ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026
Clinical implementation of intensity modulated proton therapy in breath-hold for mediastinal lymphoma patients using surface monitoring and nasal high-flow therapy.
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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: We report our first clinical experience treating mediastinal lymphoma patients in breath-hold (BH) with intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT), using optical surface scanning (OSS) for beam gating and nasal high-flow therapy (NHFT). Moreover, we evaluated BH stability throughout treatment and assessed adequacy of applied treatment margins. Materials and methods: Thirteen patients received IMPT-BH with anterior beams supported by NHFT and OSS. OSS enabled gated treatment delivery with a 3 mm breathing window and a maximum isocenter shift of 5 mm. OSS respiratory traces were synchronized with machine log-file beam delivery data to identify beam-on periods. BH stability, BH duration, and OSS-derived isocenter shifts were assessed during cone beam CT (CBCT) and treatment. Margin adequacy was evaluated using post-treatment CBCTs acquired for 34 fractions (2-3 CBCTs per patient), while plan robustness over time was assessed with weekly repeat-CTs. Results: Analyzing 187 fractions, the median number of BHs was 1 [1-6] per CBCT and 5 [3-20] per treatment delivery. Intra- and inter-BH surface stability were within 1 mm, and the median isocenter deviation during beam delivery was less than 3 mm. Average fraction time was 44 ± 13 min, decreasing as patients became more experienced. One plan adaptation was required in the entire cohort. Residual target shifts during BH treatments were < 8 mm, comparable to motion in free-breathing. Conclusions: IMPT-BH with OSS and NHFT is feasible for treating mediastinal lymphoma, providing stable BHs, and acceptable treatment times. Interfraction motion was slightly higher than intrafraction motion, suggesting that combining bone alignment with soft tissue adjustment could improve setup accuracy.
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.