ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2026
Development and validation of an automated evaluation system for lattice radiotherapy using a commercial treatment planning system scripting API.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeClinical implementation of lattice radiotherapy (LRT) remains constrained by the absence of standardized, automated tools for comprehensive post-plan dosimetric analysis within commercial treatment planning systems (TPS). Herein, an automated script-based tool was developed using the Eclipse Scripting API (ESAPI) to enable rapid, standardized calculation of key LRT-specific metrics, including peak-to-valley dose ratio (PVDR), equivalent uniform dose (EUD), and ablative dose ratio (ADR).
methodsA modular computational architecture comprising four functional layers was implemented: (1) user interface for protocol configuration, (2) computation layer integrating multiple PVDR algorithms, (3) data service layer providing direct read-only access to three-dimensional dose and anatomical data via ESAPI, and (4) reporting module. To accommodate ESAPI security restrictions, a dual-script architecture incorporating a preprocessing sphere segmentation module was established. Validation was performed using a retrospective cohort of 12 lung cancer LRT patients, with accuracy assessed against manual TPS measurements and established reference values.
resultsConcordance between automated and manual TPS measurements was high. Standard dose-volume parameter extraction exhibited perfect agreement. For spatially explicit PVDR analysis, mean absolute error relative to manual profile assessment was 0.034 (absolute VPDR units). EUD calculations deviated less than 3% from published reference data. Evaluation time per plan was reduced from 15.41 ± 3.20 min (manual) to 1.97 ± 0.34 min (automated), representing a 7.8-fold efficiency gain with elimination of inter-operator variability.
conclusionThis ESAPI-based tool automates and standardizes dosimetric evaluation of LRT, addressing a practical workflow bottleneck. Integration of multiple calculation methods within a deterministic framework establishes a shareable benchmark for consistent multi-institutional analysis, providing a foundation for future investigations correlating detailed dosimetric parameters with clinical outcomes in spatially fractionated radiotherapy.
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.