ArticleTechnology in cancer research & treatment
The Risk of Radiogenic Second Cancer Based on Differential DVH: Central Nervous System Malignant Tumor in Children.
Article in Technology in cancer research & treatment. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep-learning magnetic resonance imaging-based automatic segmentation for organs-at-risk in the brain: Accuracy and impact on dose distribution.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2023Article
- Tomotherapy for cranio-spinal irradiation.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2023Review
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
objectivesTo quantify the risk of radiogenic second cancer in pediatric patients receiving hippocampal-sparing craniospinal irradiation either with intensity-modulated radiation therapy or tomotherapy due to the development of a solid second cancer after radiotherapy using the concept of excess absolute risk.
methodsComputed tomography images of 15 pediatric patients who received craniospinal irradiation treatment were selected for this study. For each case, intensity-modulated radiation therapy and tomotherapy plans were computed. Then, the dosimetry parameters were analyzed. Differential dose-volume histograms were generated, and the excess absolute risks were calculated for each plan of each patient.
resultsThe tomotherapy group was superior to the intensity-modulated radiation therapy group in target area homogeneity index (
conclusionsThe tomotherapy plan has obvious advantages in the protection of the hippocampus for children undergoing craniospinal irradiation treatment. Tomotherapy increased the risk of radiogenic second cancer in organ at risk, and therefore, it is imperative to take the risk factor into consideration in the formulation of treatment protocols.
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.