ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015
Dosimetric impact of tumor bed delineation variability based on 4DCT scan for external-beam partial breast irradiation.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study sought to evaluate the dosimetric impact of tumor bed delineation variability (based on clips, seroma or both clips and seroma) during external-beam partial breast irradiation (EB-PBI) planned utilizing four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) scans. 4DCT scans of 20 patients with a seroma clarity score (SCS) 3~5 and ≥5 surgical clips were included in this study. The combined volume of the tumor bed formed using clips, seroma, or both clips and seroma on the 10 phases of 4DCT was defined as the internal gross target volume (termed IGTVC, IGTVS and IGTVC+S, respectively). A 1.5-cm margin was added by defining the planning target volume (termed PTVC, PTVS and PTVC+S, respectively). Three treatment plans were established using the 4DCT images (termed EB-PBIC, EB-PBIS, EB-PBIC+S, respectively). The results showed that the volume of IGTVC+S was significantly larger than that of IGTVCand IGTVS. Similarly, the volume of PTVC+S was markedly larger than that of PTVC and PTVS. However, the PTV coverage for EB-PBIC+S was similar to that of EB-PBIC and EB-PBIS, and there were no significant differences in the homogeneity index or conformity index between the three treatment plans (P=0.878, 0.086). The EB-PBIS plan resulted in the lowest ipsilateral normal breast and ipsilateral lung doses compared with the EB-PBIC and EB-PBIC+S plans. To conclude, the volume variability delineated based on clips, seroma or both clips and seroma resulted in dosimetric variability for organs at risk, but did not show a marked influence on the dosimetric distribution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26885108PMC4723953What 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.