ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2016
Intrafractional dose variation and beam configuration in carbon ion radiotherapy for esophageal cancer.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current status and prospect of particle therapy for esophageal cancer.Precision radiation oncology · 2024Review
- Planning strategies for robust carbon-ion scanning radiotherapy for stage I esophageal cancer: a retrospective study.Journal of radiation research · 2023Article
- Robust Angle Selection in Particle Therapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- Prognostic significance of lung radiation dose in patients with esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2019Article
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
backgroundIn carbon ion radiotherapy (CIR) for esophageal cancer, organ and target motion is a major challenge for treatment planning due to potential range deviations. This study intends to analyze the impact of intrafractional variations on dosimetric parameters and to identify favourable settings for robust treatment plans.
methodsWe contoured esophageal boost volumes in different organ localizations for four patients and calculated CIR-plans with 13 different beam geometries on a free-breathing CT. Forward calculation of these plans was performed on 4D-CT datasets representing seven different phases of the breathing cycle. Plan quality was assessed for each patient and beam configuration.
resultsTarget volume coverage was adequate for all settings in the baseline CIR-plans (V
conclusionsDespite intrafractional motion, CIR for esophageal cancer is possible with robust treatment plans when an individually optimized beam setup is selected depending on tumor size and localization.
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.