Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30721567›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2019

Dose evaluation indices for total body irradiation using TomoDirect with different numbers of ports: A comparison with the TomoHelical method.

Yuki Kasai, Yukihide Fukuyama, Hiromi Terashima, Katsumasa Nakamura, Tomonari Sasaki

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yuki KasaiDepartment of Health Sciences, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka City, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan.
Yukihide FukuyamaDepartment of Radiology, Harasanshin Hospital, 1-8 Taihakumachi, Hakata-ku, Fukuoka City, Fukuoka, 812-0033, Japan.
Hiromi TerashimaDepartment of Radiology, Harasanshin Hospital, 1-8 Taihakumachi, Hakata-ku, Fukuoka City, Fukuoka, 812-0033, Japan.
Katsumasa NakamuraDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, 1-20-1 Handayama, Higashi-ku, Hamamatsu City, Shizuoka, 431-3192, Japan.
Tomonari SasakiDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka City, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan.
Harasanshin Hospital · JPKyushu University · JPHamamatsu University School of Medicine · JP

Funding

JSPS KAKENHI JP17K10483
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

TomoDirect has been reported to have some advantages over TomoHelical in delivering total body irradiation (TBI). This study aimed to investigate the relationships between the number of ports and the dose evaluation indices in low-dose TBI in TomoDirect mode using 2-12 ports and to compare these data with those for the TomoHelical mode in a simulation study. Thirteen patients underwent low-dose TBI in TomoHelical mode from June 2015 to June 2016. We used the same computed tomography data sets for these patients to create new treatment plans for upper-body parts using TomoDirect mode with 2-12 beam angles as well as TomoHelical mode. The prescription was 4 Gy in two equal fractions. For the TomoDirect data, we generated plans with 2-12 ports with approximately equally spaced angles; the modulation factor, field width, and pitch were 2.0, 5.0 cm, and 0.500, respectively. For the TomoHelical plans, the modulation factor, field width, and pitch were 2.0, 5.0 cm, and 0.397, respectively. D2, D98, D50, and the homogeneity index (HI) were evaluated to compare TomoDirect plans having 2-12 ports with the TomoHelical plan. Using TomoDirect plans, D2 with four ports or fewer, D98 with 10 ports or fewer, D50 with four ports or fewer and HI with five ports or fewer showed statistically significantly worse results than the TomoHelical plan. With the TomoDirect plans, D2 with seven ports or more, D50 with eight ports or more, and HI with eight ports or more showed statistically significant improvement compared with the TomoHelical plan. All of the dose evaluation indices of the TomoDirect plans showed a tendency to improve as the number of ports increased. TomoDirect plans showed statistically significant improvement of D2, D50, and HI compared with the TomoHelical plan. Therefore, we conclude that TomoDirect can provide better dose distribution in low-dose TBI with TomoTherapy.

Indexed as

AdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsOrgans at RiskPrognosisRadiometryRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedWhole-Body IrradiationTomoDirectTomoHelicalTomoTherapytotal body irradiation

Identifiers

PMID30721567
PMCPMC6370990
OpenAlexW2913445677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.