ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2014
Robotic radiosurgery as an alternative to brachytherapy for cervical cancer patients.
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Can stereotactic body radiotherapy replace brachytherapy in gynecologic cancers? A systematic review of current evidence.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026Review
- Article
- The value of brachytherapy in the age of advanced external beam radiotherapy: a review of the literature in terms of dosimetry.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2022Review
- Long-term results of robotic radiosurgery for non brachytherapy patients with cervical cancer.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2021Article
- IMRT and brachytherapy comparison in gynaecological cancer treatment: thinking over dosimetry and radiobiology.Ecancermedicalscience · 2019Article
- External beam techniques to boost cervical cancer when brachytherapy is not an option-theories and applications.Annals of translational medicine · 2017Review
- Effect of rectal enemas on rectal dosimetric parameters during high-dose-rate vaginal cuff brachytherapy: A prospective trial.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2016Article
- Modern radiation therapy and potential fertility preservation strategies in patients with cervical cancer undergoing chemoradiation.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2015Review
- 3D-printed Magnetic Resonance (MR)-based gynecological phantom for image-guided brachytherapy training.BrachytherapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeTo compare MRI-guided brachytherapy (BT) and two different dose prescriptions for robotic radiosurgery (RRS) in locally advanced cervical cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eleven patients with FIGO stage IIB-IIIB cervical cancer underwent RRS instead of BT for various reasons. A total dose of 30 Gy was administered in five fractions. The maximum dose was chosen such that the prescribed dose was 70 % of the maximum dose (RRS70). To simulate BT more closely, additional plan calculations were carried out for a higher maximum dose with the same enclosing dose of 30 Gy being now 25 % of the maximum dose (RRS25). BT plans were calculated for the same patients (BTRRS). Finally, the resulting three sets of treatment plans were compared with 38 other patients treated with MRI-guided BT and the same dose prescription (BTref). Plan comparisons were performed based on DVH parameters with regard to target coverage (V100), conformation number (CN), and sparing of the organs at risk (OARs).
resultsThe best coverage of V100 = 100 ± 0 % was obtained with RRS25, followed by RRS70 with 97.1 ± 2.7 %, BTref with 90.9 ± 8.9 %, and the intraindividual BTRRS with 80.6 ± 6.4 %. The sparing of OARs was associated with D0.1 cc, D2 cc, and D5 cc to the rectum, sigmoid, and bladder walls. OAR doses were compliant with the GEC-ESTRO guidelines and comparable among RRS70, RRS25, BTRRS, and BTref. By contrast, RRS25 could not fulfill these guidelines, exceeding considerably the tolerable dose constraints for the walls of the critical OARs.
conclusionDespite of the excellent coverage and higher maximum dose, the unacceptably high exposure to the OARs disqualified RRS25 as an alternative for BT in cervical cancer patients. By contrast, RRS70 offered the best protection for the OARs, comparable to BT, and even better target coverage and conformity than BT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24589918What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.