The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
MR-guidance in clinical reality: current treatment challenges and future perspectives
Open accessAbstract
Magnetic Resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) marks the beginning of a new era. MR is a versatile and suitable imaging modality for radiotherapy, as it enables direct visualization of the tumor and the surrounding organs at risk. Moreover, MRgRT provides real-time imaging to characterize and eventually track anatomical motion. Nevertheless, the successful translation of new technologies into clinical practice remains challenging. To date, the initial availability of next-generation hybrid MR-linac (MRL) systems is still limited and therefore, the focus of the present preview was on the initial applicability in current clinical practice and on future perspectives of this new technology for different treatment sites.MRgRT can be considered a groundbreaking new technology that is capable of creating new perspectives towards an individualized, patient-oriented planning and treatment approach, especially due to the ability to use daily online adaptation strategies. Furthermore, MRL systems overcome the limitations of conventional image-guided radiotherapy, especially in soft tissue, where target and organs at risk need accurate definition. Nevertheless, some concerns remain regarding the additional time needed to re-optimize dose distributions online, the reliability of the gating and tracking procedures and the interpretation of functional MR imaging markers and their potential changes during the course of treatment. Due to its continuous technological improvement and rapid clinical large-scale application in several anatomical settings, further studies may confirm the potential disruptive role of MRgRT in the evolving oncological environment.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hellman, S., & Weichselbaum, R. R. (1995) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.1995.13.1.8 · Cited by 2,562
Gomez, D. R., Blumenschein, G. R., Lee, J. J., Hernandez, M., Ye, R., Camidge, D. R., Doebele, R. C., Skoulidis, F., Gaspar, L. E., Gibbons, D. L., et al. (2016) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(16)30532-0 · Cited by 1,086
Cited by
Smart Nanomaterials in Cancer Theranostics: Challenges and Opportunities
Kashyap, B. K., Singh, V. V., Solanki, M. K., Kumar, A., Ruokolainen, J., & Kesari, K. K. (2023) · ACS Omega · doi:10.1021/acsomega.2c07840 · Cited by 348
Lin, D., Lapen, K., Sherer, M. V., Kantor, J., Zhang, Z., Boyce, L. M., Bosch, W., Korenstein, D., & Gillespie, E. F. (2020) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.04.011 · Cited by 59
Metadata
- Authors
- Corradini, S., Alongi, F., Andratschke, N., Belka, C., Boldrini, L., Cellini, F., Debus, J., Guckenberger, M., Hörner-Rieber, J., Lagerwaard, F. J., Mazzola, R., Palacios, M. A., Philippens, M. E. P., Raaijmakers, C. P. J., Terhaard, C. H. J., Valentini, V., & Niyazi, M.
- Venue
- Radiation Oncology
- Published
- 2019-06-03
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 92-92
- ISSN
- 1748-717X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2948831484
- Cited by
- 356
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 44.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: MR-guidance in clinical reality: current treatment challenges and future perspectives. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s13014-019-1308-y
- The paper
- Corradini, S., Alongi, F., Andratschke, N., Belka, C., Boldrini, L., Cellini, F., Debus, J., Guckenberger, M., Hörner-Rieber, J., Lagerwaard, F. J., Mazzola, R., Palacios, M. A., Philippens, M. E. P., Raaijmakers, C. P. J., Terhaard, C. H. J., Valentini, V., & Niyazi, M. (2019). MR-guidance in clinical reality: current treatment challenges and future perspectives. Radiation Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-019-1308-y
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.