Trial reportThe British journal of radiology2017
Dose specification for hippocampal sparing whole brain radiotherapy (HS WBRT): considerations from the UK HIPPO trial QA programme.
Trial report in The British journal of radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- A review of clinical trial radiotherapy quality assurance: value, evolution and lessons.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026Review
- Unilateral hippocampal sparing during whole brain radiotherapy for multiple brain metastases: narrative and critical review.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- The Effect of Hippocampal Avoidance Whole Brain Radiotherapy on the Preservation of Long-Term Neurocognitive Function in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients With Brain Metastasis.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
- A New Approach to Highly Conformal Hippocampal-sparing Whole-brain Radiotherapy: A Feasibility Study.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe HIPPO trial is a UK randomized Phase II trial of hippocampal sparing (HS) vs conventional whole-brain radiotherapy after surgical resection or radiosurgery in patients with favourable prognosis with 1-4 brain metastases. Each participating centre completed a planning benchmark case as part of the dedicated radiotherapy trials quality assurance programme (RTQA), promoting the safe and effective delivery of HS intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in a multicentre trial setting.
methodsSubmitted planning benchmark cases were reviewed using visualization for radiotherapy software (VODCA) evaluating plan quality and compliance in relation to the HIPPO radiotherapy planning and delivery guidelines.
resultsComparison of the planning benchmark data highlighted a plan specified using dose to medium as an outlier by comparison with those specified using dose to water. Further evaluation identified that the reported plan statistics for dose to medium were lower as a result of the dose calculated at regions of PTV inclusive of bony cranium being lower relative to brain.
conclusionSpecification of dose to water or medium remains a source of potential ambiguity and it is essential that as part of a multicentre trial, consideration is given to reported differences, particularly in the presence of bone. Evaluation of planning benchmark data as part of an RTQA programme has highlighted an important feature of HS IMRT dosimetry dependent on dose being specified to water or medium, informing the development and undertaking of HS IMRT as part of the HIPPO trial. Advances in knowledge: The potential clinical impact of differences between dose to medium and dose to water are demonstrated for the first time, in the setting of HS whole-brain radiotherapy.
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.