ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2019
Variation in accumulated dose of volumetric-modulated arc therapy for pancreatic cancer due to different beam starting phases.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 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.
- Positional repeatability and variation in internal and external markers during volumetric-modulated arc therapy under end-exhalation breath-hold conditions for pancreatic cancer patients.Journal of radiation research · 2020Trial
- Assessing target localization accuracy across different soft-tissue matching protocols using end-exhalation breath-hold cone-beam computed tomography in patients with pancreatic cancer.Journal of radiation research · 2023Article
- Investigation of 4D dose in volumetric modulated arc therapy-based stereotactic body radiation therapy: does fractional dose or number of arcs matter?Journal of radiation research · 2020Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo assess the effects of different beam starting phases on dosimetric variations in the clinical target volume (CTV) and organs at risk (OARs), and to identify the relationship between plan complexity and the dosimetric impact of interplay effects in volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for pancreatic cancer.
methodsSingle and double full-arc VMAT plans were generated for 11 patients. A dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions was prescribed to cover 50% of the planning target volume. Patient-specific Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine-Radiation Therapy plan files were divided into 10 files based on the respiratory phases in four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) simulations. The phase-divided VMAT plans were calculated in consideration of the beam starting phase for each arc and were then combined in the mid-ventilation phase of 4DCT (4D plans). The dose-volumetric parameters were compared with the calculated dose distributions without consideration of the interplay effects (3D plans). Additionally, relationships among plan parameters such as modulation complexity scores, monitor units (MUs), and dose-volumetric parameters were evaluated.
resultsDosimetric differences in the median values associated with different beam starting phases were within ± 1.0% and ± 0.2% for the CTV and ± 0.5% and ± 0.9% for the OARs during single and double full-arc VMAT, respectively. Significant differences caused by variations in the beam starting phases were observed only for the dose-volumetric parameters of the CTV during single full-arc VMAT (P < 0.05), associated with moderate or strong correlations between the MUs and the dosimetric differences between the 4D and 3D plans.
conclusionsThe beam starting phase affected CTV dosimetric variations of single full-arc VMAT. The use of double full-arc VMAT mitigated this problem. However, variation in the dose delivered to OARs was not dependent on the beam starting phase, even for single full-arc VMAT.
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.