamlines, both high (>120 Mev) and low (<75 MeV) energy. Five of the 7 recently established programs (n = 7, since 2015) use high-energy general-purpose beamlines, where some beam characteristics, including penumbrae size and dose delivery rate, differ from those typically achieved on dedicated beamlines. The evolution of the ocular treatment framework is ongoing as 9 centers reported the intent to upgrade their systems within five years, to engage state-of-the-art developments in beam delivery, imaging, and planning tools. Conclusion: Common protocols in dosimetry, dose, and fractionation have largely been adopted worldwide, while variability persists in planning, quality assurance, and delivery workflows. The obsolescence of dedicated ocular proton systems and key planning tools, and a lack of standardization, remain as pressing challenges. The adoption of non-dedicated high-energy systems on gantries and integration into multipurpose treatment environments enhances OPT accessibility, but this transition requires ongoing critical evaluation of dosimetric trade-offs and clinical outcomes. Multicenter collaboration, technological innovation, and clinical validation are essential to continued assurance of the safe and effective delivery of OPT worldwide.
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.