ArticleJournal of medical physics
Dosimetric and Treatment Delivery Efficiency Comparison of Two Ring-gantry Linear Accelerator Platforms for Liver Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy.
Article in Journal of medical physics. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the dosimetric performance and treatment delivery efficiency of two ring-gantry linear accelerator platforms, Helical Tomotherapy and Halcyon, in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for liver metastasis. Materials and Methods: A retrospective dosimetric analysis was conducted on 16 patients with solitary liver metastasis. For each patient, SBRT plans were generated using the Accuray treatment planning system (TPS) (Tomotherapy) and Eclipse TPS (Halcyon). Plan evaluation included conformity, homogeneity, and gradient indices, along with target coverage and organs at risk (OAR) dose-volume parameters, in accordance with Radiation Therapy Oncology Group-1112 (RTOG-1112) guidelines. Treatment efficiency was assessed using monitor units (MU) and beam-on time (BOT). Statistical analysis was performed using paired Results: Both platforms achieved acceptable target coverage and OAR constraints. Conformity index and gradient index were comparable. Halcyon showed improved planning target volume homogeneity, lower normal liver V15 Gy, reduced OAR doses, and significantly lower MU and BOT ( Conclusion: Both Tomotherapy and Halcyon are capable of generating high-quality liver SBRT plans with comparable target coverage. However, Halcyon demonstrated improved normal tissue sparing and enhanced treatment efficiency.
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.