Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25589505›Full record

Trial reportJournal of radiation research2015

Assessment of transposed ovarian movement: how much of a safety margin should be added during pelvic radiotherapy?

Itaru Soda, Hiromichi Ishiyama, Shigemitsu Ono, Kouji Takenaka, Masahide Arai, Tsutomu Arai, Haruko Iwase, Akane Sekiguchi, Shogo Kawakami, Shouko Komori and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of radiation research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Itaru SodaDepartment of Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minamiku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-0374, Japan itaruso@kitasato-u.ac.jp.
Hiromichi IshiyamaDepartment of Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minamiku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-0374, Japan.
Shigemitsu OnoDepartment of Gynecology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minamiku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-0374, Japan.
Kouji TakenakaDepartment of Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minamiku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-0374, Japan.
Masahide AraiDepartment of Gynecology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minamiku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-0374, Japan.
Tsutomu AraiDepartment of Gynecology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minamiku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-0374, Japan.
Haruko IwaseDepartment of Gynecology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minamiku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-0374, Japan.
Akane SekiguchiDepartment of Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minamiku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-0374, Japan.
Shogo KawakamiDepartment of Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minamiku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-0374, Japan.
Shouko KomoriDepartment of Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minamiku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-0374, Japan.
Takashi OndaDepartment of Gynecology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minamiku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-0374, Japan.
Kazushige HayakawaDepartment of Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minamiku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-0374, Japan.
Kitasato University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to analyze transposed ovarian movement. Data from 27 patients who underwent ovarian transposition after surgical treatment for uterine cancer were retrospectively analyzed. Computed tomography (CT) images including transposed ovaries were superimposed on other CT images acquired at different times, and were matched on bony structures. Differences in ovarian position between the CT images were measured. The planning organ at risk volume (PRV) margins were calculated from the formula of the 90% reference intervals (RIs) and the 95% RI, which were defined as mean ± 1.65 standard deviation (SD) and mean ± 1.96 SD, respectively. The 90% RI in the cranial, caudal, anterior, posterior, left and right directions were 1.5, 1.5, 1.4, 1.0, 1.7 and 0.9 cm, respectively. The 95% RI in the corresponding directions were 1.5, 2.0, 1.7, 1.2, 1.9 and 1.2 cm, respectively. These data suggest that bilateral ovaries need a PRV margin of ∼2 cm in all directions. The present study suggests that a transposed ovary needs the same PRV margin as a normal ovary (∼2 cm). Even after transposition, ovaries should be kept away from the radiation field to take into consideration the degree of ovarian movement.

Indexed as

AdultDose-Response Relationship, RadiationFemaleHumansMotionOrgans at RiskOvaryPelvisRadiation ProtectionRadiographyRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityUterine Neoplasmscervical cancerintensity modulation radiotherapyovarian preservationpostoperative radiotherapyradiation therapytransposed ovary

Identifiers

PMID25589505
PMCPMC4380061
OpenAlexW2112998959

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.