ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2017
Comparison of photon volumetric modulated arc therapy, intensity-modulated proton therapy, and intensity-modulated carbon ion therapy for delivery of hypo-fractionated thoracic radiotherapy.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2017. 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, 123 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamic control of carbon-ion radiation dose distribution amid respiratory motion challenges: A review of prediction research using geant4 and deep learning physics-constrained models.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Review
- Performance of a 6D Treatment Chair for Patient Positioning in an Upright Posture for Fixed Ion Beam Lines.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- Dosimetric evaluation of 4D-CBCT reconstructed by Simultaneous Motion Estimation and Image Reconstruction (SMEIR) for carbon ion therapy of lung cancer.Medical physics · 2019Article
- 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of the present study was to compare the dose distribution generated from photon volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT), and intensity modulated carbon ion therapy (IMCIT) in the delivery of hypo-fractionated thoracic radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten selected patients who underwent thoracic particle therapy between 2015 and 2016 were re-planned to receive a relative biological effectiveness (RBE) weighted dose of 60 Gy (i.e., GyE) in 15 fractions delivered with VMAT, IMPT, or IMCIT with the same optimization criteria. Treatment plans were then compared.
resultsThere were no significant differences in target volume dose coverage or dose conformity, except improved D
conclusionAlthough it was comparable to VMAT, IMCIT led to significantly better tumor target dose coverage and conformity than did IMPT. Particle therapy, compared with VMAT, improved thoracic OAR sparing. IMCIT, compared with IMPT, may further improve normal lung and major blood vessel sparing under limited respiratory motion.
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.