ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026
Balancing dose preservation and treatment efficiency in motion-managed magnetic resonance image-guided radiotherapy of pancreatic cancer.
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. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Active motion management (AMM) during magnetic resonance image (MRI)-guided pancreatic cancer radioablation enables tight planning target volume (PTV) margins but may prolong treatment. AMM strategies include beam gating and drift correction, which respectively interrupt or adjust treatment delivery in response to target motion. This study evaluates gross tumor volume (GTV) dose coverage and time efficiency using varying AMM settings. Materials and methods: Cine MRI data from 100 fractions in 20 patients undergoing MRI-guided pancreatic cancer radioablation were used to simulate treatment delivery of 5 × 10.0 Gy using a 2 mm PTV margin. Seventeen scenarios were evaluated: No AMM and combinations of gating window and drift correction thresholds from 5 mm to 2 mm. Accumulated dose and treatment time efficiency (beam-on/total time) were derived from the simulated beam history. Results: Without AMM, the median (5th-95th percentile) change in GTV D Conclusions: AMM improved GTV dose fidelity for pancreatic cancer radioablation with tight PTV margins, but stricter motion thresholds reduced efficiency. Prioritizing a low drift threshold over a narrow gating window preserved most of dose-related benefits while maintaining more efficient delivery, and may represent an AMM strategy for clinical workflows.
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.