ArticlePrecision radiation oncology2026
Dosimetric comparison of lattice radiotherapy across three modern linear accelerator platforms.
Article in Precision 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to compare the dosimetric characteristics of lattice radiotherapy across different linear accelerator platforms (Versa HD, Halcyon, and NeuRT Aurora) and to evaluate the feasibility of its clinical application. Methods: This study included ten patients with bulky tumors who were eligible for spatially fractionated radiotherapy, including five pelvic cases and five abdominal cases. For each patient, high-dose vertices were contoured within the gross tumor volume using a standardized method, followed by three independently designed treatment plans on the Versa HD, Halcyon, and NeuRT Aurora platforms. The prescribed dose was 2400 cGy in three fractions. Dosimetric evaluation of the target volume included vertex coverage, maximum dose, and the peak-to-valley dose ratio. In addition, a vertex-specific dose analysis was performed to quantify the number of vertices with a D95 of less than 2400 cGy. For organs at risk, the following dosimetric parameters were evaluated: the mean dose to the intra-lattice margin volume, the maximum dose to tissues located more than 2 cm from the vertices, and standard dosimetric parameters for the spinal cord, small bowel, colon, liver, stomach, lungs, and kidneys. Results: All plans demonstrated the characteristic dosimetric features of lattice radiotherapy by establishing alternating high-dose peaks and low-dose valleys within the target volume, while achieving effective protection of surrounding normal tissues without compromising target coverage. Among the three platforms, NeuRT Aurora demonstrated superior performance in dose gradient control and normal tissue protection. The mean peak-to-valley ratios were 6.4, 6.9, and 8.9 for the Versa HD, Halcyon, and NeuRT Aurora platforms, respectively. The maximum dose to tissues located more than 2 cm from the vertices was significantly lower in the NeuRT Aurora plans (1158.6 cGy) than in the Versa HD plans (1280.6 cGy) and Halcyon plans (1257.8 cGy). Consistent with this trend, the NeuRT Aurora plans were also associated with a lower mean dose to the intra-lattice margin volume (792.4 cGy) than the Versa HD (831.4 cGy) and Halcyon (845.7 cGy) plans. For all specific organs at risk, the evaluated dosimetric parameters remained within clinical tolerance limits across the three treatment platforms. Conclusions: This study systematically evaluated lattice radiotherapy plans across three accelerator platforms. Although differences were observed in peak-to-valley ratios and organ-at-risk sparing, all plans met clinical requirements, confirming the overall feasibility of each platform.
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.