ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2018
Comparison of semiautomated tangential VMAT with 3DCRT for breast or chest wall and regional nodes.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of 3D-CRT vs. VMAT for radiotherapy of whole breast with simultaneous integrated boost.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2026Article
- Comparison of heart-sparing radiation techniques for left-sided breast cancer: DIBH combined with tangential 3D radiation vs. conventional and tangential VMAT techniques.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of Reference Selection on Gamma Analysis in Patient-Specific Quality Assurance for Monte Carlo-Based Treatment Planning Systems.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Article
- Off-isocentric VMAT technique for breast cancer: Effective dose reduction to organs at risk and its applicability based on patient anatomy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Robustness of VMAT to setup errors in postmastectomy radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer: Impact of bolus thickness.PloS one · 2023Article
- Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT): a review of clinical outcomes-what is the clinical evidence for the most effective implementation?The British journal of radiology · 2022Review
- Article
- Comparison of whole breast dosimetry techniques - From 3DCRT to VMAT and the impact on heart and surrounding tissues.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2022Article
- In regards to Bogue J, Wan J, Lavey RS, Parsai EI. Dosimetric comparison of VMAT with integrated skin flash to 3D field-in-field tangents for left breast irradiation. Journal of applied clinical medical physics. 2019 Feb;20(2):24-9.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2019Article
- Planning System-dependent Recommendations of Intensity-modulated Technique for Breast Radiotherapy: A Literature Review-based Adaptation and Institutional Dosimetric Experience from a Large-volume Tertiary Cancer Care Hospital.Journal of medical physicsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radiotherapy to the breast after surgery sometimes requires adjoining nodes to be included in the treatment volume. In these cases, the traditional approach has been a complex 3-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy (3DCRT) beam arrangement which can result in significant dose heterogeneity at the beam junctions. A Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) beam arrangement has previously been proposed for breast cases, where the chest wall/breast is treated with a limited angle (partial arc) tangential VMAT technique (Virén et al. [2015] Radiat Oncol. 10:79). In our study, this approach is extended to breast and chest wall cases with adjoining nodes by adding a separate conventional VMAT arc field specifically limited to the superior nodes. This VMAT method was implemented using a semiautomated approach on 27 patients, and the resultant plan compared to a monoisocentric 3DCRT plan. Plan statistics, Dose-Volume Histogram (DVH) analysis and Radiation Oncologist (RO) preference were assessed. When compared to the 3DCRT technique, the VMAT planning method was found to result in better target volume coverage, high doses to organs at risk (OAR) were reduced but greater OAR volumes received low doses. Having said that, the volume receiving low doses with this tangential VMAT technique was less than that of other VMAT planning methods described in the literature, and the integral dose was less than the 3DCRT method. The VMAT technique also resulted in more robust junction doses that the 3DCRT method. RO review found that the VMAT technique was preferred in 81% of cases. Specifically, the VMAT plans were preferred in all categories of patients except left chest wall cases where the intermammary nodes were also treated. The VMAT technique described here is a useful addition to the treatment options available for breast/chest wall and nodal patients.
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.