Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26223271›Full record

Trial reportRadiation oncology (London, England)2015

Regional hyperthermia of the abdomen, a pilot study towards the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis.

Marcus Beck, Pirus Ghadjar, Mirko Weihrauch, Susen Burock, Volker Budach, Jacek Nadobny, Jalid Sehouli, Peter Wust

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IClinical Trial, Phase II
In one paragraph

Trial report in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Heating technology for malignant tumors: a review.International journal of hyperthermia : the official journal of European Society for Hyperthermic Oncology, North American Hyperthermia Group · 2020
    Review
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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marcus BeckDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany. marcus.beck@charite.de.
Pirus GhadjarDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Mirko WeihrauchDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Susen BurockCharité Comprehensive Cancer Center, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Volker BudachDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Jacek NadobnyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Jalid SehouliDepartment of Gynecology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Peter WustDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany. peter.wust@charite.de.
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeritoneal carcinomatosis occurs in different cancer subtypes and is associated with a dismal prognosis. Some doubts remain whether the whole abdomen can be treated by regional hyperthermia, therefore we analyzed feasibility conducting a pilot study.

methodsA simulation of the abdominopelvic heat distribution in 11 patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis was done using the HyperPlan software and the SIGMA-60 and SIGMA-Eye applicators. Tissue-specific region-related electrical and thermal parameters were used to solve the Maxwell's equations and the bioheat-transfer equation. Three-dimensional specific absorption rate (SAR) distributions and, additionally, estimated region-related perfusion rates were used to solve the bioheat-transfer equation. The predicted SAR and temperature distributions were compared with minimally invasive measurements in pelvic reference points.

resultsIn 11 patients (7 of them treated in the SIGMA-60 and 4 in the SIGMA-Eye applicator) the measured treatment variables (SAR, temperatures in the pelvic reference points) indicated that the heated volumes were higher for the SIGMA-Eye applicator. The mean computed abdominal SARs were less for the SIGMA-Eye (33 versus 44 W/kg). Nevertheless, the temperature distributions in the abdomen (peritoneal cavity) were more homogeneous in the SIGMA-Eye applicator as compared to the SIGMA-60 as indicated by higher values of T90 (mean 40.2 versus 38.2 °C) and T50 (mean 41.1 versus 40.2 °C), while the maximum temperatures were similar (in the range 41 to 43 °C). Even though the mean abdominal SAR was lower in the SIGMA-Eye, the heat distribution covered a larger volume of the abdomen (in particular the upper abdomen). For the SIGMA-60 applicator the achieved T90 appeared to be limited between 41 and 42 °C, for the SIGMA Eye applicator more effective T90 in the range 42 to 43 °C were obtained.

conclusionOur results suggest that an adequate heating of the abdomen and therefore abdominal regional hyperthermia in PC patients appears feasible. The SIGMA-Eye applicator appears to be superior compared to the SIGMA-60 applicator for abdominal hyperthermia.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationAbdomenCarcinomaHumansHyperthermia, InducedPeritoneal NeoplasmsPilot Projects

Identifiers

PMID26223271
PMCPMC4520203
OpenAlexW1586141717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.