ArticlePloS one2016
A Dosimetric Study of Using Fixed-Jaw Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for the Treatment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma with Cervical Lymph Node Metastasis.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A retrospective study using the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database to predict risk and prognostic factors for lung metastasis in cervical carcinoma: nomogram development and validation.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- Micro-CT analysis of the mandibular bone microarchitecture of rats after radiotherapy and low-power laser therapy.Lasers in medical science · 2022Article
- Estimated radiation doses to ovarian and uterine organs in breast cancer irradiation using radio-photoluminescent glass dosimeters (RPLDs).Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2021Article
- Effective Organs-at-Risk Dose Sparing in Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Using a Half-Beam Technique in Whole Pelvic Irradiation.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- A comparative study of identical VMAT about two adjacent targets with and without fixed-jaw technique.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2019Article
- The Hippocampus Sparing Volume Modulated Arc Therapy does not Influence Plan Quality on Locally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Patients.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Impact of Intertarget Distances on Single-Isocenter Radiotherapy Plans with jaw-Tracking and jaw-Fixed Techniques for Vertebral Metastases.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
- Split X-jaw Planning Technique of Volumetric Modulated Arc Radiotherapy.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
purposeTo study the dosimetric difference between fixed-jaw volumetric modulated radiotherapy (FJ-VMAT) and large-field volumetric modulated radiotherapy (LF-VMAT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) with cervical lymph node metastasis.
methodsComputed tomography (CT) datasets of 10 NPC patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy were used to generate LF-VMAT and FJ-VMAT plans in the Eclipse version 10.0 treatment planning system. These two kinds of plans were then compared with respect to planning-target-volume (PTV) coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), organ-at-risk sparing, monitor units (MUs) and treatment time (TT).
resultsThe FJ-VMAT plans provided lower D2% of PGTVnd (PTV of lymph nodes), PTV1 (high-risk PTV) and PTV2 (low-risk PTV) than did the LF-VMAT plans, whereas no significant differences were observed in PGTVnx (PTV of primary nasopharyngeal tumor). The FJ-VMAT plans provided lower doses delivered to the planning organ at risk (OAR) volumes (PRVs) of both brainstem and spinal cord, both parotid glands and normal tissue than did the LF-VMAT plans, whereas no significant differences were observed with respect to the oral cavity and larynx. The MUs of the FJ-VMAT plans (683 ± 87) were increased by 22% ± 12% compared with the LF-VMAT plans (559 ± 62). In terms of the TT, no significant difference was found between the two kinds of plans.
conclusionsFJ-VMAT was similar or slightly superior to LF-VMAT in terms of PTV coverage and was significantly superior in terms of OAR sparing, at the expense of increased MUs.
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.