Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28553583›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical signals and sensors

Assessment and Comparison of Homogeneity and Conformity Indexes in Step-and-Shoot and Compensator-Based Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) and Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy (3D CRT) in Prostate Cancer.

Marzieh Salimi, Kaveh Shirani Tak Abi, Hassan Ali Nedaie, Hossein Hassani, Hussain Gharaati, Mahmood Samei, Rezgar Shahi, Hamed Zarei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical signals and sensors. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Air variability in maxillary sinus during radiotherapy for sinonasal carcinoma.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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.

Marzieh SalimiPhD Candidate of Medical Physics, Medical Physics and Engineering Department, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Kaveh Shirani Tak AbiMSc of Medical Radiation Engineering, Department of Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
Hassan Ali NedaieAssistant Prof of Medical Physics, Radiotherapy Oncology Department, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Hossein HassaniMSc of Medical Radiation Engineering, Department of Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
Hussain GharaatiProf of Medical Physics, Radiotherapy Oncology Department, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mahmood SameiOncologists, Radiotherapy Oncology Center, Karaj, Iran.
Rezgar ShahiMSc Student of Medical Radiation Engineering, Department of Energy Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Hamed ZareiDepartment of Radiology, Allied Medical Faculty, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D CRT) are two treatment modalities in prostate cancer, which provide acceptable dose distribution in tumor region with sparing the surrounding normal tissues. IMRT is based on inverse planning optimization; in which, intensity of beams is modified by using multileaf collimators and also compensators with optimum shapes in step and shoot (SAS) and compensator-based method, respectively. In the recent study, some important parameters were compared in two IMRT and 3D CRT methods. Prescribed dose was 80 Gy for both IMRT procedures and 70 Gy for 3D CRT. Treatment plans of 15 prostate cancer candidates were compared to target the minimum dose, maximum dose, V 76 Gy (for IMRT plans) V 66.5 Gy (for 3D CRT), mean dose, conformity index (CI), and homogeneity index (HI). Dose conformity in compensators-based IMRT was better than SAS and 3D CRT. The same outcome was also achieved for homogeneity index. The target coverage was achieved 95% of prescribed dose to 95% of planning target volume (PTV) in 3D CRT and 95% of prescribed dose to 98% of PTV in IMRT methods. IMRT increases maximum dose of tumor region, improves CI and HI of target volume, and also reduces dose of organs at risks.

Indexed as

3D CRTcompensatorconformity indexhomogeneity indexIMRTstep and shoot

Identifiers

PMID28553583
PMCPMC5437761

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.