ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Using Image-guided Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy on Patients With Head and Neck Soft-tissue Sarcoma.
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does deformation of immobilization devices impact treatment accuracy in thoracic cancer radiotherapy?Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Maximizing the Clinical Benefit of Radiotherapy in Solitary Plasmacytoma: An International Multicenter Analysis.Cancers · 2020Article
- Clinical Analysis of Rotational-Translational Error Coupling in 3DoF Versus 6DoF CBCT Couch Corrections:A Cross-Sectional Study.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
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImage-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT) is increasingly being used to treat patients with soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) of the head and neck. Although there is no comparison between IMRT and conventional radiation therapy (CRT) concerning their efficacy. In this analysis, we compared CRT and IMRT outcomes for head and neck STS. PATIENTS AND
methodsSixty-seven patients who underwent radiotherapy between 1994 and 2017 were identified.
resultsThe median follow-up was 31 months. Of the 67 patients, 34% were treated with CRT technique and 66% with IG-IMRT. The locoregional relapse rate following IMRT was 21% versus 70% with CRT (p<0.001) and the 5-year locoregional control was 69% versus 28%, respectively (p=0.01). IG-IMRT was associated with non-significant, less acute, and chronic adverse events. In the multivariate analysis, a significant influence of radiation technique on locoregional control was confirmed (p=0.04).
conclusionIG-IMRT seems to be associated both with higher locoregional control as well as lower acute and chronic toxicities.
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.