Trial reportPhysics in medicine and biology2018
Supplemental computational phantoms to estimate out-of-field absorbed dose in photon radiotherapy.
Trial report in Physics in medicine and biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analytical models for external photon beam radiotherapy out-of-field dose calculation: a scoping review.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Proton Radiotherapy Could Reduce the Risk of Fatal Second Cancers for Children with Intracranial Tumors in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.International journal of particle therapy · 2021Article
- ANALYTICAL MODEL TO ESTIMATE EQUIVALENT DOSE FROM INTERNAL NEUTRONS IN PROTON THERAPY OF CHILDREN WITH INTRACRANIAL TUMORS.Radiation protection dosimetry · 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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to develop a straightforward method of supplementing patient anatomy and estimating out-of-field absorbed dose for a cohort of pediatric radiotherapy patients with limited recorded anatomy. A cohort of nine children, aged 2-14 years, who received 3D conformal radiotherapy for low-grade localized brain tumors (LBTs), were randomly selected for this study. The extent of these patients' computed tomography simulation image sets were cranial only. To approximate their missing anatomy, we supplemented the LBT patients' image sets with computed tomography images of patients in a previous study with larger extents of matched sex, height, and mass and for whom contours of organs at risk for radiogenic cancer had already been delineated. Rigid fusion was performed between the LBT patients' data and that of the supplemental computational phantoms using commercial software and in-house codes. In-field dose was calculated with a clinically commissioned treatment planning system, and out-of-field dose was estimated with a previously developed analytical model that was re-fit with parameters based on new measurements for intracranial radiotherapy. Mean doses greater than 1 Gy were found in the red bone marrow, remainder, thyroid, and skin of the patients in this study. Mean organ doses between 150 mGy and 1 Gy were observed in the breast tissue of the girls and lungs of all patients. Distant organs, i.e. prostate, bladder, uterus, and colon, received mean organ doses less than 150 mGy. The mean organ doses of the younger, smaller LBT patients (0-4 years old) were a factor of 2.4 greater than those of the older, larger patients (8-12 years old). Our findings demonstrated the feasibility of a straightforward method of applying supplemental computational phantoms and dose-calculation models to estimate absorbed dose for a set of children of various ages who received radiotherapy and for whom anatomies were largely missing in their original computed tomography simulations.
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.