ArticleDysphagia2019
Optimising Radiation Therapy Dose to the Swallowing Organs at Risk: An In Silico Study of feasibility for Patients with Oropharyngeal Tumours.
Article in Dysphagia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent evidence suggests that reducing radiotherapy dose delivered to specific anatomical swallowing structures [Swallowing Organs at Risk (SWOARs)] may improve swallowing outcomes post-treatment for patients with head and neck cancer. However, for those patients with tumours of the oropharynx, which typically directly overlap the SWOARs, reducing dose to these structures may be unachievable without compromising on the treatment of the disease. To assess the feasibility of dose reduction in this cohort, standard IMRT plans (ST-IMRT) and plans with reduced dose to the SWOARs (SW-IMRT) were generated for 25 oropharyngeal cancer patients (Brouwer et al. in Radiother Oncol 117(1):83-90, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2015.07.041 , 2015; Christianen et al. in Radiother Oncol 101(3):394-402, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2011.05.015 , 2011). ST-IMRT and SW-IMRT plans were compared for: mean dose to the SWOARs, volume of pharynx and larynx receiving 50 Gy and 60 Gy (V50 and V60 respectively) and overlap between the tumour volume and the SWOARs. Additionally, two different SWOARs delineation guidelines (Brouwer et al. in Radiother Oncol 117(1):83-90, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2015.07.041 , 2015; Christianen et al. in Radiother Oncol 101(3):394-402, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2011.05.015 , 2011) were used to highlight differences in calculated volumes between existing contouring guidelines. Agreement in SWOARs volumes between the two guidelines was calculated using a concordance index (CI). Despite a large overlap between the tumour and SWOARs, significant (p < 0.05) reductions in mean dose to 4 of the 5 SWOARs, and V50/V60 for the pharynx and larynx were achieved with SW-IMRT plans. Low CIs per structure (0.15-0.45) were found between the two guidelines highlighting issues comparing data between studies when different guidelines have been used (Hawkins et al. in Semin Radiat Oncol 28(1):46-52, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semradonc.2017.08.002 , 2018; Brodin et al. in Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 100(2):391-407, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.09.041 , 2018). This study found reducing dose to the SWOARs is a feasible practice for patients with oropharyngeal cancer. However, future prospective research is needed to determine if the extent of dose reduction achieved equates to clinical benefits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30741335What 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.