ArticleRadiological physics and technology2019
Comparison of volumetric-modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy prostate cancer plans accounting for cold spots.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A new predictive parameter for dose-volume metrics in intensity-modulated radiation therapy planning for prostate cancer: Initial phantom study.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Dosimetric comparison between intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy to enhance bladder and bowel.Journal of medicine and life · 2023Article
- Comprehensive Comparison of Progressive Optimization Algorithm Based Automatic Plan and Manually Planned Treatment Technique for Cervical-Thoracic Esophageal Cancers.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
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
Abstract
This study compared dosimetric indices of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) accounting for cold spots in prostate cancer plans. IMRT plans were retrospectively generated from 30 prostate cancer patients with ten cases for each risk group, who received VMAT plans. The mean, maximum, and minimum doses, and conformity and homogeneity indexes were evaluated for planning target volume (PTV) and the mean dose and V20-V70 for organs at risk (OAR) including the rectum, bladder, right and left femoral heads, and rectum overlapped with PTV (ROP) regions. The numbers and volume percentages of cold spots within PTVs and ROP regions were measured using in-house software. Three-dimensional probabilistic distributions of the probability and distributions of cold spots were generated using a centroid matching technique for visualization and analysis. There was a statistically better dose conformity in the PTV, rectum, and bladder dose-sparing in VMAT compared to that in the IMRT plans, whereas VMAT had statistically worse target dose homogeneity, and right and left femoral head dose-sparing than those of the IMRT plans. The average volume percentage of cold spots per PTV for the VMAT was 4.37 ± 2.68%, which was smaller than the 5.72 ± 1.84% observed for IMRT plans (P = 0.007). The volume percentage of cold spots per ROP for the VMAT did not significantly differ from those for the IMRT plans. Compared with IMRT, the VMAT plans achieved better PTV dose conformity, OAR dose-sparing, and smaller cold spots in the treatment of prostate cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30805779What 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.