ArticleJournal of contemporary brachytherapy2019
Comparative analysis of image-guided adaptive interstitial brachytherapy and intensity-modulated arc therapy versus conventional treatment techniques in cervical cancer using biological dose summation.
Article in Journal of contemporary brachytherapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automated EQDJournal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2026Article
- Image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy in patients with FIGO IIIC1 cervical cancer: efficacy, toxicity and prognosis.Journal of Cancer · 2023Article
- Comparative Analysis of 60Co and 192Ir Sources in High Dose Rate Brachytherapy for Cervical Cancer.Cancers · 2022Review
- Hybrid tandem and ovoids brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: impact of dose and tumor volume metrics on outcomes.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2021Article
- Biological dose summation of external beam radiotherapy for the whole breast and image-guided high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy boost in early-stage breast cancer.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2020Article
- Predictive value of Excel forms based on an automatic calculation of dose equivalent in 2 Gy per fraction in adaptive brachytherapy for cervical cancer.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2020Article
- Biological dose summation of intensity-modulated arc therapy and image-guided high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2020Article
- High precision radiotherapy including intensity-modulated radiation therapy and pulsed-dose-rate brachytherapy for cervical cancer: a retrospective monoinstitutional study.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2019Article
- Determining Combined Modality Dosimetric Constraints by Integration of IMRT and LDR Prostate Brachytherapy Dosimetry and Correlation with Toxicity.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare image-guided adaptive interstitial brachytherapy (BT) and intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) with conventional treatment techniques in cervical cancer using an alternative biological dose summation method. MATERIAL AND
methodsInitially, 21 interstitial BT and IMAT plans of patients with cervical cancer were included and additional plans were created (inverse optimized interstitial, optimized intracavitary, non-optimized intracavitary BT plans, and conformal external beam radiotherapy [EBRT]). The most exposed volume of critical organs in BT were identified manually on EBRT CT images. Biological total doses (EQD2) were calculated and compared between each combination of BT and EBRT plans. This method was compared with uniform dose conception (UDC) in IMAT and conformal EBRT plans.
resultsThe D
conclusionsAlthough optimization improves the quality of conventional BT plans, interstitial plans produce significantly higher dose coverage of high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV) and lower doses to organs at risk (OARs). IMAT plans decrease the dose to the rectum. UDC overestimates OARs doses.
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.