ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2018
Dosimetric comparison of 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, volumetric modulated arc therapy, and helical tomotherapy for postoperative gastric cancer patients.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of robust optimization against geometric uncertainties in TomoHelical planning for prostate cancer.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- Efficacy and toxicity of capecitabine combined with intensity-modulated radiotherapy after D1/D2 lymph node dissection in patients with gastric cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2021Article
- Optimal tumor coverage with different beam energies by IMRT, VMAT and TOMO: Effects on patients with proximal gastric cancer.Medicine · 2020Article
- miR-92b promotes gastric cancer growth by activating the DAB2IP-mediated PI3K/AKT signalling pathway.Cell proliferation · 2020Article
- Automated VMAT planning for postoperative adjuvant treatment of advanced gastric cancer.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare dosimetric data for the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) between 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and helical tomotherapy [1]. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe dosimetric data for 15 gastric cancer patients treated with 3DCRT, VMAT, or HT techniques were used. Cumulative dosimetric parameters, homogeneity index (HI), and conformal index (CI) were compared for the PTV and OARs.
resultsThe average maximum doses of PTV were significantly higher in VMAT plans than in 3DCRT (p = 0.04) and HT (p = 0.02) plans, whereas minimum dose values were significantly lower in 3DCRT plans compared with VMAT (p < 0.001) and HT (p = 0.02) plans. Liver mean dose (D
conclusionsThe HT plans reduced the maximum dose applied to the target and improved the conformality and homogeneity of radiation, while providing sufficient PTV coverage.
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.