ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2014
Dosimetric comparison between helical tomotherapy and volumetric modulated arc-therapy for non-anaplastic thyroid cancer treatment.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of robust optimization against geometric uncertainties in TomoHelical planning for prostate cancer.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- A Model-Based Method for Assessment of Salivary Gland and Planning Target Volume Dosimetry in Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy Planning on Head-and-Neck Cancer.Journal of medical physicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate and compare dosimetric parameters of volumetric modulated arctherapy (VMAT) and helical tomotherapy (HT) for non-anaplastic thyroid cancer adjuvant radiotherapy.
methodsTwelve patients with non-anaplastic thyroid cancer at high risk of local relapse received adjuvant external beam radiotherapy with curative intent in our institution, using a two-dose level prescription with a simultaneous integrated boost approach. Each patient was re-planned by the same physicist twice using both VMAT and HT. Several dosimetric quality indexes were used: target coverage index (proportion of the target volume covered by the reference isodose), healthy tissue conformity index (proportion of the reference isodose volume including the target volume), conformation number (combining both previous indexes), Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), and homogeneity index ((D2%-D98%)/prescribed dose). Dose-volume histogram statistics were also compared.
resultsHT provided statistically better target coverage index and homogeneity index for low risk PTV in comparison with VMAT (respectively 0.99 vs. 0.97 (p=0.008) and 0.22 vs. 0.25 (p=0.016)). However, HT provided poorer results for healthy tissue conformity index, conformation number and DSC with low risk and high risk PTV. As regards organs at risk sparing, by comparison with VMAT, HT statistically decreased the D2% to medullary canal (25.3 Gy vs. 32.6 Gy (p=0.003)). Besides, HT allowed a slight sparing dose for the controlateral parotid (Dmean: 4.3 Gy vs. 6.6 Gy (p=0.032)) and for the controlateral sub-maxillary gland (Dmean: 29.1 Gy vs. 33.1 Gy (p=0.041)).
conclusionsBoth VMAT and HT techniques for adjuvant treatment of non-anaplastic thyroid cancer provide globally attractive treatment plans with slight dosimetric differences. However, helical tomotherapy clearly provides a benefit in term of medullary canal sparing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.