ArticleJournal of medical physics
Enhancing Treatment Efficiency: Investigating the Optimal Segment Width in Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Prostate Cancer Management.
Article in Journal of medical physics. 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.
- VMAT for Head and Neck Cancer: What Is the Impact of the Optimization Parameters on the Treatment Plan Quality?Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: The minimum segment width (MSW) is a critical element in designing optimal apertures and creating segments of various sizes and shapes in radiation treatment planning. Aims: This study utilized dose-volume histogram analysis to evaluate the effect of MSW on dose distribution in patients undergoing volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer. Settings and Design: VMAT plans were generated for 13 prostate cancer patients using 6MV photons in the Monaco treatment planning system. The plans were designed with three different MSW: 0.5 cm, 1.0 cm, and 1.5 cm while keeping all remaining factors constant. Subjects and Methods: The plans for each MSW group were compared based on several criteria: conformity index, homogeneity index, dose to organs at risk, control points, monitor units (MUs), plan execution time, and gamma passing rates (GPRs). Results: Comparing the plans with different MSWs revealed that treatment plans using MSWs of 0.5 cm and 1.0 cm were of higher standard compared to those with an MSW of 1.5 cm. Specifically, planning target volume coverage (V95) significantly decreased with the increase to a 1.5 cm MSW. It was also noted that with an increase in MSW, the overall MUs decreased and the GPR improved. Conclusions: The 0.5 cm and 1.0 cm MSW sets demonstrated superior VMAT plan merit compared to the 1.5 cm MSW set. VMAT plans with a 1.0 cm MSW can be considered the optimal choice, ensuring both high-plan quality and efficient treatment for prostate cases.
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.