ArticleOncoTargets and therapy2018
Dosimetric comparison of volumetric-modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy in patients with cervical cancer: a meta-analysis.
Article in OncoTargets and therapy, 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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Platform-specific comparison of IMRT and VMAT angular resolution for Ethos-based online adaptive radiotherapy in cervical cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Spiral volumetric modulated arc therapy for whole-brain radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost to multiple brain metastases.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Article
- Adaptive Target Volume and Dosimetry in Image-Guided Radiotherapy for Cervical Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Gynecologic Malignancies-A Peek into the Upcoming Evidence.Cancers · 2024Review
- Dosimetric comparison between intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy to enhance bladder and bowel.Journal of medicine and life · 2023Article
- Outcome and toxicity of chemoradiation using volumetric modulated arc therapy followed by 3D image-guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer: Vietnam National Cancer Hospital experience.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2023Article
- Risk for second bladder and rectal malignancies from cervical cancer irradiation.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2021Article
- Modified combined radiotherapy for cervical cancer in kidney transplant recipient.Clinical case reports · 2021Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Image-Guided Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Combined with Paclitaxel Liposomes and Cisplatin for Locally Advanced Stage IIB-IIIB Cervical Cancer: A Retrospective Study at a Single Center.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2020Article
- Proton therapy for non-squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: planning comparison and toxicity.Journal of radiation research · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are two of the main treatment techniques for cervical cancer. Whether either technique significantly reduces irradiated volumes of organs at risk (OARs) remains controversial. The aim of this study was to explore which of these treatment paradigms is the superior technique in cervical treatment, taking clinical outcomes and treatment efficiency from published findings into consideration. MATERIALS AND
methodsPubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were utilized. The average percent irradiated volumes of OAR were extracted from all included studies. Dual arc results were extracted due to their superiority to single arc methods in terms of plan quality. Standard mean deviations and 95% CIs were calculated for delivery time, monitor units, and average percent irradiated volumes of OAR. Assessment of publication bias and sensitivity analyses were performed. All statistical analyses were conducted using R 3.5.0 software.
resultsEight studies were included in this meta-analysis. For irradiated volumes of OARs, irradiated volume of rectum receiving 40 Gy (rectum V40) was significantly decreased in VMAT compared with IMRT. However, no significant differences were observed between IMRT and VMAT plans in bladder V40 or small bowel V40/V30. In addition, delivery times and monitor units were significantly lower in the VMAT plan than in the IMRT plan.
conclusionCompared with IMRT, VMAT is significantly more protective for the rectum, suggesting that it may be an optional therapy technique for patients with cervical cancer.
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.