Toward Ultra-fast Treatments: Large Energy Acceptance Beam Delivery Systems and Opportunities for Proton Beam Therapy

Adam Steinberg; Hannah Norman; Jacinta Yap; Konrad Nesteruk; Suzie Sheehy

Toward Ultra-fast Treatments: Large Energy Acceptance Beam Delivery Systems and Opportunities for Proton Beam Therapy

T0 review · 0 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Widening beamline energy acceptance would remove the slowest step in proton therapy and unlock ultra-fast delivery.

desk verdict A genuinely useful review of large energy acceptance beam delivery for proton therapy, but the clinical-benefit framing runs ahead of the evidence and the beam-quality gap is real, though honestly acknowledged. read the letter →

arxiv 2601.13577 v1 pith:MZKWGFLP submitted 2026-01-20 physics.med-ph physics.acc-ph

Jacinta Yap , Adam Steinberg , Hannah Norman , Konrad Nesteruk , Suzie Sheehy This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.med-phphysics.acc-ph

keywords protonbeamtherapychargedparticledeliverylargeenergyacceptancerapidnovelmodalitiescompactfacilitieslayerswitchingtime

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Proton beam therapy is slowed by the energy layer switching time — the wait while magnets re-tune before each new depth layer. The paper argues this bottleneck is a design choice, not a law of physics: conventional beamlines accept only about 0.5–1% momentum spread, so every energy change forces a full magnet re-ramp. If the beamline were built to accept a wide energy band at fixed magnet settings, switching time could drop by orders of magnitude, enabling ultra-fast delivery. The authors survey a decade of large-energy-acceptance beamline designs and argue that the clinical payoff — shorter treatments, less motion-induced dose error, practical rescanning, and future arc and FLASH therapy — follows directly from this one change.

What carries the argument

The central object is the large energy acceptance (LEA) beamline: a beam transport and delivery system whose momentum acceptance spans tens of percent rather than the conventional ~0.5–1%. The key identity is the relationship between beamline momentum acceptance and the energy layer switching time: when acceptance is small, every change in beam energy requires synchronous re-ramping of all magnets to a new field setting; when acceptance is large, a fixed magnet setting transports a wide range of energies, so the ELST collapses toward the mechanical speed of the degrader and the control-system latency. The paper frames the design requirements as geometric achromaticity (all momenta converge a

What would settle it

Measure the delivered spot size and shape in a prototype large-energy-acceptance beamline across the full 70–230 MeV range at clinical intensity and scanning angles; if distortion or energy-dependent variation exceeds the ±10% size / ±1 mm position tolerances cited in the paper, the claimed treatment-quality and motion-mitigation advantages would fail to materialize.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the energy layer switching time — the wait between successive depth layers during pencil beam scanning — is a fundamental constraint imposed by the narrow momentum acceptance (about 0.5–1%) of current beam delivery systems, and that this constraint can be removed by designing beamlines with a large energy acceptance (tens of percent). With a large-energy-acceptance beamline, magnets no longer need to be re-ramped for each energy layer, because a single magnet setting transports the full energy range; only a degrader or accelerator setting must change. The authors argue this eliminates the dominant component of beam delivery time, leading to ultra-fast delive

Load-bearing premise

The entire clinical case rests on a large-energy-acceptance beamline delivering circular, stable, energy-independent spots across the full therapeutic energy range within clinical tolerances; the paper itself flags that most proposals suffer nonlinear beam distortion and energy-dependent spot variation, so if that assumed beam quality is not met, the dosimetric benefits evaporate.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If a LEA beamline is realized, the energy layer switching time could drop from hundreds of milliseconds or seconds to near the physical limits of the degrader and interlocks, reducing total beam delivery time by the 70–90% share that ELST currently contributes.
Ultra-fast delivery would make volumetric rescanning practical, allowing many repaints per breathing cycle and better averaging of respiratory motion.
Bidirectional energy delivery becomes possible without hysteresis re-ramping, enabling new planning optimizations and facilitating proton arc therapy and beam tracking.
Bragg-peak FLASH delivery, which requires whole-field irradiation within about a second, becomes feasible with a LEA beamline, whereas current ELSTs preclude it.
Shorter treatments reduce intrafraction motion, permit smaller planning margins, and increase patient throughput, directly improving treatment quality and cost-effectiveness.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The review's logic implies that the accelerator choice (cyclotron versus synchrotron) becomes less decisive for treatment speed; the beamline becomes the rate-limiting component, so future R&D should shift from accelerator design to beamline acceptance and magnet technology.
A concrete testable prediction follows: if a clinical LEA beamline is built, measured spot-size energy dependence will need to stay within clinical tolerances across the full energy range; if it does not, plan quality and robustness will degrade and the dosimetric advantage over a well-tuned conventional system will shrink.
The paper's emphasis on transporting a large range of energies rather than a large energy spread suggests that LEA systems will still need energy-selection or collimation to control distal fall-off when the degrader produces a broad spectrum; without it, off-nominal energies could distort the depth-dose distribution.
If the technology matures, the cost model of proton therapy could shift: single-room facilities with a LEA beamline and a simpler accelerator may approach the size and cost of a conventional linac bunker, potentially making proton therapy a mainstream radiotherapy option rather than a specialized one.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

You should know two things before reading this one. First, it is a well-executed review, not a new result. That is fine; the review is needed. It compiles the scattered LEA beamline proposals (KST, Fenning, GaToroid, Nesteruk, TURBO, etc.) into one place, adds a genuinely helpful comparison table, and crisply separates geometric from optical achromaticity. Second, the clinical enthusiasm in the framing is stronger than the underlying evidence. Words like "revolutionise" and "the complete exploitation of PBT ... can only be made possible" are promotional, and the paper would be better without them. But that is a framing problem, not a load-bearing flaw.

What the paper does well: it correctly identifies ELST as a real bottleneck, with the supporting timing studies cited properly. It gives a fair and detailed survey of the design space, including the trade-offs and unbuilt status of every proposal. It is candid about the open challenges, especially beam distortion from nonlinear fields and the lack of end-to-end dosimetric studies. The authors have their own horse in the race (TURBO), but they cite competing designs fairly and do not overstate the maturity of their own work. The central argument—that increasing beamline momentum acceptance would reduce ELST and enable faster delivery—holds up as a review-level claim.

The soft spots are proportionate. The weakest link is the beam-quality assumption: Table 2 shows only one design claims full optical achromaticity, and that one partially reintroduces ramping. The paper itself acknowledges in Section 4.1 that many LEA designs produce non-circular, asymmetric, energy-dependent spots, and that very little exists on LEA-specific planning. The reader's stress-test concern lands, but it lands on the field, not on this paper. A review should flag that gap, and this one does. What it should not do is then claim the clinical benefits are "clear" in the summary. That overreach is fixable with softening language.

The citation pattern looks sound. The paper leans on primary sources for ELST data and clinical claims, and the discussion of both supporting and limiting studies is balanced. No signs of circularity beyond the normal self-citation you expect from an active group.

Who is this for? Anyone working on PBT delivery systems, accelerator physics for therapy, or treatment planning for fast delivery. It deserves a serious referee. I would send it to peer review and accept after minor revisions that temper the promotional language and make the beam-quality caveat more prominent in the abstract and summary.

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. This review article argues that the energy layer switching time (ELST) remains a major bottleneck in proton beam therapy (PBT), and that a beam delivery system (BDS) designed with a large energy/momentum acceptance could minimize or eliminate this bottleneck, enabling 'ultra-fast' delivery. The paper reviews clinical motivations (shorter treatments, reduced motion/degradation, improved rescanning, volumetric rescanning, bidirectional delivery, arc therapy, FLASH), surveys proposed LEA beamline designs (Keil, Fenning, Wan, Brouwer, Nesteruk, GaToroid, Trbojevic, Dascalu/Sheehy, Liao, TURBO), compares their geometric and optical achromaticity, discusses magnet technologies, and examines clinical implementation issues, particularly beam quality. It is a review rather than original research; its claims are supported by cited literature, and it explicitly identifies open challenges and the lack of constructed LEA systems.

Significance. If the LEA concept is realized, it could transform PBT delivery by removing a recognized technological bottleneck and enabling emerging delivery modalities. The review is timely, comprehensive, and technically informed, providing a clear distinction between geometric and optical achromaticity and a useful comparison table. It is appropriately cautious: it repeatedly notes that no LEA BDS has been built, that most designs suffer from nonlinear-field beam distortion, and that very little exists in the literature on LEA-specific planning/dosimetric impact (Section 4.1). The paper also correctly states that full exploitation of a LEA BDS requires an accelerator capable of rapid energy variation. While the clinical benefits are contingent on solving beam-quality and dosimetric-modeling challenges, the review does not overclaim; it frames these as open problems. The manuscript is a valuable resource for the field and a credible case for further R&D.

minor comments (5)

[3.1.2] In the paragraph on Keil et al., the phrase 'the drifts appear appear much shorter than the magnets' contains a duplicated word ('appear appear'). Please revise.
[Affiliation] Affiliation 6 contains a typographical error: 'T echnology' should read 'Technology'.
[Table 2 / Reference [168]] Reference [168] is cited as a dataset. If the beamline parameters (1.23-2.32 Tm, 70-230 MeV) are drawn from a peer-reviewed publication, please cite that source instead or in addition to the dataset.
[Figure 10 caption] The caption states 'Figures pending copyright permissions.' For a published review, permissions must be secured before publication; please ensure that all copyrighted figures are reproduced with explicit permission, consistent with the statement in the caption of Figure 2.
[4.1.1] The sentence 'A LEA BDS which does not need to rely successive magnetic field changes for each IES on may offer better stability' contains a grammatical error. Suggested revision: '...does not need to rely on successive magnetic field changes for each IES may offer better stability...'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

Review-style paper; central LEA argument rests on external evidence, not on self-citation or fitted predictions.

full rationale

This is a narrative review, not a derivation with fitted parameters. The central causal chain — ELST is a bottleneck; increasing beamline momentum acceptance avoids per-layer magnet ramping; faster delivery yields clinical benefits — is supported by external measurements and planning studies (e.g., refs 38, 39, 41, 97, 98), not by the authors' own prior results. The self-citations that appear (Yap 2021 for the ELST bottleneck; Dascalu and Sheehy 2021, Steinberg et al. 2024, Yap et al. 2023 for LEA designs) are descriptive or corroborative rather than load-bearing: the ELST bottleneck is independently evidenced by Suzuki et al. and Shen et al., and the LEA proposals are reviewed as literature rather than invoked as proof of clinical benefit. No equation is fitted and then renamed a prediction; no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' own work; no ansatz is smuggled in via citation. The paper explicitly acknowledges open questions, e.g., 'very little currently exists in literature' on LEA-specific planning/dosimetric impact, and Section 4.1 candidly discusses beam distortion and quality uncertainties. These are honest limitations, not circular reasoning. The only mild self-referential element is citing the authors' own earlier review for the recognized ELST bottleneck, but because that claim is multiply supported externally, it does not constitute circularity. Overall the review is self-contained in its argumentation and appropriately defers to external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The paper's central claim rests on domain assumptions about the importance of ELST and the feasibility of LEA beamlines; it introduces no new free parameters or entities. Its evidence base is the cited literature.

free parameters (1)

None
Review paper; no free parameters are fitted. ELST values in Table 1 are literature-reported measurements, not fitted by this paper.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption ELST is a dominant contributor to total beam delivery time
The entire motivation rests on this. The paper cites clinic-modeling studies (Suzuki 2016, Shen 2017) showing 70-90% contribution; if those models are wrong, the centrality of the LEA case weakens.
domain assumption A LEA BDS can be realized while maintaining clinically acceptable beam quality
Section 4.1 explicitly acknowledges beam distortion and spot variation as open challenges for most LEA designs. The clinical benefits assume this can be solved, but the paper itself lists it as an unsolved issue.
domain assumption Published LEA design studies are sufficiently credible indicators of feasibility
The survey of LEA proposals takes their simulated lattice designs at face value; several have not undergone detailed error/fringe-field studies (e.g., Trbojevic 2021).

invented entities (1)

Large energy acceptance (LEA) BDS concept
purpose: Central concept: a beam delivery system accepting a wide momentum range without retuning magnets, to eliminate ELST.
The concept is an engineering design goal, not a new physical entity. It has no falsifiable handle beyond the various simulations cited (none built clinically).

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Toward Ultra-fast Treatments: Large Energy Acceptance Beam Delivery Systems and Opportunities for Proton Beam Therapy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MZKWGFLP

@misc{pith2026260113577,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Toward Ultra-fast Treatments: Large Energy Acceptance Beam Delivery Systems and Opportunities for Proton Beam Therapy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MZKWGFLP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2601.13577}
}

read the original abstract

Treatment delivery is largely determined by capabilities of the beam delivery system (BDS), where faster delivery can have many potential benefits including improved dosimetric quality, utility, cost effectiveness, patient throughput and comfort. Despite significant developments in accelerators, delivery methodologies, dose optimisation and more, the energy layer switching time (ELST) is still a persisting limitation in existing BDS. The ELST can contribute significantly to beam delivery time (BDT) and extend treatment times, requiring compensation by optimisation planning approaches, motion mitigation strategies, or active beam modification. This fundamental constraint can be addressed by increasing the narrow energy acceptance range of conventional beamlines to minimise the ELST, enabling ultra-fast delivery. A large energy acceptance (LEA) BDS has the potential to revolutionise PBT through immediate improvements to current treatment delivery and emerging delivery modalities: the complete exploitation of PBT - and unlocking its full potential - can only be made possible with advances in beam delivery technologies. We review the abundant opportunities offered by an ultra-fast BDS: shorter treatment times, reduced motion induced dose degradation, improved effectiveness of motion management techniques, possibilities for volumetric rescanning, bidirectional delivery, further planning optimisation, and novel delivery strategies. We overview the design concepts of several LEA proposals, technology requirements, and also discuss the remaining challenges and considerations with realising a LEA BDS in practice. There are multiple avenues requiring further development and study, however the clinical potential and benefits of this enabling technology are clear: ultra-fast delivery offers both immediate and future improvements to PBT treatments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.13577 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Worldwide PBT and carbon ion beam therapy (CIBT) facilities: operational, anticipated (under construction) and proposed (planned), total number of CPT facilities listed above bars. PTCOG data updated Dec 2025 (5). Single room PBT facilities are those reported with one beam or gantry – including dedicated ocular and upright centers. compared to ∼USD $100-200M (13, 14) for a multi-room facility – the standard route in… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Compact, single-room PBT systems with gantries (left) and upright systems (middle, right). Hitachi (9), P-Cure and MedAustron synchrotron solutions (top). ProNova and Mevion upright solutions with the Leo Cancer Care Marie chair (bottom, right). Images reproduced with permission, P-cure, ProNova Solutions and Mevion Medical Systems, pending permission from MedAustron. beam momentum range bypasses restrictions impose… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Schematic showing typical PBS delivery. 3D coverage of the treatment volume is achieved by scanning the beam across a layer (in the X–Y plane) in a predetermined pattern before the energy is lowered reaching a shorter depth (in Z), then scanned across and repeated again for each consecutive layer. Adapted from (17). The resulting dose distribution is highly configurable: delivery parameters can in principle be varie… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (9 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Beams with a narrow (0.05%, top left) and wide (3.5%, bottom left) incident energy spread (ES) and their resulting spread out BPs (right). A shallower surface dose and sharper distal fall-off can be achieved with a smaller beam energy spread. Reproduced with permission…

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Magnet ramping sequence (shown for rescanning), conventionally from high to low energies, adapted from (66). Schematic of a hysteresis loop showing the field current correlation for an electromagnet. Stable delivery follows the cycle from maximum to minimum energy when…

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Dose distributions for a stationary target (left) and with motion applied (right), modelled on natural breathing, axes in mm. Resulting inhomogeneities and hot spots are shown when considering a liver case (top) or a 4 cm diameter spherical target (bottom) in a moving …

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Delivery optimised for a simulated 4DCT plan accounting for breathing motion during tumour tracking for a momentum acceptance range within a realistic treatment band (left) and without limitation (right), adapted from (98). The number of energy layers is not typically …

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Energy meandering scheme showing ramping profile for both ‘up’ and ‘down’ sides of the hysteresis loop (see also [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Schematic showing components which may typically comprise an ESS (left), adapted from (153). Beam energies are reduced after passing through the degrader, resulting in particles with a spread of momenta (right). The ESS aperture indicates the distribution of particles …

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Rendering of two curved CCT dipole layers (left) and photo of the fabricated mandrel assembly (right). Figures pending copyright permissions. This is a provisional file, not the final typeset article 22 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_10.png]

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: Calculated increases in beam size using the same nozzle geometry for various proton energies (left), also showing the effect of reducing the drift distance in air by 40 cm (red) (198). Measured spot sizes (FWHM) at isocentre in air, at different PBT facilities (right)…

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: Upright static arc delivery with TBs (left), adapted from (227). Illustration showing the arrangement of transmission (‘shoot through’) beams to irradiate small spots at the target boundary with larger, conventional BP spots for the remainder of the volume (right) (23…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

234 extracted references · 158 canonical work pages

[1]

Physics and biomedical challenges.Nature Reviews Physics 0123456789(2021)

Durante M, Debus J, Loeffler JS. Physics and biomedical challenges.Nature Reviews Physics 0123456789(2021). doi:10.1038/s42254-021-00368-5

work page doi:10.1038/s42254-021-00368-5 2021
[2]

The role of radiotherapy in cancer treatment: Estimating optimal utilization from a review of evidence-based clinical guidelines.Cancer104 (2005) 1129–1137

Delaney G, Jacob S, Featherstone C, Barton M. The role of radiotherapy in cancer treatment: Estimating optimal utilization from a review of evidence-based clinical guidelines.Cancer104 (2005) 1129–1137. doi:10.1002/cncr.21324

doi:10.1002/cncr.21324 2005
[3]

Estimating the demand for radiotherapy from the evidence: A review of changes from 2003 to 2012.Radiotherapy and Oncology112(2014) 140–144

Barton MB, Jacob S, Shafiq J, Wong K, Thompson SR, Hanna TP, et al. Estimating the demand for radiotherapy from the evidence: A review of changes from 2003 to 2012.Radiotherapy and Oncology112(2014) 140–144. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2014.03.024

doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2014.03.024 2003
[4]

Global democratisation of proton radiotherapy.The Lancet Oncology24(2023) e245–e254

Yan S, Ngoma TA, Ngwa W, Bortfeld TR. Global democratisation of proton radiotherapy.The Lancet Oncology24(2023) e245–e254. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(23)00184-5

work page doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00184-5 2023
[5]

Particle therapy facilities

[Dataset] Particle Therapy Co-Operative Group (PTCOG). Particle therapy facilities. https://www.ptcog.site/index.php/facilities-in-operation-public (2025)

2025
[6]

Radiotherapy and theranostics: A Lancet Oncology Commission.The Lancet Oncology25(2024) e545–e580

Abdel-Wahab M, Giammarile F, Carrara M, Paez D, Hricak H, Ayati N, et al. Radiotherapy and theranostics: A Lancet Oncology Commission.The Lancet Oncology25(2024) e545–e580. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(24)00407-8

work page doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00407-8 2024
[7]

Three ways to make proton therapy affordable.Nature549(2017) 451–453

Bortfeld TR, Loeffler JS. Three ways to make proton therapy affordable.Nature549(2017) 451–453. doi:10.1038/549451a. Frontiers 27 Yap et al.Toward Ultra-fast PBT Treatments

work page doi:10.1038/549451a 2017
[8]

Commissioning of the world’s first compact pencil-beam scanning proton therapy system.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics19(2018) 94–105

Pidikiti R, Patel BC, Maynard MR, Dugas JP, Syh J, Sahoo N, et al. Commissioning of the world’s first compact pencil-beam scanning proton therapy system.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics19(2018) 94–105. doi:10.1002/acm2.12225

work page doi:10.1002/acm2.12225 2018

Show all 234 references

[9]

Hadron Therapy Achievements and Challenges: The CNAO Experience.Physics4(2022) 229–257

Rossi S. Hadron Therapy Achievements and Challenges: The CNAO Experience.Physics4(2022) 229–257. doi:10.3390/physics4010017

2022 doi
[10]

Commissioning of a novel gantry-less proton therapy system.Frontiers in Oncology(2024)

Feldman J, Pryanichnikov A, Achkienasi A, Polyansky I, Hillman Y , Raskin S, et al. Commissioning of a novel gantry-less proton therapy system.Frontiers in Oncology(2024)

2024
[11]

Updated Status of Protom Synchrotrons for Radiation Therapy.Proceedings of the 27th Russian Particle Accelerator Conference(2021), vol

Balakin V , Pryanichnikov A, Alexandrov V , Bazhan A, Belikhin M, Chashurin V , et al. Updated Status of Protom Synchrotrons for Radiation Therapy.Proceedings of the 27th Russian Particle Accelerator Conference(2021), vol. RuPAC2021, 4 pages, 0.468 MB. doi:10.18429/ JACOW-RUPA...

2021
[12]

Proton Facility Economics: Single-Room Centers.Journal of the American College of Radiology15(2018) 1704–1708

Kerstiens J, Johnstone GP, Johnstone PA. Proton Facility Economics: Single-Room Centers.Journal of the American College of Radiology15(2018) 1704–1708. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2018.07.020

2018 doi
[13]

Proton Beam Therapy for the Treatment of Cancer in Children and Adults: A Health Technology Assessment

Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH). Proton Beam Therapy for the Treatment of Cancer in Children and Adults: A Health Technology Assessment. CADTH HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT no.145, Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (2017)

2017
[14]

Inequality in Accessibility of Proton Therapy for Cancers and Its Economic Determinants: A Cross-Sectional Study.Frontiers in Oncology12(2022)

Xia Z, Wang J, Xia J, Wang M, Cheng Z. Inequality in Accessibility of Proton Therapy for Cancers and Its Economic Determinants: A Cross-Sectional Study.Frontiers in Oncology12(2022). doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.876368

2022
[15]

The societal impact of ion beam therapy.Zeitschrift fur Medizinische Physik(2020) 6–8

Bortfeld TR, de Viana MF, Yan S. The societal impact of ion beam therapy.Zeitschrift fur Medizinische Physik(2020) 6–8. doi:10.1016/j.zemedi.2020.06.007

2020 doi
[16]

Retrofitting LINAC Vaults for Compact Proton Systems—Experiences Learned.IEEE Transactions on Radiation and Plasma Medical Sciences6(2022) 282–287

Clasie BM, Bortfeld TR, Kooy HM, Seybolt K, Sharp GC, Winey B. Retrofitting LINAC Vaults for Compact Proton Systems—Experiences Learned.IEEE Transactions on Radiation and Plasma Medical Sciences6(2022) 282–287. doi:10.1109/TRPMS.2021.3083982

2022
[17]

Future Developments in Charged Particle Therapy: Improving Beam Delivery for Efficiency and Efficacy.Frontiers in Oncology11(2021) 1–25

Yap J, De Franco A, Sheehy S. Future Developments in Charged Particle Therapy: Improving Beam Delivery for Efficiency and Efficacy.Frontiers in Oncology11(2021) 1–25. doi:10.3389/fonc.2021. 780025

2021 doi
[18]

Roadmap: Proton therapy physics and biology.Physics in Medicine & Biology66(2021) 05RM01

Paganetti H, Beltran C, Both S, Dong L, Flanz J, Furutani K, et al. Roadmap: Proton therapy physics and biology.Physics in Medicine & Biology66(2021) 05RM01. doi:10.1088/1361-6560/abcd16

2021 doi
[19]

Proton therapy delivery : What is needed in the next ten years ?British Journal of Radiology2019(2020)

Schreuder AN, Shamblin J. Proton therapy delivery : What is needed in the next ten years ?British Journal of Radiology2019(2020)

2020
[20]

Future Prospects for Particle Therapy Accelerators.Reviews of Accelerator Science and Technology10(2019) 49–92

Myers S, Degiovanni A, Farr JB. Future Prospects for Particle Therapy Accelerators.Reviews of Accelerator Science and Technology10(2019) 49–92. doi:10.1142/s1793626819300056

2019 doi
[21]

Future technological developments in proton therapy - A predicted technological breakthrough.Cancer / Radiotherapie (2021)

Vidal M, Moignier C, Patriarca A, Sotiropoulos M, Schneider T, Marzi LD. Future technological developments in proton therapy - A predicted technological breakthrough.Cancer / Radiotherapie (2021). doi:10.1016/j.canrad.2021.06.017

2021 doi
[22]

(The) future (of) synchrotrons for particle therapy.CERN Yellow Reports: School Proceedings1(2017) 293–307

Flanz J. (The) future (of) synchrotrons for particle therapy.CERN Yellow Reports: School Proceedings1(2017) 293–307. doi:10.23730/CYRSP-2017-001.293

2017 doi
[23]

Proton therapy – Present and future.Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews109 (2017) 26–44

Mohan R, Grosshans D. Proton therapy – Present and future.Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews109 (2017) 26–44. doi:10.1016/j.addr.2016.11.006

2017 doi
[24]

New horizons in particle therapy systems.Medical Physics45(2018) e953–e983

Farr JB, Flanz JB, Gerbershagen A, Moyers MF. New horizons in particle therapy systems.Medical Physics45(2018) e953–e983. doi:10.1002/mp.13193. This is a provisional file, not the final typeset article28 Yap et al.Toward Ultra-fast PBT Treatments

2018 doi
[25]

Accelerators, Gantries, Magnets and Imaging Systems for Particle Beam Therapy: Recent Status and Prospects for Improvement.Frontiers in Oncology11 (2022) 1–20

Collings EW, Lu L, Gupta N, Sumption MD. Accelerators, Gantries, Magnets and Imaging Systems for Particle Beam Therapy: Recent Status and Prospects for Improvement.Frontiers in Oncology11 (2022) 1–20. doi:10.3389/fonc.2021.737837

2022
[26]

Emerging technologies for cancer therapy using accelerated particles

Graeff C, V olz L, Durante M. Emerging technologies for cancer therapy using accelerated particles. Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics131(2023) 104046. doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2023.104046

2023
[27]

A review of proton therapy – Current status and future directions.Precision Radiation Oncology6(2022) 164–176

Mohan R. A review of proton therapy – Current status and future directions.Precision Radiation Oncology6(2022) 164–176. doi:10.1002/pro6.1149

2022 doi
[28]

Zenklusen SM, Pedroni E, Meer D. A study on repainting strategies for treating moderately moving targets with proton pencil beam scanning at the new gantry 2 at PSI.Physics in Medicine and Biology 55(2010) 5103–5121. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/55/17/014

2010 doi
[29]

Review of technologies and procedures of clinical dosimetry for scanned ion beam radiotherapy.Physica Medica43(2017) 79–99

Giordanengo S, Manganaro L, Vignati A. Review of technologies and procedures of clinical dosimetry for scanned ion beam radiotherapy.Physica Medica43(2017) 79–99. doi:10.1016/j.ejmp. 2017.10.013

2017 doi
[30]

van de Water TA, Lomax AJ, Bijl HP, Schilstra C, Hug EB, Langendijk JA. Using a Reduced Spot Size for Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy Potentially Improves Salivary Gland-Sparing in Oropharyngeal Cancer.International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics82(2012) e313...

2012 doi
[31]

Effects of spot parameters in pencil beam scanning treatment planning.Medical Physics45(2018) 60–73

Kraan AC, Depauw N, Clasie B, Giunta M, Madden T, Kooy HM. Effects of spot parameters in pencil beam scanning treatment planning.Medical Physics45(2018) 60–73. doi:10.1002/mp.12675

2018 doi
[32]

Cyclotron and linear accelerator generated scanning proton beams for lung cancer SBRT: Interplay effects and mitigations

Liu CW, Kolano AM, Gray T, Stephans KL, Videtic GMM, Farr JB, et al. Cyclotron and linear accelerator generated scanning proton beams for lung cancer SBRT: Interplay effects and mitigations. Medical Physics(2024) mp.17082. doi:10.1002/mp.17082

2024 doi
[33]

Impact of varying planning parameters on proton pencil beam scanning dose distributions in four commercial treatment planning systems.Medical Physics46(2019) 1150–1162

Alshaikhi J, Doolan PJ, D’Souza D, Holloway SM, Amos RA, Royle G. Impact of varying planning parameters on proton pencil beam scanning dose distributions in four commercial treatment planning systems.Medical Physics46(2019) 1150–1162. doi:10.1002/mp.13382

2019 doi
[34]

Energy spectrum control for modulated proton beams.Medical Physics36(2009) 2297–2308

Hsi WC, Moyers MF, Nichiporov D, Anferov V , Wolanski M, Allgower CE, et al. Energy spectrum control for modulated proton beams.Medical Physics36(2009) 2297–2308. doi:10.1118/1.3132422

2009 doi
[35]

Geant4 simulations of proton beam transport through a carbon or beryllium degrader and following a beam line.Physics in Medicine and Biology54(2009) 5831–5846

Van Goethem MJ, Van Der Meer R, Reist HW, Schippers JM. Geant4 simulations of proton beam transport through a carbon or beryllium degrader and following a beam line.Physics in Medicine and Biology54(2009) 5831–5846. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/54/19/011

2009 doi
[36]

Management of Motion and Anatomical Variations in Charged Particle Therapy: Past, Present, and Into the Future.Frontiers in Oncology12(2022) 1–16

Pakela JM, Knopf A, Dong L, Rucinski A, Zou W. Management of Motion and Anatomical Variations in Charged Particle Therapy: Past, Present, and Into the Future.Frontiers in Oncology12(2022) 1–16. doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.806153

2022
[37]

Particle therapy in the future of precision therapy.The British journal of radiology93(2020) 20200183

Schaub L, Harrabi SB, Debus J. Particle therapy in the future of precision therapy.The British journal of radiology93(2020) 20200183. doi:10.1259/bjr.20200183

2020 doi
[38]

Quantitative analysis of treatment process time and throughput capacity for spot scanning proton therapy.Medical Physics 43(2016) 3975–3986

Suzuki K, Palmer MB, Sahoo N, Zhang X, Poenisch F, MacKin DS, et al. Quantitative analysis of treatment process time and throughput capacity for spot scanning proton therapy.Medical Physics 43(2016) 3975–3986. doi:10.1118/1.4952731

2016 doi
[39]

Technical Note: Using experimentally determined proton spot scanning timing parameters to accurately model beam delivery time.Medical Physics44(2017) 5081–5088

Shen J, Tryggestad E, Younkin JE, Keole SR, Furutani KM, Kang Y , et al. Technical Note: Using experimentally determined proton spot scanning timing parameters to accurately model beam delivery time.Medical Physics44(2017) 5081–5088. doi:10.1002/mp.12504

2017 doi
[40]

Retrospective analysis of reduced energy switching and room switching times on throughput efficiency of a multi-room proton therapy center.British Journal of Radiology93(2020)

Mah D, Chen CC, Nawaz AO, Galbreath G, Shmulenson R, Lee N, et al. Retrospective analysis of reduced energy switching and room switching times on throughput efficiency of a multi-room proton therapy center.British Journal of Radiology93(2020). doi:10.1259/bjr.20190820. Frontie...

2020 doi
[41]

Pencil beam characteristics of the next-generation proton scanning gantry of PSI: Design issues and initial commissioning results.European Physical Journal Plus126(2011) 1–27

Pedroni E, Meer D, Bula C, Safai S, Zenklusen S. Pencil beam characteristics of the next-generation proton scanning gantry of PSI: Design issues and initial commissioning results.European Physical Journal Plus126(2011) 1–27. doi:10.1140/epjp/i2011-11066-0

2011 doi
[42]

Effect of the initial energy layer and spot placement parameters on IMPT delivery efficiency and plan quality.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics(2023) e13997

Zhu M, Flampouri S, Stanforth A, Slopsema R, Diamond Z, LePain W, et al. Effect of the initial energy layer and spot placement parameters on IMPT delivery efficiency and plan quality.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics(2023) e13997. doi:10.1002/acm2.13997

2023 doi
[43]

Mizushima K, Furukawa T, Iwata Y , Hara Y , Saotome N, Saraya Y , et al. Performance of the HIMAC beam control system using multiple-energy synchrotron operation.Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms406(2017)...

2017 doi
[44]

Multiple energy extraction reduces beam delivery time for a synchrotron-based proton spot-scanning system.Advances in Radiation Oncology3(2018) 412–420

Younkin JE, Bues M, Sio TT, Liu W, Ding X, Keole SR, et al. Multiple energy extraction reduces beam delivery time for a synchrotron-based proton spot-scanning system.Advances in Radiation Oncology3(2018) 412–420. doi:10.1016/j.adro.2018.02.006

2018 doi
[45]

The Influence of Motion on the Delivery Accuracy When Comparing Actively Scanned Carbon Ions versus Protons at a Synchrotron-Based Radiotherapy Facility.Cancers14(2022) 1–14

Lebbink F, Stock M, Georg D, Kn¨ausl B. The Influence of Motion on the Delivery Accuracy When Comparing Actively Scanned Carbon Ions versus Protons at a Synchrotron-Based Radiotherapy Facility.Cancers14(2022) 1–14

2022
[46]

Zhao L, Liu G, Chen S, Shen J, Zheng W, Qin A, et al. Developing an accurate model of spot- scanning treatment delivery time and sequence for a compact superconducting synchrocyclotron proton therapy system.Radiation Oncology17(2022) 87. doi:10.1186/s13014-022-02055-w

2022 doi
[47]

Beam commissioning of the first compact proton therapy system with spot scanning and dynamic field collimation.The British journal of radiology93(2020) 20190598

Vilches-Freixas G, Unipan M, Rinaldi I, Martens J, Roijen E, Almeida IP, et al. Beam commissioning of the first compact proton therapy system with spot scanning and dynamic field collimation.The British journal of radiology93(2020) 20190598. doi:10.1259/bjr.20190598

2020 doi
[48]

Optimization of synchrotron based ion beam therapy facilities for treatment time reduction, options and the MedAustron development roadmap.Physica Medica81(2021) 264–272

De Franco A, Schmitzer C, Gambino N, Glatzl T, Myalski S, Pivi M. Optimization of synchrotron based ion beam therapy facilities for treatment time reduction, options and the MedAustron development roadmap.Physica Medica81(2021) 264–272. doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.11.029

2021 doi
[50]

Noda K, Furukawa T, Fujimoto T, Hara Y , Inaniwa T, Iwata Y , et al. Recent progress and future plans of heavy-ion cancer radiotherapy with HIMAC.Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms406(2017) 374–378. doi:10...

2017
[51]

3D range-modulator for scanned particle therapy: Development, Monte Carlo simulations and experimental evaluation

Simeonov Y , Weber U, Penchev P, Ringbæk TP, Schuy C, Brons S, et al. 3D range-modulator for scanned particle therapy: Development, Monte Carlo simulations and experimental evaluation. Physics in Medicine and Biology62(2017) 7075–7096. doi:10.1088/1361-6560/aa81f4

2017 doi
[52]

Design and construction of a ripple filter for a smoothed depth dose distribution in conformal particle therapy.Physics in Medicine and Biology44(1999) 2765–2775

Weber U, Kraft G. Design and construction of a ripple filter for a smoothed depth dose distribution in conformal particle therapy.Physics in Medicine and Biology44(1999) 2765–2775. doi:10.1088/ 0031-9155/44/11/306

1999
[53]

The advantages and challenges of superconducting magnets in particle therapy.Superconductor Science and Technology29(2016)

Gerbershagen A, Calzolaio C, Meer D, Sanfilippo S, Schippers M. The advantages and challenges of superconducting magnets in particle therapy.Superconductor Science and Technology29(2016). doi:10.1088/0953-2048/29/8/083001

2016 doi
[54]

A predictive algorithm for spot position corrections after fast energy switching in proton pencil beam scanning.Medical Physics45(2018) 4806–4815

Psoroulas S, Bula C, Actis O, Weber DC, Meer D. A predictive algorithm for spot position corrections after fast energy switching in proton pencil beam scanning.Medical Physics45(2018) 4806–4815. doi:10.1002/mp.13217. This is a provisional file, not the final typeset article30 ...

2018 doi
[55]

Chaudhri N, Saito N, Bert C, Franczak B, Steidl P, Durante M, et al. Ion-optical studies for a range adaptation method in ion beam therapy using a static wedge degrader combined with magnetic beam deflection.Physics in Medicine and Biology55(2010) 3499–3513. doi:10.1088/0031-9...

2010 doi
[56]

The potential of Gantry beamline large momentum acceptance for real time tumour tracking in pencil beam scanning proton therapy

Fattori G, Zhang Y , Meer D, Weber DC, Lomax AJ, Safai S. The potential of Gantry beamline large momentum acceptance for real time tumour tracking in pencil beam scanning proton therapy. Scientific Reports10(2020) 1–13. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-71821-1

2020 doi
[57]

Large energy acceptance gantry for proton therapy utilizing superconducting technology.Physics in Medicine and Biology64 (2019)

Nesteruk KP, Calzolaio C, Meer D, Rizzoglio V , Seidel M, Schippers JM. Large energy acceptance gantry for proton therapy utilizing superconducting technology.Physics in Medicine and Biology64 (2019). doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ab2f5f

2019 doi
[58]

Commissioning and beam characterization of the first gantry-mounted accelerator pencil beam scanning proton system.Medical Physics47(2020) 3496–3510

Kang M, Pang D. Commissioning and beam characterization of the first gantry-mounted accelerator pencil beam scanning proton system.Medical Physics47(2020) 3496–3510. doi:10.1002/mp.13972

2020 doi
[59]

Dosimetric evaluation of dose shaping by adaptive aperture and its impact on plan quality.Medical Dosimetry49(2024) 30–36

Silvus A, Haefner J, Altman MB, Zhao T, Perkins S, Zhang T. Dosimetric evaluation of dose shaping by adaptive aperture and its impact on plan quality.Medical Dosimetry49(2024) 30–36. doi:10.1016/j.meddos.2023.10.011

2024 doi
[60]

Grewal HS, Ahmad S, Jin H. Performance evaluation of adaptive aperture’s static and dynamic collimation in a compact pencil beam scanning proton therapy system: A dosimetric comparison study for multiple disease sites.Medical Dosimetry46(2021) 179–187. doi:10.1016/j.meddos.2020.11.001

2021 doi
[61]

Clinical Implementation of Proton Therapy Using Pencil-Beam Scanning Delivery Combined With Static Apertures.Frontiers in Oncology11(2021) 1–11

B¨aumer C, Plaude S, Khalil DA, Geismar D, Kramer PH, Kr¨oninger K, et al. Clinical Implementation of Proton Therapy Using Pencil-Beam Scanning Delivery Combined With Static Apertures.Frontiers in Oncology11(2021) 1–11. doi:10.3389/fonc.2021.599018

2021
[62]

Characterization of penumbra sharpening and scattering by adaptive aperture for a compact pencil beam scanning proton therapy system.Medical Physics48(2021) 1508–1519

Grewal HS, Ahmad S, Jin H. Characterization of penumbra sharpening and scattering by adaptive aperture for a compact pencil beam scanning proton therapy system.Medical Physics48(2021) 1508–1519. doi:10.1002/mp.14771

2021 doi
[63]

Operational and design aspects of accelerators for medical applications

Schippers JM, Seidel M. Operational and design aspects of accelerators for medical applications. Physical Review Special Topics - Accelerators and Beams18(2015) 1–7. doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTAB. 18.034801

2015 doi
[64]

A novel beam optics concept in a particle therapy gantry utilizing the advantages of superconducting magnets.Zeitschrift fur Medizinische Physik26 (2016) 224–237

Gerbershagen A, Meer D, Schippers JM, Seidel M. A novel beam optics concept in a particle therapy gantry utilizing the advantages of superconducting magnets.Zeitschrift fur Medizinische Physik26 (2016) 224–237. doi:10.1016/j.zemedi.2016.03.006

2016 doi
[65]

Beam properties within the momentum acceptance of a clinical gantry beamline for proton therapy.Medical Physics(2021) 1–15

Giovannelli AC, Maradia V , Meer D, Safai S, Psoroulas S, Togno M, et al. Beam properties within the momentum acceptance of a clinical gantry beamline for proton therapy.Medical Physics(2021) 1–15. doi:10.1002/mp.15449

2021 doi
[66]

Precise beam delivery for proton therapy with dynamic energy modulation.Journal of Physics: Conference Series1067(2018)

Actis O, Mayor A, Meer D, Weber D. Precise beam delivery for proton therapy with dynamic energy modulation.Journal of Physics: Conference Series1067(2018). doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1067/9/ 092002

2018 doi
[67]

A bi-directional beam-line energy ramping for efficient patient treatment with scanned proton therapy.Physics in Medicine & Biology68(2023) 175001

Actis O, Mayor A, Meer D, Rechsteiner U, Bolsi A, Lomax AJ, et al. A bi-directional beam-line energy ramping for efficient patient treatment with scanned proton therapy.Physics in Medicine & Biology68(2023) 175001. doi:10.1088/1361-6560/acebb2

2023 doi
[68]

Operational Improvement of a Proton Therapy System From Reduced Energy Layer Switching Time.International Journal of Particle Therapy16(2025) 100742

Artz ME, Grewal HS, Zhang Y , Johnson PB, Saki M, Schreuder N, et al. Operational Improvement of a Proton Therapy System From Reduced Energy Layer Switching Time.International Journal of Particle Therapy16(2025) 100742. doi:10.1016/j.ijpt.2025.100742

2025
[69]

Simultaneous reduction of number of spots and energy layers in intensity modulated proton therapy for rapid spot scanning delivery.Medical Physics(2024) mp.17070

Fu A, Taasti VT, Zarepisheh M. Simultaneous reduction of number of spots and energy layers in intensity modulated proton therapy for rapid spot scanning delivery.Medical Physics(2024) mp.17070. doi:10.1002/mp.17070. Frontiers 31 Yap et al.Toward Ultra-fast PBT Treatments

2024 doi
[70]

The use of a mini-ridge filter with cyclotron-based pencil beam scanning proton therapy.Medical Physics(2023) mp.16254

O’Grady F, Janson M, Rao AD, Chawla AK, Stephenson L, Fan J, et al. The use of a mini-ridge filter with cyclotron-based pencil beam scanning proton therapy.Medical Physics(2023) mp.16254. doi:10.1002/mp.16254

2023 doi
[71]

Prioritized efficiency optimization for intensity modulated proton therapy

M¨uller BS, Wilkens JJ. Prioritized efficiency optimization for intensity modulated proton therapy. Physics in Medicine and Biology61(2016) 8249–8265. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/61/23/8249

2016 doi
[72]

Proton therapy of lung cancer patients – Treatment strategies and clinical experience from a medical physicist’s perspective.Physica Medica130(2025) 104890

Taasti VT, Kneepkens E, van der Stoep J, Velders M, Cobben M, Vullings A, et al. Proton therapy of lung cancer patients – Treatment strategies and clinical experience from a medical physicist’s perspective.Physica Medica130(2025) 104890. doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2024.104890

2025
[73]

Motion management in particle therapy.Medical Physics45(2018) e994–e1010

Mori S, Knopf AC, Umegaki K. Motion management in particle therapy.Medical Physics45(2018) e994–e1010. doi:10.1002/mp.12679

2018 doi
[74]

Motion mitigation in scanned ion beam therapy through 4D-optimization.Physica Medica 30(2014) 570–577

Graeff C. Motion mitigation in scanned ion beam therapy through 4D-optimization.Physica Medica 30(2014) 570–577. doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.03.011

2014 doi
[75]

A review of the clinical introduction of 4D particle therapy research concepts.Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology (2024) 100535

Kn¨ausl B, Belotti G, Bertholet J, Daartz J, Flampouri S, Hoogeman M, et al. A review of the clinical introduction of 4D particle therapy research concepts.Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology (2024) 100535. doi:10.1016/j.phro.2024.100535

2024
[76]

Physics Controversies in Proton Therapy.Seminars in Radiation Oncology23(2013) 88–96

Engelsman M, Schwarz M, Dong L. Physics Controversies in Proton Therapy.Seminars in Radiation Oncology23(2013) 88–96. doi:10.1016/j.semradonc.2012.11.003

2013 doi
[77]

Effects of respiratory motion on dose uniformity with a charged particle scanning method.Physics in Medicine and Biology37 (1992) 223–234

Phillips MH, Pedroni E, Blattmann H, Boehringer T, Coray A, Scheib S. Effects of respiratory motion on dose uniformity with a charged particle scanning method.Physics in Medicine and Biology37 (1992) 223–234. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/37/1/016

1992 doi
[78]

Quantification of interplay effects of scanned particle beams and moving targets.Physics in Medicine and Biology53(2008) 2253–2265

Bert C, Gr¨ozinger SO, Rietzel E. Quantification of interplay effects of scanned particle beams and moving targets.Physics in Medicine and Biology53(2008) 2253–2265. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/53/ 9/003

2008 doi
[79]

Shan J, Yang Y , Schild SE, Daniels TB, Wong WW, Fatyga M, et al. Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) interplay effect evaluation of asymmetric breathing with simultaneous uncertainty considerations in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.Medical Physics47(2020) 5428...

2020 doi
[80]

Dosimetric consequences of tumour motion due to respiration for a scanned proton beam.Physics in Medicine and Biology56(2011) 6563–6581

Kraus KM, Heath E, Oelfke U. Dosimetric consequences of tumour motion due to respiration for a scanned proton beam.Physics in Medicine and Biology56(2011) 6563–6581. doi:10.1088/ 0031-9155/56/20/003

2011
[81]

Li H, Zhu XR, Zhang X. Reducing Dose Uncertainty for Spot-Scanning Proton Beam Therapy of Moving Tumors by Optimizing the Spot Delivery Sequence.International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics93(2015) 547–556. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.06.019

2015 doi
[82]

A study of the beam-specific interplay effect in proton pencil beam scanning delivery in lung cancer.Acta Oncologica56(2017) 531–540

Kang M, Huang S, Solberg TD, Mayer R, Thomas A, Teo BKK, et al. A study of the beam-specific interplay effect in proton pencil beam scanning delivery in lung cancer.Acta Oncologica56(2017) 531–540. doi:10.1080/0284186X.2017.1293287

2017
[83]

Proton therapy in clinical practice.Chinese Journal of Cancer30(2011) 315–326

Liu H, Chang JY . Proton therapy in clinical practice.Chinese Journal of Cancer30(2011) 315–326. doi:10.5732/cjc.010.10529

2011 doi
[84]

K¨othe A, Lomax AJ, Giovannelli AC, Safai S, Bizzocchi N, Roelofs E, et al. The impact of organ motion and the appliance of mitigation strategies on the effectiveness of hypoxia-guided proton therapy for non-small cell lung cancer.Radiotherapy and Oncology176(2022) 208–214. do...

2022 doi
[85]

4-Dimensional Computed Tomography Imaging and Treatment Planning.Seminars in Radiation Oncology14(2004) 81–90

Keall P. 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography Imaging and Treatment Planning.Seminars in Radiation Oncology14(2004) 81–90. doi:10.1053/j.semradonc.2003.10.006. This is a provisional file, not the final typeset article32 Yap et al.Toward Ultra-fast PBT Treatments

2004 doi
[86]

Intrafraction motion during partial breast irradiation depends on treatment time.Radiotherapy and Oncology159(2021) 176–182

Hoekstra N, Habraken S, Swaak-Kragten A, Hoogeman M, Pignol JP. Intrafraction motion during partial breast irradiation depends on treatment time.Radiotherapy and Oncology159(2021) 176–182. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2021.03.029

2021 doi
[87]

Time Dependence of Intrafraction Patient Motion Assessed by Repeat Stereoscopic Imaging.International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics70(2008) 609–618

Hoogeman MS, Nuyttens JJ, Levendag PC, Heijmen BJ. Time Dependence of Intrafraction Patient Motion Assessed by Repeat Stereoscopic Imaging.International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics70(2008) 609–618. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.08.066

2008 doi
[88]

Motion in radiotherapy: Particle therapy.Physics in Medicine and Biology56 (2011) R113–R144

Bert C, Durante M. Motion in radiotherapy: Particle therapy.Physics in Medicine and Biology56 (2011) R113–R144. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/56/16/R01

2011 doi
[89]

Range Verification Methods in Particle Therapy: Underlying Physics and Monte Carlo Modeling.Frontiers in Oncology5(2015) 150

Kraan AC. Range Verification Methods in Particle Therapy: Underlying Physics and Monte Carlo Modeling.Frontiers in Oncology5(2015) 150. doi:10.3389/fonc.2015.00150

2015
[90]

In vivo proton range verification: A review.Physics in Medicine and Biology 58(2013) R131–R160

Knopf AC, Lomax A. In vivo proton range verification: A review.Physics in Medicine and Biology 58(2013) R131–R160. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/58/15/R131

2013 doi
[91]

A survey of practice patterns for real-time intrafractional motion-management in particle therapy.Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology26(2023) 100439

Zhang Y , Trnkova P, Toshito T, Heijmen B, Richter C, Aznar M, et al. A survey of practice patterns for real-time intrafractional motion-management in particle therapy.Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology26(2023) 100439. doi:10.1016/j.phro.2023.100439

2023
[92]

Respiratory motion management in particle therapy.Medical Physics37(2010) 449–460

Rietzel E, Bert C. Respiratory motion management in particle therapy.Medical Physics37(2010) 449–460. doi:10.1118/1.3250856

2010 doi
[93]

Poulsen PR, Eley J, Langner U, Simone CB, Langen K. Efficient Interplay Effect Mitigation for Proton Pencil Beam Scanning by Spot-Adapted Layered Repainting Evenly Spread out Over the Full Breathing Cycle.International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics100(2018) 226...

2018 doi
[94]

Younkin JE, Morales DH, Shen J, Ding X, Stoker JB, Yu NY , et al. Technical Note: Multiple energy extraction techniques for synchrotron-based proton delivery systems may exacerbate motion interplay effects in lung cancer treatments.Medical Physics48(2021) 4812–4823. doi:10.100...

2021 doi
[95]

Maximum proton kinetic energy and patient-generated neutron fluence considerations in proton beam arc delivery radiation therapy

Sengbusch E, P ´erez-And´ujar A, DeLuca PM, Mackie TR. Maximum proton kinetic energy and patient-generated neutron fluence considerations in proton beam arc delivery radiation therapy. Medical Physics36(2009) 364–372. doi:10.1118/1.3049787

2009 doi
[96]

Does the Maximum Initial Beam Energy for Proton Therapy Have to Be 230 MeV?Quantum Beam Science8(2024) 23

Beltran CJ, Perales A, Furutani KM. Does the Maximum Initial Beam Energy for Proton Therapy Have to Be 230 MeV?Quantum Beam Science8(2024) 23. doi:10.3390/qubs8030023

2024 doi
[97]

Improving delivery efficiency using spots and energy layers reduction algorithms based on a large momentum acceptance beamline.Medical Physics(2023) mp.16420

Wang W, Liu X, Yang Z, Liao Y , Li P, Zhao R, et al. Improving delivery efficiency using spots and energy layers reduction algorithms based on a large momentum acceptance beamline.Medical Physics(2023) mp.16420. doi:10.1002/mp.16420

2023 doi
[98]

Exploring beamline momentum acceptance for tracking respiratory variability in lung cancer proton therapy: A simulation study

Giovannelli AC, K¨othe A, Safai S, Meer D, Zhang Y , Weber DC, et al. Exploring beamline momentum acceptance for tracking respiratory variability in lung cancer proton therapy: A simulation study. Physics in Medicine & Biology(2023). doi:10.1088/1361-6560/acf5c4

2023 doi
[99]

Energy layer optimization strategies for intensity-modulated proton therapy of lung cancer patients.Medical Physics45(2018) 4355–4363

Jensen MF, Hoffmann L, Petersen JBB, Møller DS, Alber M. Energy layer optimization strategies for intensity-modulated proton therapy of lung cancer patients.Medical Physics45(2018) 4355–4363. doi:10.1002/mp.13139

2018 doi
[100]

Proton energy optimization and reduction for intensity-modulated proton therapy.Physics in Medicine and Biology59(2014) 6341–6354

Cao W, Lim G, Liao L, Li Y , Jiang S, Li X, et al. Proton energy optimization and reduction for intensity-modulated proton therapy.Physics in Medicine and Biology59(2014) 6341–6354. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/59/21/6341

2014 doi
[101]

Minimum-MU and sparse-energy-layer (MMSEL) constrained inverse optimization method for efficiently deliverable PBS plans.Physics in Medicine & Biology64(2019) 205001

Lin Y , Clasie B, Liu T, McDonald M, Langen KM, Gao H. Minimum-MU and sparse-energy-layer (MMSEL) constrained inverse optimization method for efficiently deliverable PBS plans.Physics in Medicine & Biology64(2019) 205001. doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ab4529. Frontiers 33 Yap et al.To...

2019 doi
[102]

Gao H, Clasie B, McDonald M, Langen KM, Liu T, Lin Y . Technical Note: Plan-delivery-time constrained inverse optimization method with minimum-MU-per-energy-layer (MMPEL) for efficient pencil beam scanning proton therapy.Medical Physics47(2020) 3892–3897. doi:10.1002/mp.14363

2020 doi
[105]

Cardinality-constrained plan-quality and delivery-time optimization method for proton therapy.Medical Physics51(2024) 4567–4580

Lin B, Li Y , Liu B, Fu S, Lin Y , Gao H. Cardinality-constrained plan-quality and delivery-time optimization method for proton therapy.Medical Physics51(2024) 4567–4580. doi:10.1002/mp. 17249

2024 doi
[106]

Kang M, Wei S, Choi JI, Lin H, Simone CB. A Universal Range Shifter and Range Compensator Can Enable Proton Pencil Beam Scanning Single-Energy Bragg Peak FLASH-RT Treatment Using Current Commercially Available Proton Systems.International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*...

2022 doi
[107]

Bridging research and clinical practice in ultra-high dose rate proton therapy.The European Physical Journal Plus(2025)

Schwarz M. Bridging research and clinical practice in ultra-high dose rate proton therapy.The European Physical Journal Plus(2025)

2025
[108]

Design of static and dynamic ridge filters for FLASH–IMPT: A simulation study.Medical Physics49(2022) 5387–5399

Zhang G, Gao W, Peng H. Design of static and dynamic ridge filters for FLASH–IMPT: A simulation study.Medical Physics49(2022) 5387–5399. doi:10.1002/mp.15717

2022 doi
[109]

A Novel Energy Modulator Design Concept for FLASH Proton Therapy.Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering11(2025) 1–4

Hagmann V , Colizzi I, Ambruosi A, Lomax AJ, Meer D, Psoroulas S, et al. A Novel Energy Modulator Design Concept for FLASH Proton Therapy.Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering11(2025) 1–4. doi:10.1515/cdbme-2025-0101

2025 doi
[110]

Experimental validation of coarse ridge filters for FLASH proton therapy.Medical Physics52(2025) e18044

Hotoiu L, Stappen FV , Pin A, Nilsson R, Ivoc J, Kim M, et al. Experimental validation of coarse ridge filters for FLASH proton therapy.Medical Physics52(2025) e18044. doi:10.1002/mp.18044

2025 doi
[111]

Commissioning of a clinical pencil beam scanning proton therapy unit for ultra-high dose rates (FLASH).Medical Physics48(2021) 4017–4026

Nesteruk KP, Togno M, Grossmann M, Lomax AJ, Weber DC, Schippers JM, et al. Commissioning of a clinical pencil beam scanning proton therapy unit for ultra-high dose rates (FLASH).Medical Physics48(2021) 4017–4026. doi:10.1002/mp.14933

2021 doi
[112]

Feasibility study of multiple-energy Bragg peak proton FLASH on a superconducting gantry with large momentum acceptance.Medical Physics (2024) mp.16932

Zeng Y , Li H, Wang W, Liu X, Qin B, Dai S, et al. Feasibility study of multiple-energy Bragg peak proton FLASH on a superconducting gantry with large momentum acceptance.Medical Physics (2024) mp.16932. doi:10.1002/mp.16932

2024 doi
[113]

Treatment parameters consideration for universal range shifter-based multi-energy proton FLASH-RT.Medical Physics52(2025) e70039

Zeng Y , Quan H, Zhang Q, Wang W, Liu X, Qin B, et al. Treatment parameters consideration for universal range shifter-based multi-energy proton FLASH-RT.Medical Physics52(2025) e70039. doi:10.1002/mp.70039

2025 doi
[114]

Ultra-High dose rate radiation production and delivery systems intended for FLASH.Medical Physics(2022) 1–37

Farr J, Grilj V , Malka V , Sudharsan S, Schippers M. Ultra-High dose rate radiation production and delivery systems intended for FLASH.Medical Physics(2022) 1–37. doi:10.1002/mp.15659

2022 doi
[115]

Biological and Mechanical Synergies to Deal With Proton Therapy Pitfalls: Minibeams, FLASH, Arcs, and Gantryless Rooms.Frontiers in Oncology10(2021) 1–14

Mazal A, Vera Sanchez JA, Sanchez-Parcerisa D, Udias JM, Espa˜na S, Sanchez-Tembleque V , et al. Biological and Mechanical Synergies to Deal With Proton Therapy Pitfalls: Minibeams, FLASH, Arcs, and Gantryless Rooms.Frontiers in Oncology10(2021) 1–14. doi:10.3389/fonc.2020.613669

2021
[116]

Technical challenges for FLASH proton therapy.Physica Medica78(2020) 71–82

Jolly S, Owen H, Schippers M, Welsch C. Technical challenges for FLASH proton therapy.Physica Medica78(2020) 71–82. doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.08.005

2020 doi
[117]

Physics and biology of ultrahigh dose-rate (FLASH) radiotherapy: A topical review.Physics in Medicine and Biology65(2020)

Esplen N, Mendonca MS, Bazalova-Carter M. Physics and biology of ultrahigh dose-rate (FLASH) radiotherapy: A topical review.Physics in Medicine and Biology65(2020). doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ abaa28. This is a provisional file, not the final typeset article34 Yap et al.Toward Ultr...

2020 doi
[118]

Navigating the straits: Realizing the potential of proton FLASH through physics advances and further pre-clinical characterization

Fenwick JD, Mayhew C, Jolly S, Amos RA, Hawkins MA. Navigating the straits: Realizing the potential of proton FLASH through physics advances and further pre-clinical characterization. Frontiers in Oncology14(2024) 1420337. doi:10.3389/fonc.2024.1420337

2024
[119]

The first direct method of spot sparsity optimization for proton arc therapy.Acta Oncologica62(2023) 48–52

Zhao L, You J, Liu G, Wuyckens S, Lu X, Ding X. The first direct method of spot sparsity optimization for proton arc therapy.Acta Oncologica62(2023) 48–52. doi:10.1080/0284186X.2023.2172689

2023
[120]

Fast robust optimization of proton PBS arc therapy plans using early energy layer selection and spot assignment.Physics in Medicine & Biology67(2022) 065010

Engwall E, Battinelli C, Wase V , Marthin O, Glimelius L, Bokrantz R, et al. Fast robust optimization of proton PBS arc therapy plans using early energy layer selection and spot assignment.Physics in Medicine & Biology67(2022) 065010. doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ac55a6

2022 doi
[121]

A novel energy sequence optimization algorithm for efficient spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) treatment delivery.Acta Oncologica59 (2020) 1178–1185

Liu G, Li X, Zhao L, Zheng W, Qin A, Zhang S, et al. A novel energy sequence optimization algorithm for efficient spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) treatment delivery.Acta Oncologica59 (2020) 1178–1185. doi:10.1080/0284186X.2020.1765415

2020
[122]

A novel energy layer optimization framework for spot-scanning proton arc therapy.Medical Physics47(2020) 2072–2084

Gu W, Ruan D, Lyu Q, Zou W, Dong L, Sheng K. A novel energy layer optimization framework for spot-scanning proton arc therapy.Medical Physics47(2020) 2072–2084. doi:10.1002/mp.14083

2020 doi
[123]

Treatment planning of scanned proton beams in RayStation.Medical Dosimetry49(2024) 2–12

Janson M, Glimelius L, Fredriksson A, Traneus E, Engwall E. Treatment planning of scanned proton beams in RayStation.Medical Dosimetry49(2024) 2–12. doi:10.1016/j.meddos.2023.10.009

2024 doi
[124]

Static proton arc therapy: Comprehensive plan quality evaluation and first clinical treatments in patients with complex head and neck targets.Medical Physics(2025) mp.17669

Fracchiolla F, Engwall E, Mikhalev V , Cianchetti M, Giacomelli I, Siniscalchi B, et al. Static proton arc therapy: Comprehensive plan quality evaluation and first clinical treatments in patients with complex head and neck targets.Medical Physics(2025) mp.17669. doi:10.1002/mp.17669

2025 doi
[125]

Explore the feasibility of using spot-scanning proton arc therapy for a synchrotron accelerator-based proton therapy system – A simulation study

Cong X, Liu G, Liu P, Zhao L, Chen S, Li X, et al. Explore the feasibility of using spot-scanning proton arc therapy for a synchrotron accelerator-based proton therapy system – A simulation study. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics(2024) e14526. doi:10.1002/acm2.14526

2024 doi
[126]

Ding X, Li X, Zhang JM, Kabolizadeh P, Stevens C, Yan D. Spot-Scanning Proton Arc (SPArc) Therapy: The First Robust and Delivery-Efficient Spot-Scanning Proton Arc Therapy.International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics96(2016) 1107–1116. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.08. 049

2016 doi
[127]

Fixed beamlines can replace gantries for particle therapy.Medical Physics(2022) 1–4

Schreuder N, Ding X, Li Z. Fixed beamlines can replace gantries for particle therapy.Medical Physics(2022) 1–4. doi:10.1002/mp.15531

2022 doi
[128]

Opportunities and challenges of upright patient positioning in radiotherapy.Physics in Medicine & Biology(2024)

V olz L, Korte JC, Martire MC, Zhang Y , Hardcastle N, Durante M, et al. Opportunities and challenges of upright patient positioning in radiotherapy.Physics in Medicine & Biology(2024). doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ad70ee

2024 doi
[129]

Underwood T, Yan S, Bortfeld T, Gr´egoire V , Lomax T. A Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) Analysis for Gantry-Less Upright Radiation Therapy.International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics122(2025) 1337–1343. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2025.02.039

2025 doi
[130]

Considerations for Upright Particle Therapy Patient Positioning and Associated Image Guidance.Frontiers in Oncology12(2022) 13

V olz L. Considerations for Upright Particle Therapy Patient Positioning and Associated Image Guidance.Frontiers in Oncology12(2022) 13

2022
[131]

Particle arc therapy: Status and potential.Radiotherapy and Oncology(2024) 110434

Mein S, Wuyckens S, Li X, Both S, Carabe A, Vera MC, et al. Particle arc therapy: Status and potential.Radiotherapy and Oncology(2024) 110434. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110434

2024
[132]

An evaluation of rescanning technique for liver tumour treatments using a commercial PBS proton therapy system.Radiotherapy and Oncology121 (2016) 281–287

Zhang Y , Huth I, Wegner M, Weber DC, Lomax AJ. An evaluation of rescanning technique for liver tumour treatments using a commercial PBS proton therapy system.Radiotherapy and Oncology121 (2016) 281–287. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2016.09.011

2016 doi
[133]

Experimental verification of motion mitigation of discrete proton spot scanning by re-scanning.Physics in Medicine and Biology58(2013) 8555–8572

Sch¨atti A, Zakova M, Meer D, Lomax AJ. Experimental verification of motion mitigation of discrete proton spot scanning by re-scanning.Physics in Medicine and Biology58(2013) 8555–8572. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/58/23/8555

2013 doi
[134]

Intrafractional motion during proton beam scanning.Physics in Medicine and Biology50(2005) 4853–4862

Lambert J, Suchowerska N, McKenzie DR, Jackson M. Intrafractional motion during proton beam scanning.Physics in Medicine and Biology50(2005) 4853–4862. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/50/20/008. Frontiers 35 Yap et al.Toward Ultra-fast PBT Treatments

2005 doi
[135]

Current status of proton therapy techniques for lung cancer.Radiation Oncology Journal37 (2019) 232–248

Han Y . Current status of proton therapy techniques for lung cancer.Radiation Oncology Journal37 (2019) 232–248. doi:10.3857/roj.2019.00633

2019
[136]

Effectiveness of different rescanning techniques for scanned proton radiotherapy in lung cancer patients.Physics in Medicine and Biology63(2018) aabb7b

Engwall E, Glimelius L, Hynning E. Effectiveness of different rescanning techniques for scanned proton radiotherapy in lung cancer patients.Physics in Medicine and Biology63(2018) aabb7b. doi:10.1088/1361-6560/aabb7b

2018 doi
[137]

Comparative study of layered and volumetric rescanning for different scanning speeds of proton beam in liver patients.Physics in Medicine and Biology58 (2013) 7905–7920

Bernatowicz K, Lomax AJ, Knopf A. Comparative study of layered and volumetric rescanning for different scanning speeds of proton beam in liver patients.Physics in Medicine and Biology58 (2013) 7905–7920. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/58/22/7905

2013 doi
[138]

The effectiveness of combined gating and re-scanning for treating mobile targets with proton spot scanning

Sch¨atti A, Zakova M, Meer D, Lomax AJ. The effectiveness of combined gating and re-scanning for treating mobile targets with proton spot scanning. An experimental and simulation-based investigation. Physics in Medicine and Biology59(2014) 3813–3828. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/59/14/3813

2014 doi
[139]

Evaluation of spot size using volumetric repainting technique on a ProteusPLUS PBS Proton Therapy System.Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1662(2020) 012027

Rana S, Bennouna J, Gutierrez A, Rosenfeld A. Evaluation of spot size using volumetric repainting technique on a ProteusPLUS PBS Proton Therapy System.Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1662(2020) 012027. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1662/1/012027

2020 doi
[140]

Rana S, Bennouna J, Gutierrez AN, Rosenfeld AB. Impact of magnetic field regulation in conjunction with the volumetric repainting technique on the spot positions and beam range in pencil beam scanning proton therapy.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics21(2020) 124–131. ...

2020
[141]

Dose detectors, sensors, and their applications.Medical Physics45 (2018) e1051–e1072

Giordanengo S, Palmans H. Dose detectors, sensors, and their applications.Medical Physics45 (2018) e1051–e1072

2018
[142]

Schoemers C, Feldmeier E, Naumann J, Panse R, Peters A, Haberer T. The intensity feedback system at Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Centre.Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment795(2015) 92–99...

2015 doi
[143]

Design, integration, and commissioning of the first linac for image guided hadron therapy prototype.Physical Review Accelerators and Beams27(2024) 054701

Degiovanni A, De Michele G, Bonomi R, Cabaleiro Magallanes F, Caldara M, Dimov V , et al. Design, integration, and commissioning of the first linac for image guided hadron therapy prototype.Physical Review Accelerators and Beams27(2024) 054701. doi:10.1103/PhysRevAccelBeams.27.054701

2024 doi
[144]

Peach KJ, Aslaninejad M, Barlow RJ, Beard CD, Bliss N, Cobb JH, et al. Conceptual design of a nonscaling fixed field alternating gradient accelerator for protons and carbon ions for charged particle therapy.Physical Review Special Topics - Accelerators and Beams16(2013) 1–34. ...

2013
[145]

Oblique raster scanning: An ion dose delivery procedure with variable energy layers

Amaldi U. Oblique raster scanning: An ion dose delivery procedure with variable energy layers. Physics in Medicine and Biology64(2019). doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ab0920

2019 doi
[146]

Beam delivery characteristics of the Hitachi carbon ion scanning system at Osaka Heavy Ion Medical Accelerator in Kansai (HIMAK).Medical Physics(2023) mp.16791

Tsubouchi T, Beltran CJ, Yagi M, Hamatani N, Takashina M, Shimizu S, et al. Beam delivery characteristics of the Hitachi carbon ion scanning system at Osaka Heavy Ion Medical Accelerator in Kansai (HIMAK).Medical Physics(2023) mp.16791. doi:10.1002/mp.16791

2023 doi
[147]

Dosimetric consequences of flap dose due to rapid beam off control for a high intensity carbon ion radiation therapy synchrotron

Tsubouchi T, Furutani KM, Yagi M, Nomura T, Shimizu S, Kanai T, et al. Dosimetric consequences of flap dose due to rapid beam off control for a high intensity carbon ion radiation therapy synchrotron. Medical Physics(2024) mp.17309. doi:10.1002/mp.17309

2024 doi
[148]

FLASH instead of proton arc therapy is a more promising advancement for the next generation proton radiotherapy.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics24(2023) e14091

Kang M, Ding X, Rong Y . FLASH instead of proton arc therapy is a more promising advancement for the next generation proton radiotherapy.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics24(2023) e14091. doi:10.1002/acm2.14091

2023 doi
[149]

Cyclotron Versus Synchrotron for Proton Beam Therapy.Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Cyclotrons and their Applications(1995) 533–536

Fukumoto S. Cyclotron Versus Synchrotron for Proton Beam Therapy.Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Cyclotrons and their Applications(1995) 533–536. This is a provisional file, not the final typeset article36 Yap et al.Toward Ultra-fast PBT Treatments

1995
[150]

Emerging technologies in proton therapy.Acta Oncologica50(2011) 838–850

Schippers JM, Lomax AJ. Emerging technologies in proton therapy.Acta Oncologica50(2011) 838–850. doi:10.3109/0284186X.2011.582513

2011
[151]

Beam Delivery Systems for Particle Therapy: Current Status and Recent Developments

Schippers M. Beam Delivery Systems for Particle Therapy: Current Status and Recent Developments. Reviews of Accelerator Science and Technology2(2009) 179–200

2009
[152]

Indiana University Cyclotron Operation For Proton Therapy Facility.Cyclotrons and Their Applications(2007)

Anferov V A, Ball MS, Collins JC, Derenchuk VP. Indiana University Cyclotron Operation For Proton Therapy Facility.Cyclotrons and Their Applications(2007)

2007
[153]

Simulations and measurements of proton beam energy spectrum after energy degradation.Journal of Physics: Conference Series874(2017) 012108

Gerbershagen A, Adelmann A, D ¨olling R, Meer D, Rizzoglio V , Schippers JM. Simulations and measurements of proton beam energy spectrum after energy degradation.Journal of Physics: Conference Series874(2017) 012108. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/874/1/012108

2017 doi
[154]

Schippers JM. Beam-Transport Systems for Particle Therapy.Proceedings of the CAS-CERN Accelerator School: Accelerators for Medical Applications, V¨osendorf, Austria, 26 May–5 June 2015 (2017), vol. 1, 241–252. doi:10.23730/CYRSP-2017-001.241

2015 doi
[155]

A performance study of the Loma Linda proton medical accelerator.Medical Physics21(1994) 1691–1701

Coutrakon G, Hubbard J, Johanning J, Maudsley G, Slaton T, Morton P. A performance study of the Loma Linda proton medical accelerator.Medical Physics21(1994) 1691–1701. doi:10.1118/1. 597270

1994 doi
[156]

Rotatorlike gantry optics

Pavloviˇc M, Pivi MTF, Straˇs´ık I, Rizzoglio V , Pullia MG, Adler L, et al. Rotatorlike gantry optics. Physical Review Accelerators and Beams27(2024) 073502. doi:10.1103/PhysRevAccelBeams.27. 073502

2024 doi
[157]

Hadron cancer therapy complex using nonscaling fixed field alternating gradient accelerator and gantry design.Physical Review Special Topics - Accelerators and Beams10(2007) 4–11

Keil E, Sessler AM, Trbojevic D. Hadron cancer therapy complex using nonscaling fixed field alternating gradient accelerator and gantry design.Physical Review Special Topics - Accelerators and Beams10(2007) 4–11. doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTAB.10.054701

2007 doi
[158]

Normal-conducting scaling fixed field alternating gradient accelerator for proton therapy.Physical Review Special Topics - Accelerators and Beams18 (2015) 094701

Garland JM, Appleby RB, Owen H, Tygier S. Normal-conducting scaling fixed field alternating gradient accelerator for proton therapy.Physical Review Special Topics - Accelerators and Beams18 (2015) 094701. doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTAB.18.094701

2015 doi
[159]

Taylor J, Edgecock TR, Johnstone C. HEATHER – HElium ion Accelerator for radioTHERapy.13th International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Applications of Accelerators 2017, AccApp 2017: The Expanding Universe of Accelerator Applications(2018) 368–376

2017
[160]

RACCAM: An example of spiral sector scaling FFA technology

Meot F. RACCAM: An example of spiral sector scaling FFA technology. Tech. Rep. BNL–211536- 2019-NEWS, 1507116, Brookhaven National Laboratory (2019)

2019
[161]

LhARA: The Laser-hybrid Accelerator for Radiobiological Applications.Frontiers in Physics8(2020) 1–21

Aymar G, Becker T, Boogert S, Borghesi M, Bingham R, Brenner C, et al. LhARA: The Laser-hybrid Accelerator for Radiobiological Applications.Frontiers in Physics8(2020) 1–21. doi:10.3389/fphy. 2020.567738

2020
[162]

Fenning R.Novel FFAG Gantry and Transport Line Designs for Charged Particle Therapy. Ph.D. thesis, Brunel University (2011)

2011
[163]

Alternating-gradient canted cosine theta superconducting magnets for future compact proton gantries.Physical Review Special Topics - Accelerators and Beams18(2015) 103501

Wan W, Brouwer L, Caspi S, Prestemon S, Gerbershagen A, Schippers JM, et al. Alternating-gradient canted cosine theta superconducting magnets for future compact proton gantries.Physical Review Special Topics - Accelerators and Beams18(2015) 103501. doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTAB.18.103501

2015 doi
[164]

An achromatic gantry for proton therapy with fixed-field superconducting magnets.International Journal of Modern Physics A34(2019)

Brouwer L, Huggins A, Wan W. An achromatic gantry for proton therapy with fixed-field superconducting magnets.International Journal of Modern Physics A34(2019). doi:10.1142/ S0217751X19420235

2019
[165]

Beam optics of a superconducting proton-therapy gantry with a large momentum acceptance.International Journal of Modern Physics A34(2019) 1–8

Nesteruk KP, Calzolaio C, Seidel M, Schippers JM. Beam optics of a superconducting proton-therapy gantry with a large momentum acceptance.International Journal of Modern Physics A34(2019) 1–8. doi:10.1142/S0217751X19420247. Frontiers 37 Yap et al.Toward Ultra-fast PBT Treatments

2019 doi
[166]

GaToroid: A novel toroidal gantry for hadron therapy

Bottura L, Felcini E, De Rijk G, Dutoit B. GaToroid: A novel toroidal gantry for hadron therapy. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment983(2020) 164588. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2020.164588

2020
[167]

Superb Fixed Field Permanent Magnet Proton Therapy Gantry.Proceedings of IPAC2021(Campinas, Brazil: JACoW Publishing) (2021), 1405–1408

Trbojevic D, Brooks S, Roser T, Tsoupas N. Superb Fixed Field Permanent Magnet Proton Therapy Gantry.Proceedings of IPAC2021(Campinas, Brazil: JACoW Publishing) (2021), 1405–1408. doi:10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2021-TUPAB030

2021 doi
[168]

Beam delivery systems for linac-based proton therapy (2021)

[Dataset] Dascalu TS, Sheehy SL. Beam delivery systems for linac-based proton therapy (2021)

2021
[169]

Design of a large momentum acceptance proton therapy gantry utilizing AG-CCT magnets.Nuclear Science and Techniques35(2024) 172

Liao YC, Liu X, Wang W, Yang ZY , Chen QS, Qin B. Design of a large momentum acceptance proton therapy gantry utilizing AG-CCT magnets.Nuclear Science and Techniques35(2024) 172. doi:10.1007/s41365-024-01522-1

2024 doi
[170]

Design of a large energy acceptance beamline using fixed field accelerator optics.Physical Review Accelerators and Beams27(2024) 071601

Steinberg AF, Appleby RB, Yap JSL, Sheehy SL. Design of a large energy acceptance beamline using fixed field accelerator optics.Physical Review Accelerators and Beams27(2024) 071601. doi:10.1103/PhysRevAccelBeams.27.071601

2024 doi
[171]

OPTIMISATION OF A PERMANENT MAGNET MULTI-ENERGY FFA ARC FOR THE CEBAF ENERGY UPGRADE.Proceedings of IPAC2024(Nashville, TN: JACoW Publishing) (2024)

Brooks SJ. OPTIMISATION OF A PERMANENT MAGNET MULTI-ENERGY FFA ARC FOR THE CEBAF ENERGY UPGRADE.Proceedings of IPAC2024(Nashville, TN: JACoW Publishing) (2024)

2024
[172]

Permanent magnet resiliency in CEBAF’s radiation environment: LDRD grant status and plans.Proceedings of IPAC2024(Nashville, TN) (2024)

Bodenstein R, Deitrick K, Gamage B, Hamlette D, Meyers J, Nissen E, et al. Permanent magnet resiliency in CEBAF’s radiation environment: LDRD grant status and plans.Proceedings of IPAC2024(Nashville, TN) (2024). doi:10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2024-THPS58

2024 doi
[173]

Rotating Gantries Provide Individualized Beam Arrangements for Charged Particle Therapy.Cancers15(2023) 2044

Chinniah S, Deisher AJ, Herman MG, Johnson JE, Mahajan A, Foote RL. Rotating Gantries Provide Individualized Beam Arrangements for Charged Particle Therapy.Cancers15(2023) 2044. doi:10.3390/cancers15072044

2023 doi
[174]

Robust Angle Selection in Particle Therapy.Frontiers in Oncology11(2021) 715025

Zhou Y , Li Y , Kubota Y , Sakai M, Ohno T. Robust Angle Selection in Particle Therapy.Frontiers in Oncology11(2021) 715025. doi:10.3389/fonc.2021.715025

2021
[175]

The Heidelberg ion therapy center.Radiotherapy and Oncology73(2004) 186–190

Haberer T, Debus J, Eickhoff H, J¨akel O, Schulz-Ertner D, Weber U. The Heidelberg ion therapy center.Radiotherapy and Oncology73(2004) 186–190. doi:10.1016/S0167-8140(04)80046-X

2004 doi
[176]

Iwata Y , Fujimoto T, Matsuba S, Fujita T, Sato S, Furukawa T, et al. Recent progress of a superconducting rotating-gantry for carbon-ion radiotherapy.Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms406(2017) 338–342. d...

2017 doi
[177]

Thermal characteristics of a helium-free superconducting magnet system for a fast-ramping heavy-ion synchrotron.Cryogenics 126(2022) 103524

Yang Y , Mizushima K, Matsuba S, Fujimoto T, Noda E, Urata M, et al. Thermal characteristics of a helium-free superconducting magnet system for a fast-ramping heavy-ion synchrotron.Cryogenics 126(2022) 103524. doi:10.1016/j.cryogenics.2022.103524

2022
[178]

Brouwer L, Caspi S, Edwards K, Godeke A, Hafalia R, Hodgkinson A, et al. Design and test of a curved superconducting dipole magnet for proton therapy.Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment9...

2020
[179]

HTS/lTS Hybrid High Field Superconducting Magnet Designs for the Proposed 100 TeV Proton Colliders.Proceedings of the 6th Int

Gupta R, Anerella M, Ghosh A, Kolonko J, Larson D, Rey C, et al. HTS/lTS Hybrid High Field Superconducting Magnet Designs for the Proposed 100 TeV Proton Colliders.Proceedings of the 6th Int. Particle Accelerator Conf.IPAC2015(2015) 3 pages, 1.201 MB. doi:10.18429/ JACOW-IPAC2...

2015
[180]

A new configuration for a dipole magnet for use in high energy physics applications.Nuclear Instruments and Methods80(1970) 339–341

Meyer DI, Flasck R. A new configuration for a dipole magnet for use in high energy physics applications.Nuclear Instruments and Methods80(1970) 339–341. doi:10.1016/0029-554X(70) 90784-6. This is a provisional file, not the final typeset article38 Yap et al.Toward Ultra-fast P...

1970 doi
[181]

Gantries for carbon ions

Pullia MG, Felcini E, Benedetto E, Dassa L, De Matteis E, Donetti M, et al. Gantries for carbon ions. Health and Technology(2024). doi:10.1007/s12553-024-00870-7

2024 doi
[182]

Robin DS, Arbelaez D, Caspi S, Sun C, Sessler A, Wan W, et al. Superconducting toroidal combined- function magnet for a compact ion beam cancer therapy gantry.Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated ...

2011 doi
[183]

Holder DJ. A Compact Superconducting 330 MeV Proton Gantry for Radiotherapy and Computed Tomography A COMPACT SUPERCONDUCTING 330 MeV PROTON GANTRY FOR RADIOTHERAPY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY*.Proceedings of IPAC2014(2014)

2014
[184]

TURBO: A novel beam delivery system enabling rapid depth scanning for charged particle therapy.Journal of Physics: Conference Series2420(2023) 012094

Yap JS, Sheehy SL, Steinberg AF, Norman HX, Appleby RB. TURBO: A novel beam delivery system enabling rapid depth scanning for charged particle therapy.Journal of Physics: Conference Series2420(2023) 012094. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2420/1/012094

2023 doi
[185]

Experimental exploration of a mixed helium/carbon beam for online treatment monitoring in carbon ion beam therapy.Physics in Medicine and Biology65(2020) 0–14

V olz L, Kelleter L, Brons S, Burigo L, Graeff C, Niebuhr NI, et al. Experimental exploration of a mixed helium/carbon beam for online treatment monitoring in carbon ion beam therapy.Physics in Medicine and Biology65(2020) 0–14. doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ab6e52

2020 doi
[186]

The potential of mixed carbon-helium beams for online treatment verification: A simulation and treatment planning study.Physics in Medicine & Biology(2024)

Hardt JJ, Pryanichnikov AA, Homolka N, DeJongh EA, DeJongh DF, Cristoforetti R, et al. The potential of mixed carbon-helium beams for online treatment verification: A simulation and treatment planning study.Physics in Medicine & Biology(2024). doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ad46db

2024 doi
[187]

Mixed particle beam for simultaneous treatment and online range verification in carbon ion therapy: Proof-of-concept study

Mazzucconi D, Agosteo S, Ferrarini M, Fontana L, Lante V , Pullia M, et al. Mixed particle beam for simultaneous treatment and online range verification in carbon ion therapy: Proof-of-concept study. Medical Physics45(2018) 5234–5243. doi:10.1002/mp.13219

2018 doi
[188]

ESTRO-EPTN radiation dosimetry guidelines for the acquisition of proton pencil beam modelling data.Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology31(2024) 100621

Gom`a C, Henkner K, J¨akel O, Lorentini S, Magro G, Mirandola A, et al. ESTRO-EPTN radiation dosimetry guidelines for the acquisition of proton pencil beam modelling data.Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology31(2024) 100621. doi:10.1016/j.phro.2024.100621

2024
[189]

Use of treatment log files in spot scanning proton therapy as part of patient-specific quality assurance.Medical Physics40(2013) 021703

Li H, Sahoo N, Poenisch F, Suzuki K, Li Y , Li X, et al. Use of treatment log files in spot scanning proton therapy as part of patient-specific quality assurance.Medical Physics40(2013) 021703. doi:10.1118/1.4773312

2013 doi
[190]

Impacts of gantry angle dependent scanning beam properties on proton PBS treatment.Physics in Medicine & Biology62(2016) 344

Lin Y , Clasie B, Lu HM, Flanz J, Shen T, Jee KW. Impacts of gantry angle dependent scanning beam properties on proton PBS treatment.Physics in Medicine & Biology62(2016) 344. doi:10.1088/ 1361-6560/aa5084

2016
[191]

Clinical implementation and commissioning of the MedAustron Particle Therapy Accelerator for non-isocentric scanned proton beam treatments.Medical Physics47(2020) 380–392

Grevillot L, Osorio Moreno J, Letellier V , Dreindl R, Elia A, Fuchs H, et al. Clinical implementation and commissioning of the MedAustron Particle Therapy Accelerator for non-isocentric scanned proton beam treatments.Medical Physics47(2020) 380–392. doi:10.1002/mp.13928

2020 doi
[192]

The influence of lateral beam profile modifications in scanned proton and carbon ion therapy: A Monte Carlo study.Physics in Medicine and Biology55(2010) 5169–87

Parodi K, Mairani A, Brons S, Naumann J, Kr¨amer M, Sommerer F, et al. The influence of lateral beam profile modifications in scanned proton and carbon ion therapy: A Monte Carlo study.Physics in Medicine and Biology55(2010) 5169–87. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/55/17/018

2010 doi
[193]

Adjustment of the lateral and longitudinal size of scanned proton beam spots using a pre-absorber to optimize penumbrae and delivery efficiency.Phys Med Biol55(2010) 7097–7106

Titt U, Mirkovic D, Sawakuchi GO, Perles LA, Newhauser WD, Taddei PJ, et al. Adjustment of the lateral and longitudinal size of scanned proton beam spots using a pre-absorber to optimize penumbrae and delivery efficiency.Phys Med Biol55(2010) 7097–7106. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/ ...

2010 doi
[194]

Technical Note: Spot characteristic stability for proton pencil beam scanning a).Medical Physics43(2016) 777–782

Chen CC, Chang C, Moyers MF, Gao M, Mah D. Technical Note: Spot characteristic stability for proton pencil beam scanning a).Medical Physics43(2016) 777–782. doi:10.1118/1.4939663

2016 doi
[195]

Dowdell SJ, Clasie B, Depauw N, Metcalfe P, Rosenfeld AB, Kooy HM, et al. Monte Carlo study of the potential reduction in out-of-field dose using a patient-specific aperture in pencil beam scanning Frontiers 39 Yap et al.Toward Ultra-fast PBT Treatments proton therapy.Physics ...

2012 doi
[196]

Range shifter contribution to neutron exposure of patients undergoing proton pencil beam scanning.Medical Physics(2023) mp.16897

Romero-Exp´osito M, Liszka M, Christou A, Toma-Dasu I, Dasu A. Range shifter contribution to neutron exposure of patients undergoing proton pencil beam scanning.Medical Physics(2023) mp.16897. doi:10.1002/mp.16897

2023 doi
[197]

Both S, Shen J, Kirk M, Lin L, Tang S, Alonso-Basanta M, et al. Development and Clinical Implementation of a Universal Bolus to Maintain Spot Size During Delivery of Base of Skull Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy.International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics90...

2014 doi
[198]

Jelen U, Bubula ME, Ammazzalorso F, Engenhart-Cabillic R, Weber U, Wittig A. Dosimetric impact of reduced nozzle-to-isocenter distance in intensity-modulated proton therapy of intracranial tumors in combined proton-carbon fixed-nozzle treatment facilities.Radiation Oncology8(2...

2013 doi
[199]

Investigations of line scanning proton therapy with dynamic multi-leaf collimator.Physica Medica55(2018) 47–55

Kim DH, Park S, Jo K, Cho S, Shin E, Lim DH, et al. Investigations of line scanning proton therapy with dynamic multi-leaf collimator.Physica Medica55(2018) 47–55. doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.10. 009

2018 doi
[200]

Commissioning of a gantry beamline with rotator at a synchrotron-based ion therapy center.Physical Review Accelerators and Beams27(2024) 023503

Pivi MTF, Adler L, Guidoboni G, Kowarik G, Kurf¨urst C, Maderb¨ock C, et al. Commissioning of a gantry beamline with rotator at a synchrotron-based ion therapy center.Physical Review Accelerators and Beams27(2024) 023503. doi:10.1103/PhysRevAccelBeams.27.023503

2024 doi
[201]

Impact of spot size on plan quality of spot scanning proton radiosurgery for peripheral brain lesions.Medical Physics41(2014) 121705

Wang D, Dirksen B, Hyer DE, Buatti JM, Sheybani A, Dinges E, et al. Impact of spot size on plan quality of spot scanning proton radiosurgery for peripheral brain lesions.Medical Physics41(2014) 121705. doi:10.1118/1.4901260

2014 doi
[202]

The physics of proton therapy.Physics in Medicine & Biology60(2015)

Newhauser WD, Zhang R. The physics of proton therapy.Physics in Medicine & Biology60(2015). doi:10.1088/0031-9155/60/8/R155

2015 doi
[203]

Experimental characterization of two-dimensional pencil beam scanning proton spot profiles.Physics in Medicine and Biology58(2013) 6193–6204

Lin L, Ainsley CG, McDonough JE. Experimental characterization of two-dimensional pencil beam scanning proton spot profiles.Physics in Medicine and Biology58(2013) 6193–6204. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/58/17/6193

2013 doi
[204]

Experimental characterization of two-dimensional spot profiles for two proton pencil beam scanning nozzles.Physics in Medicine and Biology59 (2013) 493–504

Lin L, Ainsley CG, Solberg TD, McDonough JE. Experimental characterization of two-dimensional spot profiles for two proton pencil beam scanning nozzles.Physics in Medicine and Biology59 (2013) 493–504. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/59/2/493

2013 doi
[205]

Linz U, editor.Ion Beam Therapy: Fundamentals, Technology, Clinical Applications(Springer) (2012)

2012
[206]

Therapeutic step and shoot proton beam spot-scanning with a multi-leaf collimator: A Monte Carlo study.Radiation Protection Dosimetry115(2005) 164–169

Bues M, Newhauser WD, Titt U, Smith AR. Therapeutic step and shoot proton beam spot-scanning with a multi-leaf collimator: A Monte Carlo study.Radiation Protection Dosimetry115(2005) 164–169. doi:10.1093/rpd/nci259

2005 doi
[208]

Rana S, Rosenfeld AB. Impact of errors in spot size and spot position in robustly optimized pencil beam scanning proton-based stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) lung plans.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics22(2021) 147–154. doi:10.1002/acm2.13293

2021 doi
[209]

Utility of a patient-specific aperture collimator and multi-leaf collimator in line scanning proton therapy.Journal of the Korean Physical Society (2024)

Ko M, Jeon C, Ahn SH, Han Y , Chung K, Cho S, et al. Utility of a patient-specific aperture collimator and multi-leaf collimator in line scanning proton therapy.Journal of the Korean Physical Society (2024). doi:10.1007/s40042-024-01166-9. This is a provisional file, not the f...

2024 doi
[210]

Dosimetric impact of spot size variations in proton pencil beam scanning — a Monte Carlo simulation study.Medical Engineering & Physics140 (2025) 104346

Guo J, Zhang F, Cheng J, Zhou R, Sheng Y . Dosimetric impact of spot size variations in proton pencil beam scanning — a Monte Carlo simulation study.Medical Engineering & Physics140 (2025) 104346. doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2025.104346

2025
[211]

Motion interplay as a function of patient parameters and spot size in spot scanning proton therapy for lung cancer

Grassberger C, Dowdell S, Lomax A, Sharp G, Shackleford J, Choi N, et al. Motion interplay as a function of patient parameters and spot size in spot scanning proton therapy for lung cancer. International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics86(2013) 380–386. doi:10.101...

2013 doi
[212]

Safai S, Bortfeld T, Engelsman M. Comparison between the lateral penumbra of a collimated double-scattered beam and uncollimated scanning beam in proton radiotherapy.Physics in Medicine and Biology53(2008) 1729–1750. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/53/6/016

2008 doi
[213]

What will the medical physics of proton therapy look like 10 yr from now? A personal view.Medical Physics45(2018) e984–e993

Lomax A. What will the medical physics of proton therapy look like 10 yr from now? A personal view.Medical Physics45(2018) e984–e993. doi:10.1002/mp.13206

2018 doi
[214]

A patient-specific aperture system with an energy absorber for spot scanning proton beams: Verification for clinical application

Yasui K, Toshito T, Omachi C, Kibe Y , Hayashi K, Shibata H, et al. A patient-specific aperture system with an energy absorber for spot scanning proton beams: Verification for clinical application. Medical Physics42(2015) 6999–7010. doi:10.1118/1.4935528

2015 doi
[215]

Characterization of a mini-multileaf collimator in a proton beamline.Medical Physics36(2009) 1886–1894

Daartz J, Bangert M, Bussi`ere MR, Engelsman M, Kooy HM. Characterization of a mini-multileaf collimator in a proton beamline.Medical Physics36(2009) 1886–1894. doi:10.1118/1.3116382

2009 doi
[216]

Irradiation System for HIMAC.Journal of Radiation Research48(2007) A15–A25

Torikoshi M, Minohara S, Kanematsu N, Komori M, Kanazawa M, Noda K, et al. Irradiation System for HIMAC.Journal of Radiation Research48(2007) A15–A25. doi:10.1269/jrr.48.A15

2007 doi
[217]

A dynamic collimation system for penumbra reduction in spot-scanning proton therapy: Proof of concept.Medical Physics41(2014) 1–9

Hyer DE, Hill PM, Wang D, Smith BR, Flynn RT. A dynamic collimation system for penumbra reduction in spot-scanning proton therapy: Proof of concept.Medical Physics41(2014) 1–9. doi:10.1118/1.4837155

2014 doi
[218]

Contour scanning, multi-leaf collimation and the combination thereof for proton pencil beam scanning.Physics in Medicine & Biology64(2018) 015002

Winterhalter C, Meier G, Oxley D, Weber DC, Lomax AJ, Safai S. Contour scanning, multi-leaf collimation and the combination thereof for proton pencil beam scanning.Physics in Medicine & Biology64(2018) 015002. doi:10.1088/1361-6560/aaf2e8

2018 doi
[219]

Moignier A, Gelover E, Wang D, Smith B, Flynn R, Kirk M, et al. Theoretical Benefits of Dynamic Collimation in Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy for Brain Tumors: Dosimetric and Radiobiological Metrics.International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics95 (2016) 171–...

2016 doi
[220]

Improving Head and Neck Cancer Treatments Using Dynamic Collimation in Spot Scanning Proton Therapy.International Journal of Particle Therapy2(2016) 544–554

Moignier A, Gelover E, Wang D, Smith B, Flynn R, Kirk M, et al. Improving Head and Neck Cancer Treatments Using Dynamic Collimation in Spot Scanning Proton Therapy.International Journal of Particle Therapy2(2016) 544–554. doi:10.14338/IJPT-15-00026.1

2016 doi
[221]

The LET enhancement of energy-specific collimation in pencil beam scanning proton therapy.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics26(2025) e14477

Smith BR, Hyer DE. The LET enhancement of energy-specific collimation in pencil beam scanning proton therapy.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics26(2025) e14477. doi:10.1002/acm2. 14477

2025 doi
[222]

Physical and biological impacts of collimator-scattered protons in spot-scanning proton therapy.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics20(2019) 48–57

Ueno K, Matsuura T, Hirayama S, Takao S, Ueda H, Matsuo Y , et al. Physical and biological impacts of collimator-scattered protons in spot-scanning proton therapy.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics20(2019) 48–57. doi:10.1002/acm2.12653

2019 doi
[223]

Measurements of fetal dose with Mevion S250i proton therapy system with HYPERSCAN.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics24(2023) e13957

Hopfensperger KM, Li X, Paxton A, Sarkar V , Su FCF, Price RG, et al. Measurements of fetal dose with Mevion S250i proton therapy system with HYPERSCAN.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics24(2023) e13957. doi:10.1002/acm2.13957

2023 doi
[224]

Dosimetric delivery validation of dynamically collimated pencil beam scanning proton therapy.Physics in Medicine & Biology68(2023) 055003

Nelson NP, Culberson WS, Hyer DE, Geoghegan TJ, Patwardhan KA, Smith BR, et al. Dosimetric delivery validation of dynamically collimated pencil beam scanning proton therapy.Physics in Medicine & Biology68(2023) 055003. doi:10.1088/1361-6560/acb6cd. Frontiers 41 Yap et al.Towar...

2023 doi
[225]

Innovations and the use of collimators in the delivery of pencil beam scanning proton therapy.International Journal of Particle Therapy8 (2021) 73–83

Hyer DE, Bennett LC, Geoghegan TJ, Bues M, Smith BR. Innovations and the use of collimators in the delivery of pencil beam scanning proton therapy.International Journal of Particle Therapy8 (2021) 73–83. doi:10.14338/IJPT-20-00039.1

2021 doi
[226]

Trimmer sequencing time minimization during dynamically collimated proton therapy using a colony of cooperating agents.Physics in Medicine & Biology64(2019) 205025

Smith BR, Hyer DE, Flynn RT, Hill PM, Culberson WS. Trimmer sequencing time minimization during dynamically collimated proton therapy using a colony of cooperating agents.Physics in Medicine & Biology64(2019) 205025. doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ab416d

2019 doi
[227]

Shoot-through layers in upright proton arcs unlock advantages in plan quality and range verification.Medical Physics52(2025) e18051

Engwall E, Mikhalev V , Sundstr¨om J, Marthin O, Wase V . Shoot-through layers in upright proton arcs unlock advantages in plan quality and range verification.Medical Physics52(2025) e18051. doi:10.1002/mp.18051

2025 doi
[228]

Collimating individual beamlets in pencil beam scanning proton therapy, a dosimetric investigation.Frontiers in Oncology12(2022)

Holmes J, Shen J, Patel SH, Wong WW, Foote RL, Bues M, et al. Collimating individual beamlets in pencil beam scanning proton therapy, a dosimetric investigation.Frontiers in Oncology12(2022). doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.1031340

2022
[229]

High-speed proton therapy within a short breath-hold (2025)

Maradia V , Yue N, Molzahn A, Wang J, Pankuch M, Charyyev S, et al. High-speed proton therapy within a short breath-hold (2025). ArXiv [preprint]. arXiv:2510.06766. Available at: https: //arxiv.org/pdf/2510.06766(Accessed Jan 3, 2026)

2025
[230]

Implementing dispersion measurement as part of scanning proton therapy commissioning and quality assurance.Physics in Medicine & Biology(2023)

Tan HQ, Lew KS, Koh CWY , Wibawa A, Yeap PL, Master Z, et al. Implementing dispersion measurement as part of scanning proton therapy commissioning and quality assurance.Physics in Medicine & Biology(2023). doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ad0536

2023 doi
[231]

AAPM task group 224: Comprehensive proton therapy machine quality assurance.Medical Physics46(2019) e678–e705

Arjomandy B, Taylor P, Ainsley C, Safai S, Sahoo N, Pankuch M, et al. AAPM task group 224: Comprehensive proton therapy machine quality assurance.Medical Physics46(2019) e678–e705. doi:10.1002/mp.13622

2019 doi
[232]

Mixed-size spot scanning with a compact large momentum acceptance superconducting (LMA-SC) gantry beamline for proton therapy.Physics in Medicine & Biology69(2024) 115011

Wang W, Liu X, Liao Y , Zeng Y , Chen Y , Yu B, et al. Mixed-size spot scanning with a compact large momentum acceptance superconducting (LMA-SC) gantry beamline for proton therapy.Physics in Medicine & Biology69(2024) 115011. doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ad45a6

2024 doi
[233]

Effects of spot size errors in DynamicARC pencil beam scanning proton therapy planning.Physics in Medicine & Biology69(2024) 235008

Rana S, Rosenfeld AB. Effects of spot size errors in DynamicARC pencil beam scanning proton therapy planning.Physics in Medicine & Biology69(2024) 235008. doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ad8feb

2024 doi
[234]

Ultra-high dose rate transmission beam proton therapy for conventionally fractionated head and neck cancer: Treatment planning and dose rate distributions.Cancers13(2021) 1–12

van Marlen P, Dahele M, Folkerts M, Abel E, Slotman BJ, Verbakel W. Ultra-high dose rate transmission beam proton therapy for conventionally fractionated head and neck cancer: Treatment planning and dose rate distributions.Cancers13(2021) 1–12. doi:10.3390/cancers13081859

2021 doi
[235]

Reducing the lateral dose penumbra in IMPT by incorporating transmission pencil beams.Radiotherapy and Oncology 198(2024) 110388

Kong W, Huiskes M, Habraken S, Astreinidou E, Rasch C, Heijmen B, et al. Reducing the lateral dose penumbra in IMPT by incorporating transmission pencil beams.Radiotherapy and Oncology 198(2024) 110388. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110388

2024
[236]

Single high-energy arc proton therapy with Bragg peak boost (SHARP).Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences(2024) jmrs.769

Penfold SN, Santos AMC, Penfold M, Shierlaw E, Crain R. Single high-energy arc proton therapy with Bragg peak boost (SHARP).Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences(2024) jmrs.769. doi:10. 1002/jmrs.769

2024
[237]

Hybrid proton planning combining spread-out Bragg peak beams with transmission beams to shorten field delivery times while maintaining plan quality

Hyt¨onen R, Vanderstraeten R, Verbakel WFAR. Hybrid proton planning combining spread-out Bragg peak beams with transmission beams to shorten field delivery times while maintaining plan quality. Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology35(2025) 100809. doi:10.1016/j.phro.2025.100809

2025
[238]

Geometry optimisation of graphite energy degrader for proton therapy.Physica Medica76(2020) 227–235

Oponowicz E, Owen H, Psoroulas S, Meer D. Geometry optimisation of graphite energy degrader for proton therapy.Physica Medica76(2020) 227–235. doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.06.023. This is a provisional file, not the final typeset article42

2020 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Physics and biomedical challenges.Nature Reviews Physics 0123456789(2021)

Durante M, Debus J, Loeffler JS. Physics and biomedical challenges.Nature Reviews Physics 0123456789(2021). doi:10.1038/s42254-021-00368-5

work page doi:10.1038/s42254-021-00368-5 2021

[2] [2]

The role of radiotherapy in cancer treatment: Estimating optimal utilization from a review of evidence-based clinical guidelines.Cancer104 (2005) 1129–1137

Delaney G, Jacob S, Featherstone C, Barton M. The role of radiotherapy in cancer treatment: Estimating optimal utilization from a review of evidence-based clinical guidelines.Cancer104 (2005) 1129–1137. doi:10.1002/cncr.21324

doi:10.1002/cncr.21324 2005

[3] [3]

Estimating the demand for radiotherapy from the evidence: A review of changes from 2003 to 2012.Radiotherapy and Oncology112(2014) 140–144

Barton MB, Jacob S, Shafiq J, Wong K, Thompson SR, Hanna TP, et al. Estimating the demand for radiotherapy from the evidence: A review of changes from 2003 to 2012.Radiotherapy and Oncology112(2014) 140–144. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2014.03.024

doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2014.03.024 2003

[4] [4]

Global democratisation of proton radiotherapy.The Lancet Oncology24(2023) e245–e254

Yan S, Ngoma TA, Ngwa W, Bortfeld TR. Global democratisation of proton radiotherapy.The Lancet Oncology24(2023) e245–e254. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(23)00184-5

work page doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00184-5 2023

[5] [5]

Particle therapy facilities

[Dataset] Particle Therapy Co-Operative Group (PTCOG). Particle therapy facilities. https://www.ptcog.site/index.php/facilities-in-operation-public (2025)

2025

[6] [6]

Radiotherapy and theranostics: A Lancet Oncology Commission.The Lancet Oncology25(2024) e545–e580

Abdel-Wahab M, Giammarile F, Carrara M, Paez D, Hricak H, Ayati N, et al. Radiotherapy and theranostics: A Lancet Oncology Commission.The Lancet Oncology25(2024) e545–e580. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(24)00407-8

work page doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00407-8 2024

[7] [7]

Three ways to make proton therapy affordable.Nature549(2017) 451–453

Bortfeld TR, Loeffler JS. Three ways to make proton therapy affordable.Nature549(2017) 451–453. doi:10.1038/549451a. Frontiers 27 Yap et al.Toward Ultra-fast PBT Treatments

work page doi:10.1038/549451a 2017

[8] [8]

Commissioning of the world’s first compact pencil-beam scanning proton therapy system.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics19(2018) 94–105

Pidikiti R, Patel BC, Maynard MR, Dugas JP, Syh J, Sahoo N, et al. Commissioning of the world’s first compact pencil-beam scanning proton therapy system.Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics19(2018) 94–105. doi:10.1002/acm2.12225

work page doi:10.1002/acm2.12225 2018