ArticleJournal of biomedical physics & engineering2019
Craniospinal Irradiation in Medulloblastoma using High Energy Medical Linear Accelerator: an Innovative Approach to Planning Technique.
Article in Journal of biomedical physics & engineering, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Case report: successful treatment of primary intradural extramedullary extraskeletal Ewing sarcoma in adult patient with intralesional surgery, chemotherapy, and proton beam therapy of the cerebrospinal axis.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCraniospinal irradiation (CSI) of medulloblastoma poses technological challenges due to the involvement of large treatment volume. Commonly, the whole treatment length is covered with two different isocentric plans in which the junction is shifted after every five fractions to overcome the possibility of hot and cold spot.
objectiveThis study aims to evaluate dosimetrically and clinically the innovative planning technique for the CSI which doesn't need re-planning and re-setup of patients after every five fractions. MATERIAL AND
methodsComputed tomography was done for fifteen (ten children and five adults) patients diagnosed with medulloblastoma. Treatment planning for 36 Gray (Gy) in 20 fractions (#) at the rate of 1.8Gy/# was done on the treatment planning system. A single plan for children was created with two bilateral fields of 6 Mega Voltage (MV) energy for cranium and one posterior field of 6 MV for spinal cord (C1-S2). Two plans for adult patients were created, first plan was with two bilateral fields of 6 MV for cranium and two posterior oblique fields of 6 MV for cervical and the part of thoracic spinal cord (up to T8-T9). The second plan was with a single posterior field of 15 MV covering remaining thoracic (T8-T9 to T12), lumbar and sacrum (up to lower border of S2) spine. After careful evaluation of all the plans, treatment was delivered; acute toxicities were recorded.
results95% of prescribed dose was received by more than 95% of planning target volume in all the plans with the acceptable hot spot and good homogeneity index. All the patients reported common radiation induced acute toxicities (headache, vomiting, weakness) during radiotherapy.
conclusionThe new planning technique for CSI has acceptable dosimetric and acute clinical possibilities; therefore it can be used for CSI for improved homogeneous dose delivery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31214520PMC6538910W2901872351What 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.