ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2026
In silico assessment of out-of-field dose in multiple brain metastases stereotactic radiosurgery.
Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for multiple brain metastases (MBM), there is higher out-of-field (OOF) dose contribution than that experienced in single metastasis. This study seeks to assess the impact of the introduced error in OOF dose in MBM SRS. CyberKnife Off-Centre-Ratios (OCRs) were modified by altering the measured umbra dose by an average 0.3 and 0.6% of the maximum in-field dose for 12 cones at 5 depths. An existing MATLAB Independent Dose Calculation (IDC) code was used to calculate dose at the Gross-Target-Volume (GTV) centre-of-mass (COM) and to surrounding voxels. GTV COM dose was calculated for 126 GTVs (36 patients) and dose deviations between unmodified and modified OCR were compared. Treatment plans in the Precision treatment planning system were analysed for potential causes of dose uncertainties. Up to 7.2% GTV COM dose deviation was observed for an average 0.6% change in umbra dose. Patients with many GTVs that were close to each other, with GTVs through which many beam passed or were proximal, and patients with large GTVs had higher dose deviations due to OOF dose contributions. Patients with multiple dose prescription levels (MDPLs) had larger dose deviations for GTVs with lower prescribed dose. Introducing known errors in umbra dose showed that MBM doses are impacted by OOF dose non-uniformly. OOF dose from one GTV beams can contribute significant dose to other GTVs and can be influenced by GTV-to-GTV proximity, geometrical distribution of GTVs, beam orientations, GTV sizes, and MPDLs. MBM SRS dose calculation demands accurate estimates of OOF dose.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42911537What 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.