ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2019
Optimal dose limitation strategy for bone marrow sparing in intensity-modulated radiotherapy of cervical cancer.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dosimetric and hematological toxicity analyses of bone marrow-sparing intensity-modulated radiation therapy for patients with cervical cancer treated with extended-field radiation therapy.Precision radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Exploring the role of intestinal microbiota in mitigating acute radiation-induced intestinal injury through high-energy X-ray FLASH radiotherapy via metagenomic analysis.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Development and validation of an automated Tomotherapy planning method for cervical cancer.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Comparative Analysis of VMAT and IMRT Techniques: Evaluation of Dose Constraints and Bone Marrow Sparing in Cervical Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemoradiotherapy.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Article
- The impact of bone marrow irradiation dose on acute haematologic toxicity in cervical cancer patients treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
- Analysis of Rapid arc-based Radiation Therapy on Dosimetric Parameters in Cervical Cancer Patients with and without Bone Marrow Sparing.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2022Article
- Lymphocyte-sparing pelvic radiotherapy for prostate cancer: An in-silico study.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2022Article
- Development of a nomogram for predicting grade 2 or higher acute hematologic toxicity of cervical cancer after the pelvic bone marrow sparing radiotherapy.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Which Bone Marrow Sparing Strategy and Radiotherapy Technology Is Most Beneficial in Bone Marrow-Sparing Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Patients With Cervical Cancer?Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- Approach to radiation therapy in the Jehovah's Witness patient: An overview.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation OncologyReview
- Changing the Prognosis of Metastatic Cervix Uteri Adenosquamous Carcinoma through a Multimodal Approach: A Case Report.Case reports in 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo quantify the dosimetric parameters of different bone marrow sparing strategies and to determine the optimal strategy for cervical cancer patients undergoing postoperative intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).
methodsFifteen patients with cervical cancer were selected for analysis. The planning target volume (PTV) and the organs at risks (OAR) including small bowel, bladder, rectum, femoral heads, os coxae (OC), lumbosacral spine (LS) and bone marrow (BM) were contoured. For each patient, four IMRT plans with different strategies were generated, including one plan without BM as the dose-volume constraint, namely IMRT (N) plan, and three bone marrow sparing (BMS-IMRT) plans. The three BMS-IMRT plans used the BM, OC, OC and LS respectively, as the BM OAR, namely as IMRT (BM), IMRT (OC) and IMRT (OC + LS) plans. Dose volumes for the target and the OARs were compared using analysis of variance (ANOVA).
resultsCompared with IMRT (N) plans, the dose to the small bowel, bladder, rectum and femoral heads showed no increase in the three BMS-IMRT plans. However, the irradiated dose to BM, OC and LS significantly decreased. In particular, the mean dose of BM, OC and LS decreased by about 5Gy (p < 0.05) in IMRT (BM) plans while the average volume receiving ≥20, ≥30, ≥40Gy decreased by 7.1-24.2%. The LS volume receiving 40Gy showed the highest decrease (about 31.2%, p < 0.05) in IMRT (OC + LS) plans. On the other hand, in comparison with IMRT (BM), IMRT (OC) reduced the dose volume of to the OC, but increased the dose to LS while IMRT (OC + LS) plans reduced both the OC and the LS volume at all dose levels. Specifically, the V
conclusionBy introducing the os coxae and lumbosacral spine as the dose-volume constraints, the IMRT plans exhibited the best sparing of the bone marrow without compromising the dose to surrounding normal structures. Therefore, we recommend adding the os coxae and lumbosacral spine as the BM OAR in such plans.
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.